I worry that other countries watch programs like this and think that it is indicative of American culture. The problem is, this show isn't satire. It isn't lampooning anything. They're actually representing that doing bad is "not recycling" and doing good is refraining from telling ridiculously dramatic and emotional people that they're idiots. The clichés in this show go beyond simple cliché to the point of being a political cartoon. Boys are are simply dogs with huge genitals with the words "sole motivation" tattooed on them, girls are represented by bear traps chained to a big metal ball that has "needless drama" chiseled into it, and homosexuals are represented by a "Martyr" brand bottle of maple syrup with a big "Can do no wrong" slogan underneath their name, and all of these things are jumping up for a brass ring that says "Popularity" on it. I used to teach and if a girl in my class came up and said, "I feel the need to express myself, I would have advised her that she was absolutely free to do that after class on her own time." And if you play football and you throw a slushy in an Asian girl's face because she's in glee club, I might not be able to get you expelled but I guarantee, you would be my bitch for the rest of the year. And if you threaten to kill a gay kid because he's gay, I might not be able to get you expelled but, again, you'd be my bitch for the rest of the year. I really like Jane Lynch and the musical numbers are entertaining at times but gosh this show is awful. I've come away from the episodes I've seen just feeling frustrated that this is a cultural phenomenon.
Reviews
27 Reviews
Intacto
(2001)
Just accept what you see...
1 November 2010
I really liked this movie. I think a lot of people didn't because they got hung up on the potentially confusing aspects of the concept. It doesn't come out and hit you in the face with the rules for this game that the characters play which is a good change for people who like smart, understated stories and don't need everything spelled out for them in suppositional monologues from secondary characters. This is a great movie for just collecting data about the story until the end. Has great themes of sacrifice and redemption and pretty good cinematography too. Lots of other movies have tried to be serious about quantifying "luck" and where those movies failed, this one succeeds because it doesn't hang itself with specifics. There's no way to guage how "special" you are. Just spin the chamber and hope for the best. You will get a lot more out of this movie if you don't try to "figure it out". Just accept what you see until the movie's over, then appreciate the poetry of it.
Castle
(2009–2016)
Let's be fair...
24 March 2009
Yes, this is a great vehicle for Nathan Fillion because he's gets to play the lovable scoundrel, which truly is his bread and butter. I was worried when I saw the pilot that they were going to shoot their premise in the foot but was impressed at the end when they gave you a new basis that could last longer than a few episodes. Now if we're fair and judge this show on it's writing and acting rather than on our excitement that Nathan Fillion is back then we must conclude... that the show is still pretty good. I have been impressed with the story lines up to this point and while the short description of the "who-dun-it" may sound like scenarios we've heard before, these writers aren't satisfied with a "Law and Order" ending. They've already thrown out the triple and quadruple switchbacks with the uncovering of the culprits. And all the while allowing Nathan Fillion to fill the screen with his smarmy charm and allowing him to cavort with an attractive, albeit, hard-boiled female cop.
The great part about this show is that they haven't really set up Fillion as a Sherlock Holmes. He is playing a seemingly educated street-wise poetic guy, but he isn't the one with all the answers. For every conclusion he draws, the female lead makes just as many and may refine Fillion's, which is wise on the writers' part because his character works because of the inherent flaws that come with being a writer rather than a detective.
It's a clever show that's a must-see if you're a Fillion-atic and a pretty good hour even if you're not.
The great part about this show is that they haven't really set up Fillion as a Sherlock Holmes. He is playing a seemingly educated street-wise poetic guy, but he isn't the one with all the answers. For every conclusion he draws, the female lead makes just as many and may refine Fillion's, which is wise on the writers' part because his character works because of the inherent flaws that come with being a writer rather than a detective.
It's a clever show that's a must-see if you're a Fillion-atic and a pretty good hour even if you're not.
The Mentalist
(2008–2015)
Intriguing
17 December 2008
I've only seen about four of five episodes of this show and I liked it, but as others have said, it follows a rather familiar vein. Trying not to compare it to anything else though, I found it to be enjoyable at face value. The lead character is likable and keeps the interrogations and methods of discovery light and conversational which is nice. I like that his part isn't really dark and sinister, which was an avenue obviously available to the writers given the main character's back story.
I liked the charisma between Baker and Robin Tunney and I like that his character doesn't take himself to seriously. Yes, the writers do ask you to suspend your belief occasionally and to get viewership the writers have had to make the stories bizarre and convoluted, which isn't necessarily a problem, it just makes it look like they've got heat from network people to make it edgy when it could be more mind-bending instead.
It's a fun show that can be watched at leisure and enjoyed without a serious dedication to it, which can be nice in an age of shows with year-long story arcs. If you miss one, you're not totally out of loop. If you've got an hour to spare, give it a shot. It's enjoyable.
