royalmarriage: (Default)
[personal profile] royalmarriage
...for one thing, kind of surprised by the lack of squee on my Flist about last night's We'll take Manhattan, the drama about the affair between Jean Shrimpton and David Bailey that starred Karen Gillan. Is all the post-show squee over on Twitter?

Admittedly, I've not watched it myself yet.

But. Here's the thing. Every time I read the name We'll take Manhattan it instantly makes me think of the song First we take Manhattan (written by Leonard Cohen, but originally recorded by Jennifer Warnes). Wikipedia doesn't suggest any connection (but then it doesn't yet have an article on the former anyway), so I was just wondering if anybody knows of any connection that might explain the similar names? Was it something Shrimpton or Bailey said that inspired Cohen in writing the song? Or is it just a massive coincidence?

Either way, it's a nice song to have going round your head first thing on a Friday morning. Here, have a video.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-27 09:01 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ragdoll.livejournal.com
I can't squee over it cos I haven't seen it yet. I have it on order from Amazon.co.uk since it's just the easiest way to obtain at this point. I suspect there would have been more squee a week or so ago. :(

The title We'll Take Manhattan has been around for a while -- there was a failed sitcom in 1967 of the same name. I think it might also relate to the 1929 song "Manhattan" by Rogers & Hart, sometimes known erroneously as "I'll Take Manhattan" which is about a young couple going all over the five boroughs of New York City.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-27 09:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] myfirstkitchen.livejournal.com
There's not much squee because it wasn't very good. It was pretty, but appallingly written. Very dull. Jack Seale's review is spot on: http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2012-01-26/review-we%27ll-take-manhattan,-bbc4

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-27 12:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gillyp.livejournal.com
Couldn't agree more - what a disappointment. It lost me from the start with that ridiculous opening caption, you couldn't be famous unless you were rich or titled(huh?!) and there was no such thing as youth culture in 1962 (guess the writer never heard of Tommy Steel, Cliff and Marty and Joe and The Tornadoes and Jimmy Saville all them Skiffle bands and coffee bar culture in general and The Beatles and their ilk, who were, I believe, doing pretty well in a thriving youth scene prior to 1962 etc etc. etc. etc. bah humbug!not ). It all came down to a series of slanging matches full of modernisms. Very poor, imo.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-27 12:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] davidbrider.livejournal.com
Yes, I sat through the first five minutes or so over breakfast, and that caption did rather jump out at me as startlingly mis-informed!

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-27 01:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gillyp.livejournal.com
I found this review on my lunchtime travels, which pretty much sums up all the problems I had with it.
http://www.holymoly.com/tv/reviews/preview-well-take-manhattan-amy-pond-becomes-model-60s61412
Karen G was given very little to do, it was all BaileyBaileyBailey, it was nice to look at, but said nothing about the people or their times. The writer has a pretty good track record too, Canterbury Tales, Life on Mars, but sadly, this was really was quite terrible.

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-28 05:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pica-scribit.livejournal.com
Heh. WhI was scrolling through my friends page, and saw those words, and *instantly* thought of the Cohen song (BTW, the REM cover of it is ace).

(no subject)

Date: 2012-01-28 09:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] zoefruitcake.livejournal.com
it was the first thing I thought of too

Profile

royalmarriage: (Default)
royalmarriage

December 2020

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930 31  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags