Charlie Brooker's Black Mirror

This article can also be found on Step2Inspire.

We live in an ever advancing world. In the past ten years or so, we've seen computers become common household appliances, televisions go from five channels to several hundred, news turn into a running commentary of the world (interesting or not), and telephones turn into all-purpose, wireless multi-tools. Things have advanced so quickly we've had very little chance to question it, and now we're constantly plugged into sites like Facebook and Google, which have come to know some of the most intimate details of our lives...

In a new three-part comedy drama series, Black Mirror, Charlie Brooker casts a cynical eye on the modern world, with a hint of techno-paranoia regarding the current progression of some of the most influential technologies today and where they may lead us. Somewhat inspired by shows like The Twilight Zone and Tales of the Unexpected, Black Mirror delves into a world not too dissimilar than our own, exploring the hypothetical what ifs of our current technological progress and it's potential impact on our lives. As a series of tongue-in-cheek cautionary tales, Black Mirror takes a sarcastic and cynical view of how technology can be used to both enhance and complicate our lives.

The first episode, The National Anthem, is a farce of how rolling news coverage and social media has had an impact on how we react to current events. Written by Brooker, the premier episode of the series portrays a somewhat contemporary world in the grips of the Twitter age, with information circulating at the speed of light, and public opinion louder and more influential than ever. Life for the rich and powerful is more difficult now that their every action is the scrutiny of the world, and Britain's Prime Minister is faced with a very serious dilemma...

With the kidnapping of a princess, and a rather unsavoury request involving the Prime Minister and a pig, this political thriller focuses on the public's reaction to unfolding events, despite the government's best attempts to stifle them... “I'm thinking about things like the Raoul Moat saga and when Gordon Brown had to go and apologise to Gillian Duffy,” said Brooker in regards to The National Anthem, “You get this sort of strange centrifugal force that builds up throughout the day with the rolling news networks and public opinion. It's a story in which the Prime Minister, who's played by Rory Kinnear, and the Home Secretary, played by Lindsay Duncan, are faced with a dilemma. It's very much in the Twitter age.”

The second episode, 15 Million Merits, also penned by Brooker and co-written with his wife Konnie Huq, is a sarcastic look at the future, depicting a dystopian society in which people are confined to a life of physical drudgery. The only way to escape this life of hardship is to participate in a talent show and pray you impress the judges. “It was sort of her [Konnie's] idea, 15 Million Merits,” Brooker stated, “One of the first things you see is somebody in a room, which is almost like a cell, where every single wall functions like an iPad. She was watching me using an iPad and taking the piss out of me, saying that I'd basically be happy in a room where every wall was like that. The tone of that episode is probably not what people would expect - in places it's almost like a romance. It's sweet and sour.”

The third and final episode, In Memoriam, is scripted by Peep Show's Jesse Armstrong, and is set in an alternate reality where everyone has access to a system that records everything that they see, hear and do. Able to remember every face, every event and every sound, Armstrong's tale focusses on the implications (both positive and negative) of such a technology. You know how in the heat of an argument you just wish you could rewind and say “See, this is what you said earlier!” or show how you were actually in the right all along? Well, that's essentially the premise of In Memoriam, set in a world in which everybody is equipped to replay their visual feed at will, and focusses on one couple who have a particularly bad evening...

As somewhat an enthusiast of the technological market, gawping with awe at the leaps and bounds made in the space of a few years, and luxuriously stroking a touch-screen device, I tend to have a fairly optimistic outlook when it comes to new advances. However, I must admit, I have fallen prey to techno-paranoia before... Most of us are owners of smartphones; amazing little pieces of tech that allow us to access the worldwide web where-ever we are, communicate with our social networks at the press of a button and navigate by satellite at almost any time (although their key function seems to be to keep people up to date with the minutiae of our lives, which but a few years ago we would have kept to ourselves and not felt the need to bother other people with). But are we not conditioned by these machines, to run and answer their every beep and flash like well-trained labradoodles? We are now so attached to these devices that we can never escape an email or a social update, and could only be more plugged into the net if we were in the Matrix (and don't get me started on the possibility of that already being true!).

And what if the machines decide to rise up against their squishy organic creators, or the companies that develop our most beloved technologies start to take over the world (I'm legally obliged to add that it is unlikely Google wish to take over the Earth, even though they are in possession of everything we do online, on our phones, and can locate us all using satellites and a Google Maps app)?! If I had to go into hiding (probably for outing Google's clandestine plot in that previous sentence), then I'd have to leave most of my technology behind, as it could easily betray my location, as well as any digital correspondence I may have had. I trust these companies with my details, but it is now far too easy to gather information on someone since the advent of social networking and the smartphone.