I liked the charisma between Baker and Robin Tunney and I like that his character doesn't take himself to seriously. Yes, the writers do ask you to suspend your belief occasionally and to get viewership the writers have had to make the stories bizarre and convoluted, which isn't necessarily a problem, it just makes it look like they've got heat from network people to make it edgy when it could be more mind-bending instead.
It's a fun show that can be watched at leisure and enjoyed without a serious dedication to it, which can be nice in an age of shows with year-long story arcs. If you miss one, you're not totally out of loop. If you've got an hour to spare, give it a shot. It's enjoyable.
Arrested Development
(2003–2019)
A bright light went out the day this one was cancelled...
10 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I might be this shows biggest fan, and I can list for you the reasons that this show didn't reach its full potential.
1. Fox has a horrible marketing department and has never learned that the way big shows are made is by treating them like they are a big show before they are. This show got so little positive marketing it's mind-boggling. Fox made no attempt to get people to watch it, that weren't already watching it. They treated it almost like it was a variety show, rather than the incredibly written and interwoven brainy comedy that it was.
2. A show like this that includes an overall season story arc as well as smaller multiple-episode story arcs has to be promoted out the wazoo. The only reason Lost ever got off the ground is because ABC promoted every episode like it was the "Roots" finale, and they showed every episode multiple times so that if you missed it, you could catch it the next time. This show required that kind of care, but didn't get it.
3. I'll admit the first time I watched the show I didn't like it. I had a friend buy the first season and told me to watch it. I watched the first six episodes and didn't like it. It seemed too hectic for a weekly comedy. I stuck with it, and by the end of the first season I realized how good this show actually was. This show is almost tailor-made for DVD. If you watch one episode and have to wait another week for the next, you kind of miss out on the subtle genius that weaves through the whole series. I've watched it several times and see jokes or gags that I missed the first few times I watched it even now.
4. The title. Once you've watched an entire season or the entire series you realize how appropriate the title is, but as a show that you've not seen and are deciding whether to watch versus something w/a reputation for quick humor, you won't pick "Arrested Development". It sounds like a house flipping show on the Home and Garden Network. Which is too bad, because this show missed a lot of potential devotees with the name.
5. The humor. This show had everything that makes comedy funny. If you were to try and be impartial and write up a list of everything that is funny in life, this show had it. Wordplay, mistaken identity, slapstick, characters of fickle moral character, parody of both classic and pop culture, ambiguous sexuality, innuendo, teen angst, language barriers and misunderstandings, and anything w/Tobias. I think this show was too funny. The majority of viewers in America have short attention spans, and can only concentrate on one aspect of humor at a time. This show could throw five or six of these humorous events into one 90 second scene. It was too brilliant for network television.
This show truly was so far ahead of its time that America wasn't ready for it. It gets compared to Seinfeld or other ensemble comedies, but it surpasses all of its contemporaries by never wasting a line of dialogue or one single opportunity for a plot twist.
As despicable as the characters were, you liked each one, and rooted for each of them every episode. No matter how convoluted the plot, no character was left out and every character was funny. Even the theoretical "straight men" had hilarious dialogue. A bright light went out when this one got cancelled
1. Fox has a horrible marketing department and has never learned that the way big shows are made is by treating them like they are a big show before they are. This show got so little positive marketing it's mind-boggling. Fox made no attempt to get people to watch it, that weren't already watching it. They treated it almost like it was a variety show, rather than the incredibly written and interwoven brainy comedy that it was.
2. A show like this that includes an overall season story arc as well as smaller multiple-episode story arcs has to be promoted out the wazoo. The only reason Lost ever got off the ground is because ABC promoted every episode like it was the "Roots" finale, and they showed every episode multiple times so that if you missed it, you could catch it the next time. This show required that kind of care, but didn't get it.
3. I'll admit the first time I watched the show I didn't like it. I had a friend buy the first season and told me to watch it. I watched the first six episodes and didn't like it. It seemed too hectic for a weekly comedy. I stuck with it, and by the end of the first season I realized how good this show actually was. This show is almost tailor-made for DVD. If you watch one episode and have to wait another week for the next, you kind of miss out on the subtle genius that weaves through the whole series. I've watched it several times and see jokes or gags that I missed the first few times I watched it even now.
4. The title. Once you've watched an entire season or the entire series you realize how appropriate the title is, but as a show that you've not seen and are deciding whether to watch versus something w/a reputation for quick humor, you won't pick "Arrested Development". It sounds like a house flipping show on the Home and Garden Network. Which is too bad, because this show missed a lot of potential devotees with the name.
5. The humor. This show had everything that makes comedy funny. If you were to try and be impartial and write up a list of everything that is funny in life, this show had it. Wordplay, mistaken identity, slapstick, characters of fickle moral character, parody of both classic and pop culture, ambiguous sexuality, innuendo, teen angst, language barriers and misunderstandings, and anything w/Tobias. I think this show was too funny. The majority of viewers in America have short attention spans, and can only concentrate on one aspect of humor at a time. This show could throw five or six of these humorous events into one 90 second scene. It was too brilliant for network television.
This show truly was so far ahead of its time that America wasn't ready for it. It gets compared to Seinfeld or other ensemble comedies, but it surpasses all of its contemporaries by never wasting a line of dialogue or one single opportunity for a plot twist.
As despicable as the characters were, you liked each one, and rooted for each of them every episode. No matter how convoluted the plot, no character was left out and every character was funny. Even the theoretical "straight men" had hilarious dialogue. A bright light went out when this one got cancelled
Good subtle humor+fun musical numbers+low budget feel=Horribly entertaining
13 August 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This little musical by Joss Whedon is clever and well written yet could be easily financed by a college freshman. The music is catchy, the lyrics are entertaining and fuel the story, the characters are memorable and quirky and the ending will disappoint people who want a schmoopy lovey-dovey ending. Those of us who are fans of Firefly will watch because we love Whedon's writing and Nathan Fillion's acting. Fillion's "Captain Hammer" is the shallow superhero nemesis of Neil Patrick Harris's Dr. Horrible, the latest in a long line of villains who have somehow had time to get their doctorate. While the video only adds up to just under 45 minutes, there are several story lines within the story that are very entertaining. The singing is by no means operatic, but is always pleasant and enjoyable.
Neil Patrick Harris is great in this. Felicia Day is beautiful and Nathan Fillion is memorably ridiculous.
This is a fun little sweet from Joss Whedon's bag of candy.
Neil Patrick Harris is great in this. Felicia Day is beautiful and Nathan Fillion is memorably ridiculous.
This is a fun little sweet from Joss Whedon's bag of candy.
The Riches
(2007–2008)
Truly original
14 April 2008
This is a good show. There are several areas where it is lacking i.e. believability, charisma between leads, but besides these, this show is truly original. Even if you look at the similar titles that IMDb might offer at the bottom of the page, none of them are even remotely close to this show. The idea of the American Gypsy is a rather undocumented story and this show gives a rather entertaining glimpse at an unraveled corner of it.
I'm a huge Eddie Izzard fan and while he might not be suited to this character as such, he is still phenomenal. He plays it a lot less seriously than another actor might have, and definitely less seriously than the rest of the cast, but I think this gives his character a slight quirkiness that makes for incredibly entertaining situations at the law firm where he works. The charisma between Izzard and Minnie Driver seems strained and actually Izzard has better back and forth with Gregg Henry who plays his ethically-challenged boss.
There is a constant feeling of urgency due to the rather convoluted-ness of the plot. The characters and the way of life that they are living seem to be hanging by a thread and every episode they have to out-think about a dozen different scenarios that threaten to cut it.
It's entertaining television and if you've got time for another good series, this one is worth watching.
I'm a huge Eddie Izzard fan and while he might not be suited to this character as such, he is still phenomenal. He plays it a lot less seriously than another actor might have, and definitely less seriously than the rest of the cast, but I think this gives his character a slight quirkiness that makes for incredibly entertaining situations at the law firm where he works. The charisma between Izzard and Minnie Driver seems strained and actually Izzard has better back and forth with Gregg Henry who plays his ethically-challenged boss.
There is a constant feeling of urgency due to the rather convoluted-ness of the plot. The characters and the way of life that they are living seem to be hanging by a thread and every episode they have to out-think about a dozen different scenarios that threaten to cut it.
It's entertaining television and if you've got time for another good series, this one is worth watching.
The Apple Dumpling Gang
(1975)
Great Fun
14 April 2008
This is a fantastic family movie that kids can watch and enjoy and those of us who love the Tim Conway-Don Knotts combination will get our money's worth as well. I know the movie is about Bill Bixby and the kids but really, it's all about Conway and Knotts. They worked so well together that even if the rest of the movie was worthless, they made it incredible. If you watch the scenes with the two of them moving the ladder, you'd swear that all of that was storyboarded and choreographed, but according to Conway on the special edition DVD, they improvised all of it. The bit with Knotts drinking out of the beer glass and Conway trying to get a drink out of too is some of the greatest schtick in movie history. This is a great movie with a great cast including Slim Pickens and Harry Morgan and some of the finest character actors of the day. It's great and even if you don't like live-action Disney movies, you should still be able to appreciate the comic genius of Conway and Knotts.
30 Rock
(2006–2013)
Clever Girl
7 April 2008
As a rule, I don't really think women are funny in sitcom style TV shows. This may sound sexist but it really isn't. They are rarely given parts that aren't token and rarely is the writing for them clever at all. But what I do like is intelligent looking and sounding women who aren't afraid to be the butt of the joke. What I have always liked about Tina Fey and her writing is that she seems to be able to take as good as she gives. She doesn't seem to take any one crusade too seriously and doesn't get too preachy about the crusades that she has. She has also found a cast of character actors that have found their niche in the characters on this show. Many of them, I haven't really liked on any other show, but on this show they shine. Even Tracy Morgan is funny, and Tracy Morgan is never funny.
