Reviews

10 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Mentalist: Red John's Rules (2013)
Season 5, Episode 22
10/10
On the List of Seven
5 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Great episode, perfect season finale, and I'm spoiled watching on HBO Max, where I can immediately go to the next season.

This is only really a spoiler about the list of seven, which I'm not sure even is a spoiler, I saw this last week.

I'm only on episode two of the next season, so I don't know who Red John specifically is. It may not even actually be someone on the list, although that would be a cop out. I feel like of the seven, it only makes logical sense for it to be the Homeland Security Guy or Bertram.

None of the other people on the list could possibly have the access to resource that allows Red John to have this sort of unrealistic and superhuman access and connection to everything that keeps him multiple steps ahead of everyone. The one exception is Malcolm McDowell, who I just can't seem to think has the physicality, being on the older end.

I'm sure every time we've heard Red John, there's been a voice modulator aspect, but it just doesn't at all sound like it could be Bertram. The cadence and pronunciation doesn't connect to me.

So logically speaking, I feel like it just has to be the Homeland Security guy. I could hear his voice sounding close to Red John if he was put through a modulator, and could somewhat believe he could have the access Red John seems to have.

They could go the Psychic route, but that would feel so shark-jumpy, so I hope not. And I just wouldn't believe any of the other seven hold enough power in their position to have the level of control Red John has if it doesn't go the psychic route.

Anyway, I doubt anyone will read this, but it's fun to wax poetic on a theory.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Psych: Dead Man's Curveball (2011)
Season 6, Episode 5
5/10
I love the show...this one fell flat.
6 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I would love to know the behind-the-scenes story of this one. It felt really clunky and awkward, especially when compared to all of the other episodes in the entire show.

Danny Glover is a great actor that felt very miscast. Almost all of his lines sounded like they were ADR. The pacing was very clunky and awkward.

The motives in this episode didn't make sense and the logic was all over the place. Mel runs after Izzy, but Izzy disappears, and in that time, gets murdered? The dude thinks it's Gus that broke into his office, then immediately shows up, gun in hand, ready to murder before knowing what might've been found? After the scene in the locker room where he fires Shawn after saying he doesn't know who he is? So why does he immediately go to the Psych office? Shawn has a big moment with Cal who's catching a flight, but then magically shows up where Shawn and Gus are being held at gunpoint? Then you add both Wade Boggs and Henry as Deus Ex Machinas? Ya'll.

It seems like there was a time crunch and this was thrown together to meet a deadline due to crazy things happening behind-the-scenes.

This is a wonderful show, this is the first episode I would rate less than a 7. Well, except for the street racing episode where they ADRed almost every single Adam Rodriguez line.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Psych (2006–2014)
9/10
I Love This Show (with one Critique)
13 December 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I love the idea of a brighter procedural and the chemistry between all of the actors is beautiful. The Spellingg Bee has been one of my long-standing favorites, with all of the Mr. Yang episodes. They've been able to bring a ton of awesome guest stars on each week, and bring a fresh spin on each episode diving into a different type of world.

SPOILER: The one major criticism I have is that they rely on one story element way too frequently: the evil love interest. Evil is of course a strong word, but more fun to say. With the exception of Abigail, Juliet, that marine biologist from the episode with the Seal, and of course, Gus' sister, I would say 97% of the potential love interests for Shawn or Gus end up being the person that either committed or helped commit the crime.

This could get better as the show progresses; I've seen the whole series but am only on season 4 of the rewatch. But it makes anytime there is a potential love interest kinda spoil the ending very early on.

This is not a significant enough frustration to ruin the experience, especially as I've seen the whole show, so usually remember the person responsible in every episode. But, I do wish they had switched it up a little bit more so it wasn't as predictable.

Either way, the show is fun and the relationships are so beautifully crafted, which is why we keep going back. But it is something I kept noticing.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Extreme Nostalgia, Rough Plot
12 July 2019
I was obsessed with Pokemon growing up, and had fun pointing out all the Pokemon names in a trip down memory lane. But, that was about all it had going for it .

I just didn't feel like they made the most interesting 'bang-for-your-buck' story decisions. They went a relatively cliche route and a lot of the comedic elements fell flat. Yet, I found myself laughing at moments that were unintentionally bad in a funny way.

As far as performances go, I thought Kathryn Newton was phenomenal, and one of the better parts of the movie. Tremendous screen presence garnered more impressive by the frail parts surrounding her.

I've seen Justice Smith put on great performances, specifically in The Get Down, but he really lacked in this movie. I don't know if it was the bad script, improper directing, or lack of preparation, but his line delivery just felt weird and flat. Too many of his moments felt forced and unbelievable.

Ryan Reynolds was fine. Nothing stuck out, he had a few funny moments, it was just a very forgettable movie.

Overall, I think it was a wonderful and unique idea with a lot of wrong decisions made. The script was on-the-nose and focused on the least interesting parts of the story they had. Detective Pikachu is the titular character but they made it about a loner dude that doesn't want any Pokemon and his angsty past.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
It's rough with interesting elements.
2 July 2019
The first three quarters of the movie were really rough. Almost none of the jokes landed and I watched this with a group not by myself, so it was a unanimous lack of reach.

I think the biggest problem was Sandler very clearly not caring until the very last part of the movie. I understand that might have been a character choice, but I just don't think it worked in a movie like this that required such a high energy to pull off.