Mark my words, it's only a matter of time until SIRI changes it's name to HAL-9000* and starts informing people called Dave “I'm afraid I can't do that...” Until that day comes, though, Charlie Brooker can fill your head with techno-paranoia, as Black Mirror will be transmitting it's digital information into your household black monolith on December 4th. And I, for one, reckon it's set to be bloody brilliant.

What's the bet it'll become a trending topic when it airs?

*Incidentally, I have a HAL-9000 app on my Android. I have yet to teach it to sing “Daisy”, although it has often tried to kill me with misleading map directions.

Doctor Who?

This article can also be found on Step2Inspire.

Since news of David Yates potential feature film adaptation of Doctor Who disseminated rapidly across cyberspace, a wild fire of speculation began to spread. From the optimistic to the pessimistic outlooks, people leapt on the news and shared their thoughts on how it may turn out. But of course, one of the main things on people's minds is; who will play the Doctor?

I've scoured various articles and forums, and read some of the suggestions of who they would want to play the Doctor (some good, others... well...). The predominant thought is that the actor would have to be British, with a suitably British script to accompany it. So, without further ado, here's my list of potential actors to play the Doctor in the movie...

Benedict Cumberbatch

Ever since he took to our screens as the modernised Sherlock Holmes, Cumberbatch has been a strong favourite among Who fans to portray a future Doctor. With his distinctly ethereal air, and the unique arrogant flamboyance as Sherlock, he seems perfect to play the role of the Doctor be it on television or film and he had discussed taking on the role of the Doctor with his close friend David Tennant, just as Tennant's incarnation was coming to a close. Although it did appeal to him, Cumberbatch elected not to try for the role, stating that he thought “it would have to be radically different. And anyway, I didn't really like the whole package – being on school lunch boxes.”

I can see Cumberbatch possibly working alongside Carey Mulligan as the Doctor and his companion. Having featured in an episode of Doctor Who as almost-companion Sally Sparrow, Mulligan has already shown her ability as a potential adventurer of time and space, and with her rising fame she would be a fine candidate for the cinematic companion. However, as Yates wishes to move away from the TV series, it's unlikely we'll see the return of Sally Sparrow on the big screen. But nonetheless, Sparrow or not, I can still see Mulligan making a very natural and down-to-Earth companion for the Doctor, and reckon she and Cumberbatch would work splendidly together.

Matt Smith

Not so much a valid suggestion as a little fantasy. As Yates's take on Doctor Who will not be tied to the series, this really won't be happening, but at the current rate it looks set to be produced around the time Smith's current contract comes to an end (although this doesn't mean that Smith will relinquish the role at that time - he could easily go on to rival Tom Baker in both legacy and longevity). Although the current team behind the television series aren't involved in the film at this time, if Steven Moffat and David Yates were to collaborate on the film then I'd quite like to see the adventures of the Doctor with River Song. 

With Alex Kingston starring as the Doctor's wife/companion, the film would follow their adventures leading up to that fateful day when the Doctor knows that this is the last time that he will ever see her. Alas, this is unlikely to happen, but who knows – by the time this film goes into production, perhaps Moffat may have already produced this very story as part of the TV series?

Rhys Ifans

Rhys Ifans has been proposed to play the Doctor before, in the vast media game of “Guess Who” when Tennant was fated to regenerate, and for good reason. Ifans has displayed a penchant for the mad-cap characters, playing Hugh Grant's comic relief housemate in Notting Hill, and as it looks like he will be featuring in next year's The Amazing Spider-Man as the Lizard, Ifans is set to have a firm foothold in Hollywood. I imagine Ifans could bring a very new and fresh approach to playing the Doctor - something completely different and yet familiar, the perfect feel to any incarnation of the famous Time Lord. Plus, he's Welsh. Wouldn't a Welsh Doctor be marvellous?!

Robert Downey Jr.

Currently known for portraying Sherlock Holmes in the Guy Ritchie adaptations of Britain's most famous detective, and as Tony Stark in Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr. makes another fine candidate for the role of the Doctor. Both Holmes and Stark are exceedingly bright, self-important, and ever-so-slightly off the wall – similar in many ways to a character brief for the Doctor. Although the Doctor doesn't have the same kind of arrogant air as Holmes or Stark, I don't doubt that Downey Jr. would be capable of playing him superbly. He may not be a British actor, but there is a chance that as this is an American production they'll maybe be hiring an American actor... Anyway, in my opinion he'd make a brilliant Doctor!

Hugh Laurie

Having made a huge success of himself across the pond in the past few years playing the titular role of popular series House, Hugh Laurie would also be another good choice for the Doctor. Laurie's role as Dr. House is remarkably Holmesian, almost Doctor-esque, and beneath his current American role he is ostensibly British. Also, judging by his previous roles on British television, having starred in Blackadder and Jeeves and Wooster, Laurie has a fair amount of eccentricity that could be let loose were he to take to the controls of the TARDIS!

Johnny Depp

Throughout his cinematic career, Johnny Depp has displayed a knack for playing mad-cap characters, with roles such as Captain Jack Sparrow and the Mad Hatter among the most memorably unhinged. Jack Sparrow is probably the best character to use as a likeness to the Doctor, with his uniquely flamboyant take on heroics and almost hapless cunning. Plus, Depp is a fantastic character actor, able to portray the maddest of the mad but also the most serious of roles, which is a magnificent duality for any Doctor. Again, whilst not a British actor, Depp is certainly an actor who could bring a great deal to the role – there's no doubt he'd be a fantastic Doctor.

Would it be too cliché to suggest that his companion could be Helena Bonham-Carter? They have the perfect chemistry for the Doctor and his companion, and Bonham-Carter is one of the few people who would be able to match up to his eccentricities. That being said, though, maybe Depp's Doctor would need a more “human” and grounded companion to balance him...

Bron James

He's a little known actor and writer. A man who knows the future but won't give away the ending... Admittedly, this is largely the product of fantasy, but personally I think James would make a superb candidate for the role of the Doctor!

And as for a companion, seeing as Yates has said that he'd want to work with the Harry Potter cast again, how about Emma Watson? Watson would bring a down-to-Earth feel to the TARDIS, and in my opinion she would make a brilliant time travelling companion for any Time Lord (and not just in my fantasy!)... Hopefully the obligatory kissing scene wouldn't cause the same uproar as it did with Paul McGann's Doctor and sort-of-companion Grace back in 1996!

If you could pick the cast for a Doctor Who movie, who would you pick and why? If there's any mention of Robert Pattinson, I will hunt you down... You have been warned!

David Yates to bring Doctor Who to the Big Screen

This article can also be found on Step2Inspire.

Earlier this week it was announced that David Yates, director of the past four Harry Potter films and TV mini-series State of Play, has started work on a feature film adaptation of Doctor Who.

After it's inception in 1963 and cancellation in 1989, Doctor Who lived on in the hearts and minds of it's former fans, which lead to the 1996 film starring Paul McGann and of course the shows hugely successful revival in 2005. Since former show-runner Russell T Davies resurrected the series, the show has gone from strength to strength and is currently enjoying acclaim both in the UK and the USA under the banner of present producer Steven Moffat. Surely after six years of contemporary success and it's massive fan-base, the news of a Doctor Who movie would be warmly welcomed?

Apparently not so much, as quite a few comment boards and articles are clamouring with pre-emptive objections. So far, it has only been announced that David Yates will be directing it, and it's being produced by BBC Worldwide; there's currently no script, no cast, and no crew, and is certainly a good few years off production. All that's really known is that Yates intends to transform the show's concept onto the big screen, and has said that “Russell T Davies and then Steven Moffat have done their own transformations, which were fantastic, but we have to put that aside and start from scratch.” In essence, the idea is to create a film that's not tied to the current mythos surrounding the series, but will retain all elements that are recognisably Doctor Who.

Some of the objections currently circulating the web are fairly understandable. Doctor Who is a television show with a very rich history, so to turn it into a cinematic blockbuster could be a potentially damaging route, especially if they're leaving out a lot of the current history. As it's not going to be tied to the series, it will also feature a different actor in the role of the Doctor than who-ever will then be playing him on TV (Matt Smith's current contract comes to an end in about three years, although that doesn't necessarily mean the end of one of my favourite Doctors), and will be as stand-alone as the old Peter Cushing Dr. Who and the Daleks films. Lastly, taking into account the reception of the other films based on Doctor Who (such as Dr. Who and the Daleks and the 1996 movie), there's a great deal of pessimism that this will be another 'failed' attempt at a feature length adaptation. I actually enjoyed the 1996 film, although I have yet to find someone else who did, even though it's something that's been incorporated into both official and fan canon (something the Cushing films never did).

However, as the film's only an idea at the moment and has no solid foundations yet, are these criticisms not a bit too early? There's so much that could yet go right! I made the mistake of judging something from the outset with BBC's Sherlock, hearing that is was a modernised take on the most famous detective stories of all time. “Holmes was a Victorian detective,” my thoughts sort of said on the matter, “how can it be modernised without destroying everything we know and love?” And then I sat and watched it, and 90 minutes later it had become my favourite thing on television!

Personally, I think it could turn out to be a fantastic addition to the Doctor Who legacy. With a movie budget and big-name director at the helm of the production, it could result in a spectacular adventure – provided they get the right writers on board, but as Yates will be taking his time to get this right I doubt there'll be any half-baked narratives. One way I thought of how it could work would be a very traditional Doctor Who adventure (something with a similar narrative style to Human Nature and Family of Blood for it's excellent pacing and character development, but without the Doctor transforming into a human!), set far into the Doctor's personal future (say 1000 years), by which time his current adventures on television will be but a distant memory, and about as relevant to him as the William Hartnell episodes are to the current series; providing a rich tapestry of history, but are never really referenced. That way, it's not tied to the current series, but nor is it ignoring everything the Whovians fear to lose, and leaves the Doctor free to have new escapades across time and space.

So here's to what could go right with the film; a bigger budget could lead to bigger adventures, we'll have a new take on the tale of an ancient alien traveller that can be, and has already been, transformed on numerous occasions! It may not have a storyline or a Doctor just yet, but if production on this film goes ahead then the potential for it is almost infinite. There's still every possibility this could reap the same success as the Star Trek reboot in 2009, and I certainly have every faith that David Yates could do Doctor Who great credit on the big screen.

What do you think? Is this film a great idea to expand the story of television's most famous Time Lord, or is it a travesty doomed to failure? Leave a comment below!

Dirk Gently Returns March 2012

This article can also be found on Step2Inspire.

The first televisual adaptation of Douglas Adams' Dirk Gently's Holisitic Detective Agency, the pilot for which aired on BBC Four in December last year, has just finished filming it's first full series.

Starring Stephen Mangan (Green Wing, Free Agents, Episodes) in the titular role of the madcap detective, the upcoming three-part series will not be based on the existing novels, but will be telling all-new adventures penned by BAFTA-winning writer Howard Overman (Misfits, Merlin). “I'm thrilled to have the opportunity to write more episodes of Dirk,” said Overman, “I look forward to seeing where his unique detective methodology and perspective on life takes me.”

Although the pilot episode was based on elements from the first book (excluding the ghost, the Electric Monk, Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Kubla Khan), the new episodes will bring a fresh set of Dirk Gently stories to the legacy. Adams' work tends to be very in-depth, and with so many plot-threads running throughout the Dirk Gently books (including a series of non-linear, unconnected yet connected events due to time travel) it'd be incredibly difficult to do it all justice in a TV adaptation. As Stephen Mangan, writing for a BBC blog, stated; “In my opinion, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency and The Long Dark Tea-Time Of The Soul are unfilmable as written...too much happens, there are too many ideas.” However, I have absolutely no doubt that Howard Overman is the right man to continue the Dirk Gently legacy.

As a man who believes in the interconnectedness of all things, Dirk Gently's methods of deduction are dubious at best. Most people view him as a cheap conman, hopelessly chaotic and perpetually broke, but nevertheless Dirk's methods often produce surprising results... Speaking about his role as the notorious detective, Mangan said; “I've been a fan of Douglas Adams ever since the Hitchhiker's radio series which I used to record as a child and listen to over and over again in my bedroom. It's such a thrill to now be playing one of his brilliant characters. Dirk is a chaotic, anarchic force of nature with a totally unique take on the world. He is described as 'lazy, untidy, dismissive and unreliable'. I've absolutely no idea why they thought I'd be right for the role.”

He's certainly a character I can relate to!

Alongside Mangan, Dirk Gently stars Darren Boyd (Whites, Holy Flying Circus) as Dirk's friend and unwitting accomplice Richard MacDuff, and Helen Baxendale (Cold Feet, Friends) as Richard's long-term girlfriend Susan. Having provided magnificent performances throughout the pilot, the return of this superb cast is bound to make for a bizarre and brilliant series.

Scheduled to air some time around March next year, the first season of Dirk Gently will also be the first continuing drama series to be commissioned by BBC Four. As a great fan of Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency (and of Douglas Adams in general!), I'm thoroughly looking forward to more adventures with the infamous detective, and seeing where Overman's new stories take us.