Secondly, Alec Baldwin is hysterical, period. He could easily have been a comedian his whole life. He has that quality of treating scenarios and dialogue that are absolutely ridiculous with the utmost seriousness. Plus his character is in a position where he gets to expect that others go along without questioning, no matter how absurd he seems.
This is a great show. The comedy is subtle where it's funny to be so, and outlandish when called for. Each character is valuable and the show would actually suffer if it lost one of them.
Secondly, Alec Baldwin is hysterical, period. He could easily have been a comedian his whole life. He has that quality of treating scenarios and dialogue that are absolutely ridiculous with the utmost seriousness. Plus his character is in a position where he gets to expect that others go along without questioning, no matter how absurd he seems.
This is a great show. The comedy is subtle where it's funny to be so, and outlandish when called for. Each character is valuable and the show would actually suffer if it lost one of them.
Silk
(2007)
Slow but worth the wait.
24 March 2008
This movie was very good. I know a lot of reviewers were bored and didn't like that there wasn't subtitles for the Japanese. Admittedly the issue with the subtitles would have made the movie easier to understand. In the middle of the movie there is some confusion about what exactly has transpired between Pitt and his Japanese contact and why the initial interlude between Pitt and the Japanese concubine occurs in the first place but these don't seem to be so dear to the plot that you can't remain in the dark and still get the point of the movie.
The landscape is breathtaking, the acting was great by every member of the supporting cast. I like Michael Pitt, but it seems like he can only play one character and it's the throaty sensitive guy. I was surprised that Keira Knightley took such a minor role but the punch at the end gives her character quite a bit of intrigue. As always she is wonderful and I liked Alfred Molina as well.
The cinematography was good and understated. The script was simple and it didn't seem like they wasted any words. Quite the opposite in fact.
I understand why others didn't like it but I get the impression that this is due to a lack of patience on their part.
Good movie. Try it out.
The landscape is breathtaking, the acting was great by every member of the supporting cast. I like Michael Pitt, but it seems like he can only play one character and it's the throaty sensitive guy. I was surprised that Keira Knightley took such a minor role but the punch at the end gives her character quite a bit of intrigue. As always she is wonderful and I liked Alfred Molina as well.
The cinematography was good and understated. The script was simple and it didn't seem like they wasted any words. Quite the opposite in fact.
I understand why others didn't like it but I get the impression that this is due to a lack of patience on their part.
Good movie. Try it out.
Strictly Ballroom
(1992)
This movie features something completely unheard of in cinema today
18 March 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is fun even if you don't really like dancing. It gets a bit ridiculous in the flashback but I suppose that adds to the fun. The one element that this movie has is a real transformation for the ugly duckling character. Lots of movies today use the ugly duckling device but Hollywood doesn't ever come up with a believable "ugly" person. They always take a woman who is already attractive and try to downplay her attractive parts rather than taking a woman who is believably ugly and making her beautiful. The lead in this movie did not end up being a knockout by any means but she was pleasant to look at by the end. But in the first half of the movie she is "ugly". I was impressed with this movie on this quality alone because in a world of movie makers who won't take a chance on one of their leads being undesirable, Baz Luhrman actually did that here.
And secondly if you like idea of the "Crocodile Hunter" dancing Ballroom then you should like this movie because the accents in this are so comically thick, that you expect at any point for the characters to "Throw a shrimp on the bahbee".
And secondly if you like idea of the "Crocodile Hunter" dancing Ballroom then you should like this movie because the accents in this are so comically thick, that you expect at any point for the characters to "Throw a shrimp on the bahbee".
Eddie Izzard: Sexie
(2003 Video)
Earlier stuff from Hilarious comedian
1 January 2008
This special was one of his earlier routines. It revolved a lot more around the transvestitism than his more recent offerings. He explains transvestitism in a way that seems logical to those of us who don't share the compulsion. He's very articulate and his comedy doesn't really look like him. His comedy is intelligent and while it does occasionally revolve around sexual topics, you never get the impression that he relies on the blue for humor at all. There are two kinds of comedians. There are those who talk about things that are, by general consensus, funny or shocking topics like differences between men and women, or in-laws or feces or sex and then there are comedians who are funny no matter what they are talking about. Eddie Izzard belongs to the second group. I'm sure that if he did a stand-up routine about expense reports it would be a stone riot. With some comedians, when they finish their act, you feel as though you've wasted your time a little. I always feel like the time that I spend watching his stuff is time well spent. I'm to the point now where I will rent any movie or watch any special if it has his name on it.
So if you like humor that's fresh and intelligent, check him out. They show his specials about once a month or so on BBC
So if you like humor that's fresh and intelligent, check him out. They show his specials about once a month or so on BBC
Chuck
(2007–2012)
It's not Shakespeare, but who wants Shakespeare, really?