His character's lack of presence just made it hard to root for him specifically and you wonder why Aniston's character is actually with him.

That being said, I thought the performances were quite good from other counterparts, but that also comes to good casting.

Luke Evans fits the mold of mysterious British businessman very well and I think a few of his punchlines would have landed better if they came more from a exasperation than an aggression.

Jennifer Aniston is of course the best part of the movie which helped me root for the main characters simply because she had the charisma to equate both of them, but then again that's not much surprise.

Gemma Arterton would have been the best part of the movie if she had more screen time and stole every scene she was in. Even dating back to Prince of Persia, she's always been interesting to watch. Of course, she's beautiful, but she also always has this dangerous edge to her and reeks of power.

The last like 20-30 minutes of the movie were actually quite entertaining in a way that brought it up from like a 3 to a 6, Sandler finally started giving a **** and we laughed more in the last twenty minutes than the entire movie. Which isn't really saying too much, but hey victories where you have them.

Overall it's a movie to unwind with, the story is acceptable and the performances were fine, it's comedy just didn't land, largely because of how clearly Sandler didn't care. A couple energy adjustments and better joke could've made this astronomically better, and I think this could have been a wonderful red velvet birthday cake if it just baked a little bit longer.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
My Heart Broke
16 March 2019
Not necessarily from the movie. There was a girl with Cystic Fibrosis in the crowd that completely lost it. The story hit way too home for her. Considering that I dont see how I couldn't give this a rave review.
109 out of 137 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
You're not meant to be in control.
28 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I don't want to get into too much about this and I'll put the spoiler tag on even though I won't technically spoil anything.

But this film is meant to give you the illusion of control. It's the idea that the more you try to control the outcome the more it falls out of your hands. You can't control life you can only follow along for the ride.

So many people try to force things that just aren't meant to be, whether it be career or love. The more you have to force an outcome the less likely it is to be successful. Not to say don't work hard, alway work hard to accomplish obstacles. But sometimes you spend so much time forcing the rock up the hill you don't realize the pebble that was right next to you all along.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Making a Murderer (2015–2018)
Here's the Thing...
21 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The fact is that this was a great compelling show, and had a very strong entertainment value, and that is what we have to look at, and that is what I used in rating this show.

The hope is for this to raise a conversation, and the treatment of individuals in the system can be vastly improved and this does great at conveying that idea.

Its problem and the problem a lot of people have with it is its manipulation by omission. I thought that Avery and Dassey were wrongfully convicted wholeheartedly by the end of it. Not necessarily that they were 100% innocent, but that they weren't undeniably certifiably without a shadow of a doubt guilty.

Research did great at changing that, and it was surprising to learn just how much was left out, and how critical it was. Producers claimed time, but they included a lot of less important bits than what they included.

If you do a bit of research, you see just how bad Avery looked, and it really destroyed the image of good guy at heart with an awful lot of rotten luck image the show portrayed.

His past offenses were really bad, and the evidence they omitted was very damning. It was testified or said by him in the documentary that he had never even talked to Halbach, yet he knew her well enough to repeatedly call and request for her.

He was released and cleared 18 years after his wrongful rape conviction, but had personally admitted and been accused of multiple sexual assaults.

I won't get into it all, but that's the tip of the iceberg,and are things that play a huge role of perception of innocence.

It was stupid and ridiculous to think someone could be released from serving 18 years for a rape he didn't commit to turn around and months later rape and murder Halbach. It would be completely idiotic and make no sense, which is something that would have given him leverage. Because its tough to go pointing fingers at the man just undeniably exonerated for the same crime.

He intentionally doused a cat in gasoline and threw them into a fire, and I'm sorry but that's despicable. The show made it seem accidental. It wasn't.

I think that Brendan Dassey was given a raw and unfair deal. One piece of evidence that does look bad for Dassey that was left out is the fact that his mother claimed he helped Avery clean his garage with bleach, the location many investigators believed to be the murder site, but that is heresy.

Dassey was convicted based on his own confession which he then denied and coupled with the fact about the garage floor with bleach from what I read that was it. Whether he did it or not, that was unfair and unjust. How can you convict someone based on what they say when they said the opposite as well? You can't pick and choose.

Regardless a well-crafted show.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
AHHHH THE RETURN OF THE FORCED DIALOGUE
1 June 2018
I'm going to be brutally honest the first three episodes of season one of Riverdale was the worst writing I've seen in a tv show.

But I stuck around and was happy I did because it got so much better.

But in this first episode, while nowhere near as bad as the first three of season one, I see a return in the terribly forced dialogue.

Hopefully this season sees a similar trend and whips itself back into shape.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Arrival (II) (2016)
9/10
How do you go from Lights Out to this???
17 May 2018
How do you write an iffy even for a lower budget horror film the same year as an Oscar nominated screenplay!?

I don't know if I should scold those that limited his range in previous work or severely commend a writing staff that might have helped him pull this off.

I think as you reach the ending you realize how expertly crafted the thematic elements were. I'm not sure how much of it had to do with editing or writing, but it worked and unfolded in a thoroughly unexpected way.

There were plenty of issues of course, but no movie is perfect. The pacing could get slow at points, there were some stupid plot points and characters, but as a whole this really worked for me.

I think that the first half of the movie certainly would hang more around a high 6 for me, but the last half really found its place and tempo.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed