...and 0% Gripping.
It's "one of those" - so bad, from so many aspects, it's hard to know where to begin. With so many flaws; giving relevant criticism becomes a complex job - arguably more complex than the series it self.
Pick a card, any card. Directing, Script, Acting, Plot - they are all so sub par that; trying to pick one is precarious and describing all of them would be a massive undertaking.
Small mercy: Charles Dance gets "killed off" in the first episode. As it turns out this is one of the few redeeming features. Dance, so utterly, outperforms everybody else in the cast that; the rest of the stage freezes to ice in any scene he is part of. His demise actually improves the impression as; with him goes a point of reference.
And then we have the "satire claim". A production has to be worse than bad if it is to be confused with satire. The claim has merit - Singapore Grip is so bad that the satire argument can be considered. However, a prerequisite for satire is that the audience actually gets that that is what it is - and that it has intelligent script alongside an artistic merit within the genre.
The overall impression of Singapore Grip resembles that of a very awkward dating experience - which is then is described as a successful study in social science. Confusing? - Exactly! If this is meant to be satire it's not; edgy, intelligent, or clear, enough. If it is not... it is a complete wreck.
It's "one of those" - so bad, from so many aspects, it's hard to know where to begin. With so many flaws; giving relevant criticism becomes a complex job - arguably more complex than the series it self.
Pick a card, any card. Directing, Script, Acting, Plot - they are all so sub par that; trying to pick one is precarious and describing all of them would be a massive undertaking.
Small mercy: Charles Dance gets "killed off" in the first episode. As it turns out this is one of the few redeeming features. Dance, so utterly, outperforms everybody else in the cast that; the rest of the stage freezes to ice in any scene he is part of. His demise actually improves the impression as; with him goes a point of reference.
And then we have the "satire claim". A production has to be worse than bad if it is to be confused with satire. The claim has merit - Singapore Grip is so bad that the satire argument can be considered. However, a prerequisite for satire is that the audience actually gets that that is what it is - and that it has intelligent script alongside an artistic merit within the genre.
The overall impression of Singapore Grip resembles that of a very awkward dating experience - which is then is described as a successful study in social science. Confusing? - Exactly! If this is meant to be satire it's not; edgy, intelligent, or clear, enough. If it is not... it is a complete wreck.