6 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This show is as many have said above, fun. It's not riveting, it doesn't make a ton of sense, it has a lot of plot holes, but I think most of us who watch it aren't really watching it for any of these qualities. We're watching it because it has a likable lead actor who is thrown into situations where he has to cavort with a hot female spy. And also, we kinda wanna support Adam Baldwin, because we've liked him since Firefly and want him to do well.
The show's premise is rather forgettable and the romance between the two leads will become tedious after too long, but this is a fun show that you can watch without really thinking and enjoy the frivolity.
And don't try to make the show a legitimate drama by questioning how it is that all the government's secrets are contained in one email or why it is that nobody ever questions that Chuck misses huge chunks of his shifts without so much as an seeyalater and manages to keep his job. You should probably just disregard this. I mean, it's not Shakespeare, for Pete's sake.
The show's premise is rather forgettable and the romance between the two leads will become tedious after too long, but this is a fun show that you can watch without really thinking and enjoy the frivolity.
And don't try to make the show a legitimate drama by questioning how it is that all the government's secrets are contained in one email or why it is that nobody ever questions that Chuck misses huge chunks of his shifts without so much as an seeyalater and manages to keep his job. You should probably just disregard this. I mean, it's not Shakespeare, for Pete's sake.
American Gladiators
(1989–1996)
Ridiculously awesome
4 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This show is so ridiculous it's maybe the most entertaining show in syndication.
This show has everything that you love about a good pretentious meaningless contest like the Superbowl or meetings of the House of Representatives. The best thing about this show is when the gladiators get beat. While it's extremely hilarious to see the gladiators gloating over their rather teenage-looking opponents, it's also funny to see the gladiators get beat because to hear them talk they are very close relatives to God himself and these puny contestants don't stand a chance in hell of beating them. And occasionally they would cut to them lifting weights and working out in the training room to emphasize their extreme bodily tautness. And while we all got the impression that the gladiators were using performance enhancing drugs that didn't stop us from enjoying the good old-fashioned pretentious fun.
The nature of the competitions also lent to the humor. These contests weren't designed so that the skills that regular people develop in real life would help them. "We won't just have them run, we'll have them run inside a huge hamster ball that they have to power with their own momentum and try to get the ball to stop on top of a man hole." I suppose this is what generated the fun.
So anyway, if you like bulky man-parts in tight fitting clothing or bulky woman parts in tight fitting clothing for that matter, it's in syndication on ESPN classic.
This show has everything that you love about a good pretentious meaningless contest like the Superbowl or meetings of the House of Representatives. The best thing about this show is when the gladiators get beat. While it's extremely hilarious to see the gladiators gloating over their rather teenage-looking opponents, it's also funny to see the gladiators get beat because to hear them talk they are very close relatives to God himself and these puny contestants don't stand a chance in hell of beating them. And occasionally they would cut to them lifting weights and working out in the training room to emphasize their extreme bodily tautness. And while we all got the impression that the gladiators were using performance enhancing drugs that didn't stop us from enjoying the good old-fashioned pretentious fun.
The nature of the competitions also lent to the humor. These contests weren't designed so that the skills that regular people develop in real life would help them. "We won't just have them run, we'll have them run inside a huge hamster ball that they have to power with their own momentum and try to get the ball to stop on top of a man hole." I suppose this is what generated the fun.
So anyway, if you like bulky man-parts in tight fitting clothing or bulky woman parts in tight fitting clothing for that matter, it's in syndication on ESPN classic.
What's Up, Doc?
(1972)
This movie contains everything that makes comedy funny.
3 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is maybe the most underrated comedy in history as measured by number of comedic elements.
1. Mistaken identity. This gets tiresome when it is a mistake by the characters (midsummer night's dream, etc.) but when one of the characters in the movie is purposefully driving the mistaken identity, this makes it incredibly funny.
2. A guy named Hugh. This is just funny, period. The possibilities for comedic situations that stem from "a guy named Hugh" are infinite.
3. Matching Bags. Like the mistaken identity above this can get tedious but this movie makes ideal use of this comedy device.
4. A good ridiculous car chase. The car chase in this movie is hysterical. And they do the classic rug-pull with the pane of glass that ends up being broken, not by the numerous wreck-less vehicles driving by at high speeds but rather by a guy who got knocked off his ladder.
5. Word play. "You, you" "Eunice, I'm your wife." "How, How?" "How-ard. He has trouble with names."
6. A suspecting woman who thinks her fiancé is cheating on her, the fiancé who is not cheating on her, and the other woman who wants to make the suspecting woman suspect. This aspect of the movie is great.
7. Finally, the driving force... A woman who pretty much doesn't care about the sensibilities and plans of others, and who, if she gets her way, will make sure that they go awry.
This movie is classic. If you like the Marx Brothers, or Woody Allen, or Danny Kaye, or comedy with any real quality, you should give this movie a look. Once it gets started it doesn't slow down.
