Billie Piper moves on as an actress

[capri0mni]

Last night, I was watching The Ruby in the Smoke on Masterpiece Theater, and it wasn't until I saw her name in the closing credits that I realized Billie Piper played the lead. Seems to me, she's using the stepping stone of Doctor Who to good advantage, and it just goes to show that she can play convincingly independant young women, if the script allows her.

Apparently, unlike much of Masterpiece Theater's fare, this was a new play written expressly for television, and it also seems to be the first in a series. I'm rather looking forward to see what happens next, and if Billie's character remains as strong.

Comments

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

That sounds like the time I watched three episodes of Long Way Round before figuring out (only because nexstarman told me!) that the worldly scruffy Scot on the motorbike was actually Ewan McGregor... ^^;

I watched last night too. Loved it. I knew Billie Piper was in the lead, and for the first few minutes I thought her character might turn out to be too much like Rose, but I'd completely stopped comparing her to Rose after the first twenty minutes or so. (As far as girl role model characters go, I think I like Sally better than Rose, actually. Maybe it's just because she's brainy.)

If they don't show the next one of these promptly, I may have to go check out the books...

[scarfman]

A quick Google of sally lockhart will show that the movie was based on, if not a book, a character who's appeared in books, by someone named Philip Pullman. Checking out the BBC News announcement that Piper had been cast makes it look like there's a series of four books of which Ruby was the first. I haven't been watching for it, but I haven't read any announcement that any others are to be produced. But they sure set up the ensemble as if they meant to go on. And I'd sure like to know what happened to Adelaide.

[scarfman]

The Wikipedia article on the fourth novel claims that all four are to be produced by the BBC.

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

IMDB has a second one listed as a 2006 production, but it also says 'announced', so I wasn't clear on whether it had actually been made yet.

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

There aren't any books. He wrote these for TV. And apparently, the next installment of the story hasn't been written yet (at least, it seems that way from the interview on the Masterpiece Theater website).

However, the author Phillip Pullman has written a trilogy of children's fantasy novels from an antheist point of view. Here's (http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/051226fa_fact) the link Masterpiece Theater provided to a New Yorker article about him, and his novels. I haven't read all of the article yet, myself, but he's quoted as saying: "[...] I think I can say something about moral education, and I think it has something to do with the way we understand stories," which is what I've been saying for years.

I also like how, in that New Yorker article, he's quoted as making a distinction between all religion, and monotheistic religions. Polytheistic religions have their own faults, to be sure, but they're a slightly different set of faults than the ones that go with monotheism. But from what I've read and heard from atheist' public speach, they seem to think the evils of religion have been unchanging since the first human painted the first picture of an auroch on a cave wall...

So I'll put the Dark Materials trilogy on my to-read list...

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

I've heard of the Dark Materials books, but I haven't read them yet.

I'll have to check out the interview later, because the Sally Lockhart books definitely exist... I'm finding plenty of references to them, and I just put one on hold at the library.

[leenah.livejournal.com]

The Ruby in the Smoke is one of a short series of books - i've read The Tin Princess, but not the others.

His Dark Materials is one of the most amazing set of books i've ever read. and i NEED to reread them, because they're very dense. and subversive. i love subversive books for children.

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

i love subversive books for children.


Yeah, me too. Have you seen this book: Don't Tell the Grown-Ups: the Subversive Power of Children's Literature (http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Tell-Grown-Ups-Subversive-Literature/dp/0316246255/sr=8-1/qid=1170713583/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-8738025-3731045?ie=UTF8&s=books)? It's a collection of literary critique essays on the great classics of Children's Lit, as serious literature in its own right. And the author (Alison Lurie) explores why childrean's lit has to be subversive in order to be great. Her chapter on E. Nesbit inspired me to check out that author, and now, E. Nesbit is one of my all-time favorites.

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

Pullman might be a good author, but someone out to fwap him with a rubber flounder for spoilering his own work in the interview... (just a warning).

[leenah.livejournal.com]

oooh! neat!

and E. Nesbit is on my list.

too many books, too little time!!!!!

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Ha! Okay, I won't read then, thanks. ^^;

[trinalin.livejournal.com]

As you've read from the comments, Ruby in the Smoke is the first book of Pullman's Sally Lockhart Trilogy. I liked this trilogy better than his His Dark Materials trilogy. For one thing, Sally Lockhart rocks.

Book 2 was the clunker of the trio, but book 3 is definitely the most frightening, given today's troubles with identity theft.

I was pleased to see Billie get the part. I think she was a little subdued in the performance, but other than that, it was a pretty nice adaptation.

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

I'll narrow down E. Nesbit for you. She's most famous, perhaps, for The Railway Children. But I preferred Five Children and It and The Magic Garden (Whicn, to my mind, is the most accurate depiction of how magic and spells really work, if you believe they do at all).

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I was just going from the interview with Pullman on the website... made it seem like this production was made out of the whole cloth -- and also, there were no links to the book versions on the site, which they usually provide, if books are there...

odd, then, that there are...