1. Mistaken identity. This gets tiresome when it is a mistake by the characters (midsummer night's dream, etc.) but when one of the characters in the movie is purposefully driving the mistaken identity, this makes it incredibly funny.
2. A guy named Hugh. This is just funny, period. The possibilities for comedic situations that stem from "a guy named Hugh" are infinite.
3. Matching Bags. Like the mistaken identity above this can get tedious but this movie makes ideal use of this comedy device.
4. A good ridiculous car chase. The car chase in this movie is hysterical. And they do the classic rug-pull with the pane of glass that ends up being broken, not by the numerous wreck-less vehicles driving by at high speeds but rather by a guy who got knocked off his ladder.
5. Word play. "You, you" "Eunice, I'm your wife." "How, How?" "How-ard. He has trouble with names."
6. A suspecting woman who thinks her fiancé is cheating on her, the fiancé who is not cheating on her, and the other woman who wants to make the suspecting woman suspect. This aspect of the movie is great.
7. Finally, the driving force... A woman who pretty much doesn't care about the sensibilities and plans of others, and who, if she gets her way, will make sure that they go awry.
This movie is classic. If you like the Marx Brothers, or Woody Allen, or Danny Kaye, or comedy with any real quality, you should give this movie a look. Once it gets started it doesn't slow down.
Hotel Babylon
(2006–2009)
Well-crafted fun
16 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This slick drama is what should make American TV viewers upgrade their cable or satellite to include BBC. What so-called classy shows in the states like "Desperate Housewives" and "Grey's Anatomy" pretend to have, this show actually has. Finesse. Everything about this show is classy.
The dialogue is fantastic. One would think that dialogue about the inner workings of a hotel would grow urbane after a few episodes but each time I watch this show, it seems the dialogue is fresh and intriguing.
There are absolutely no wasted characters in this show. Each one represents such a facet of the overall feeling of the show that if one were to be missing, the show would actually suffer. Tony is my favorite but I personally can't get enough of smarmy Brits and so I suppose I'm biased.
There is a new plot each week, and while they seem to stretch beyond believability at points, they never seem inane or silly. Each of the episodes holds its own points of interest that are rarely reused in the next installment. This is difficult to achieve in weekly dramas.
While everyone in the show is unbelievably attractive, they are all flawed in believable ways and even American audiences will find one to relate to and once found, will keep them coming back every week. And on that note, this show has appeal that spans the ocean. A lot of British shows are so British that much of their charm is lost on American audiences. This is not the case with Hotel Babylon. Their references and story lines are pertinent in America too and anyone who considers themselves a fan of sophisticated entertainment will enjoy this show immensely, regardless of location.
If you get BBC, this is a show to get hooked on, because it won't disappoint.
The dialogue is fantastic. One would think that dialogue about the inner workings of a hotel would grow urbane after a few episodes but each time I watch this show, it seems the dialogue is fresh and intriguing.
There are absolutely no wasted characters in this show. Each one represents such a facet of the overall feeling of the show that if one were to be missing, the show would actually suffer. Tony is my favorite but I personally can't get enough of smarmy Brits and so I suppose I'm biased.
There is a new plot each week, and while they seem to stretch beyond believability at points, they never seem inane or silly. Each of the episodes holds its own points of interest that are rarely reused in the next installment. This is difficult to achieve in weekly dramas.
While everyone in the show is unbelievably attractive, they are all flawed in believable ways and even American audiences will find one to relate to and once found, will keep them coming back every week. And on that note, this show has appeal that spans the ocean. A lot of British shows are so British that much of their charm is lost on American audiences. This is not the case with Hotel Babylon. Their references and story lines are pertinent in America too and anyone who considers themselves a fan of sophisticated entertainment will enjoy this show immensely, regardless of location.
If you get BBC, this is a show to get hooked on, because it won't disappoint.
Dirty Sexy Money
(2007–2009)
If the pilot implies what is to come...
1 October 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I comment on this title, assuming that the pilot is the last episode that will air. This show makes the mistake that many cancelled shows before it have made. It has too much of the "who cares" factor. In the first episode of a series, it's necessary to engage the audience in the show's characters in one of two ways. By the end of the show, I need to either love them or hate them. This show didn't achieve either. While it succeeded in making me disgusted with some of the characters, my disgust didn't lead to intrigue. Simply disgust. They also tried a cheap trick to get an audience by representing that the main character's father was murdered and there's a mystery around his death. This rather overused plot device has little to offer anymore. We've just seen it done too many times. I am a big fan of Peter Kraus. I've liked him since Sports Night and I heard that he did very well in Six Feet Under. But his character is represented as a street smart lawyer who has such disdain for his father's employers, yet all of his decisions in the episode speak to the contrary. He starts working for them, he picks up the phone when they call, etc. They were able to get Donald Sutherland and Peter Kraus but I'm guessing they weren't able to do this by their dazzling story arcs and pertinent dialogue. ABC must have flashed them a dollar bill.
So needless to say, the first strike was rather disappointing. I may wait a second episode before I write it off completely but if they drop the ball again, I won't be around for the third.
So needless to say, the first strike was rather disappointing. I may wait a second episode before I write it off completely but if they drop the ball again, I won't be around for the third.
Eastern Promises
(2007)
It's got some chops
24 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
David Cronenberg shoots an unflinchingly brutal depiction of the Russian mob in London. It is often times difficult to make a believable movie about Russians without using real Russians. Viggo Mortenson did well in capturing the Eastern European look and wasn't horrible on the accent either.
This film is delightfully brutal in the story telling. The statutory rape aspect of the plot is described and discussed in the film in a very cavalier fashion. And the fight scene in the bath house... well let's just say that it takes some chops to fight naked whether you're Russian mafia or not. As always, Cronenberg's signature graphic violence is present with rather explicit throat slitting and eye stabbing. The idea that these characters would use knives rather than guns is a good touch by Cronenberg. There is the statement in the film that one of the characters is "old school" KGB. In the old days, the line between the KGB and the mafia were extremely difficult to see. And both learned the value of doing things efficiently while also being thrifty. Knives are a thrifty way to kill someone. They can be made from extremely cheap materials, they don't require ammo and can be reused many times without the possibility that ballistics can identify them. But while anyone can pull a trigger and shoot someone, it takes some serious will power to do the work of stabbing someone to death, especially with the short blades they were using in the film.
So a fresh, gritty, gangster movie on an often overlooked group of underdwellers.
This film is delightfully brutal in the story telling. The statutory rape aspect of the plot is described and discussed in the film in a very cavalier fashion. And the fight scene in the bath house... well let's just say that it takes some chops to fight naked whether you're Russian mafia or not. As always, Cronenberg's signature graphic violence is present with rather explicit throat slitting and eye stabbing. The idea that these characters would use knives rather than guns is a good touch by Cronenberg. There is the statement in the film that one of the characters is "old school" KGB. In the old days, the line between the KGB and the mafia were extremely difficult to see. And both learned the value of doing things efficiently while also being thrifty. Knives are a thrifty way to kill someone. They can be made from extremely cheap materials, they don't require ammo and can be reused many times without the possibility that ballistics can identify them. But while anyone can pull a trigger and shoot someone, it takes some serious will power to do the work of stabbing someone to death, especially with the short blades they were using in the film.
So a fresh, gritty, gangster movie on an often overlooked group of underdwellers.
Horse Feathers
(1932)
Whatever it is, I'm against it.
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This Marx Bros classic has some of their best gags, musical numbers, routines,etc. that even today you hear comedians say they look to as inspiration for their comedy. Some of their other movies dwell on musical numbers that revolve around secondary characters and feature voice stylings of some Robert Goulet look-a-like. This movie was great because most of the numbers were kept in the family. Groucho's opening musical number is phenomenally sung and performed by he and his chorus of professors. Chico's singing lesson in the widow's apartment is vintage Chico and is some of the best piano playing you're ever going to see on screen. The gags with Harpo and Chico escaping the two football thugs near the end of the movie is probably one of the biggest reasons my mom wouldn't send us to our room when we misbehaved. We would re-enact these scenes in our room and obvious carnage would ensue. Everything that is good about comedy is represented in some form or fashion in this movie.
The Invisible Man
(2000–2002)
Entertainment galore
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I remember this being an incredibly entertaining show. I have seen the lead actor in a few other projects and they were pleasant enough. He does well with the good natured scoundrel role and in this show his character is a thief who ends up working for the good guys. The one thing I remember about this show is that they did an episode where big-foot had eluded man for so long because one example of the species had become invisible. I was seventeen when I saw this episode and at that time I thought that this was a really sophisticated plot twist although as I write it now it seems pretty stupid to me. But that's what happens. You watch a show as a child and you think that it is the most advanced form of media known to man and then when you grow up and see reruns on cable you remark to yourself that it doesn't make a ton of logical sense. Like when we all realized that in Hercules the legendary journeys, he was always preaching about violence being this bad thing all the while beating the hell out of the bad guys. But I'm sure that even if I saw this show today, I would still be entertained by its fun, if mediocre, premise.
Invincible
(2001 TV Movie)
The most awesomely bad movie ever.
5 September 2007
OK, if you've got the chops to put "matrix-like action" on your movie poster then you either have a really incredible martial arts film or you have "Invincible". Now my college roommate and I got such a kick out of this movie, we did our best to put it into out monthly movie line-up just so we could make fun of it. Billy Zane is classic Billy Zane in this movie. He has the quality of making dialogue that is incredibly inane seem incredibly important. At no point during this movie was there anything that even remotely resembled "matrix-like action" and the actors who play the martial arts studs all look like Ralph Macchio could probably stuff them in a locker. Like most "martial arts" movies the plot is stodgy at best but this is hidden by the fact that the special effects were created by hamsters. If you are a fan of train wrecks and mine cave-ins, this is a movie for you.
Dog Eat Dog
(I) (2002–2003)
Well,it's not really high television but it's entertaining
5 September 2007
I personally really like this show. It combines all the things that you like to see in a fun, forgettable, non-confrontational game show.
1. It has a good looking host. This is a must. Brooke Burke is no Chuck Woolery in the charisma department but she makes up for it by being a bombshell.
2. Meaningless competition. While there is a cash prize of $25,000 at the end of each episode, no one in the audience cares who wins or loses. They are much more involved in the "meaningless competition", which in this show is less about eating odd animal parts and more about completing entertaining tasks that have no real value except to provide the contestants an opportunity to show off their taut bodies.
3. Taut Bodies. I'm fairly certain that the only reason this show stayed on the air as long as it did was because it frequently involved girls changing into their swimsuits.
4. The odd man out. You may be wondering what this is. This is the contestant that is not like the others. In a lineup of five other normal looking "coeds" there's always one goth guy with a bunch of tattoos and long "elvish" hair or some idiot with a tongue ring and a mohawk. This contestant's elimination is always extremely entertaining.
So there you have it. If you have satellite TV and an hour to kill, check out dog-eat-dog on gsn.
1. It has a good looking host. This is a must. Brooke Burke is no Chuck Woolery in the charisma department but she makes up for it by being a bombshell.
2. Meaningless competition. While there is a cash prize of $25,000 at the end of each episode, no one in the audience cares who wins or loses. They are much more involved in the "meaningless competition", which in this show is less about eating odd animal parts and more about completing entertaining tasks that have no real value except to provide the contestants an opportunity to show off their taut bodies.
3. Taut Bodies. I'm fairly certain that the only reason this show stayed on the air as long as it did was because it frequently involved girls changing into their swimsuits.
4. The odd man out. You may be wondering what this is. This is the contestant that is not like the others. In a lineup of five other normal looking "coeds" there's always one goth guy with a bunch of tattoos and long "elvish" hair or some idiot with a tongue ring and a mohawk. This contestant's elimination is always extremely entertaining.
So there you have it. If you have satellite TV and an hour to kill, check out dog-eat-dog on gsn.
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
(1988)
Can't beat it.
3 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This movie has everything that makes a movie good. Even when compared to movies that are considered epic, this film holds its own. It combines everything that is good about cartoons and classic comedy with everything that is good about film noire. And like most movies that make it big, adults and children can sit in the same movie theatre and both enjoy the film immensely. The gags are smart enough that those of us who enjoy the Marx brothers and "the Maltese Falcon" are titillated and the kids who like cartoons and slapstick comedy are appeased as well. And frankly, Jessica Rabbit, for most of us who were heading into puberty in the late eighties and early nineties, was what ruined other women for us. She was sultry, sexy, and was married to a toon rabbit. Even girls watch this movie and go "Wow, she's hot". So, this movie will stand the test of time with adults and children alike and will be entertaining for years to come. Plus, Bob Hoskins, was dynamite. Nailed it.
Police Squad!
(1982)
Comic genius
30 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This predecessor to the Naked Gun movies is some of the most intelligent stupid humor ever. There are no lengths that the Zuckers wouldn't go for a gag. I call the humor "stupid humor" not because it's actually stupid but it's not high brow enough to be sophisticated comedy but it's way too good for the masses who this sort of show will miss. So in lieu of a better name, I call it stupid or "spoof" comedy. Some of the routines in this short series were so good, you'd have to watch them two or three times to take in all the comedy. This series is considerably better than more recent "spoof" movies because the clichés that this series is lampooning come from years of TV shows and movies from numerous genres rather than lampooning one other movie which if you haven't seen the one being parodied, those sorts of spoofs miss their mark. This show is dynamite and Leslie Nielson is a riot every episode.
Spider-Man 3
(2007)
A very sad day for Spiderman fans
16 May 2007
My roommate and I went and saw this movie in the theater. I have never really liked the casting of Toby Maguire in the first place, but the casting choices in this third installment were atrocious all around. Bryce Howard as a romantic rival to Kirsten Dunst seemed an incredibly ridiculous notion, not because she doesn't have the looks, but Kirsten Dunst is what you'd call a teen female "heartthrob" and Bryce Howard isn't. She looks so out of place it's distracting. Topher Grace as Venom is ridiculous. Period. I've liked him in other things but it was almost like he was trying to be worse than he had to be. I realize Sam Raimi makes horribly cheesy films but Topher wasn't even good cheesy. Just ridiculous cheesy. It's possible that Thomas Hayden Church, while not really suited to be a super-villain, did the best acting and character work in the entire show. I was disappointed with just about everything else in the movie with the exception of J.K. Simmons who has been consistently dynamite since the first installation. Pretty depressing turn of events for Spider-man fans if you ask me.
Tell Your Friends