Change Your Image
favman
Reviews
The Escape (2017)
Oh, bless
Poor, poor thing - how rottenly life has treated her. Could we see something of her husband's exciting and exhilarating life at work, and how he's got away with all the good stuff? No - I forgot: feminism says that whatever women suffer is far worse than what men do. Poor dears.
The Mist (2017)
One big flaw
I agree with what other people have said about the "quality" of this show, but wanted to draw attention to one marathon-sized flaw that makes it gibberish. In order to buy into the "terror" afflicting the characters, you have to believe that, in all the places they take refuge - a church, a mall, a police station, for God's sake! - there is not one landline telephone. From pitch to production, didn't one person notice this??
Inside No. 9: The Riddle of the Sphinx (2017)
Oh, dear
"The Riddle of the Sphinx" contains a glaring embarrassment. Prof Squires patronises Nina unmercifully: when she says her boy friend "hung" himself, he points out pedantically that it should be "hanged" . But earlier on, he tells her to "deduct" something (!), when he means "deduce". As always with the misuse of the English language, it's the half-educated (who don't know they are) who are guilty of the most egregious howlers.
Major Crimes (2012)
Good, but one vital change must be made
It's a great show, and though I regretted Ms Sedgwick's departure, Mary McDonnell does just as well - a thoughtful and individual portrayal that keeps you watching her. She gives a master class in how to play drama quietly and still grip. I like all the other characters, too, especially F. W. Bailey and Michael Paul Chan, who grow as the series progresses. Also - and this is essential - the stories and their solutions are of the highest quality. It is that rare combination of police procedural and humour, which gives the distinct impression that there people are real human beings, who not only work together but like one another. So I am a devoted fan - with just one problem. I would give it 8 or 9 if one vital change were made. That is:
Get. Rid Of. Effing. Rusty.
Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)
For a (dumb) pre-teen audience - whatever their biological age
God almighty, but this film is trash. It is an unbelievably, obscenely expensive mountain of malodorous tripe, with a stench of worthlessness that rebounds around the galaxy. Before this, I had only seen the first one, which I dismissed, as anyone with half a brain must, as just a noisy kids' movie - who cares, right? But now it has taken over the world, and someone must speak up to say that the emperor has no clothes and vile body odour.
Like all the others in the series, this story is just goodies versus baddies, with no originality and dialogue that could hardly be more banal. This is the story I'm talking about, but even the colossal effects are hardly new. As in the Saturday matinée presentations that some of us watched as children in the 1950s and 1960s, you know the goodies are going to win - the rest is tedium, with not the slightest hint of surprise at any point. But at least those Saturday serials only cost a couple of quid/dollars, not the GDP of a medium-sized country.
"Saturday matinée" actually is the key here: this movie (and the whole franchise) are aimed at nine-year-olds - or those in their late teens to early 30s whose emotional and intellectual development has frozen at nine years old, and who want to be treated to updated versions of the toys and comics they enjoyed at that age. This movie, along with all the pathetic "superhero" franchises that are polluting our cinemas, supplies that need.
And even on its own terms, it's shoddy. You would think that the makers could at least get the most basic physics or cosmology right, but no. There are many scenes set in deep space in which spaceships from the First Order or the Resistance zip across the screen, firing countless laser bombs. And. You. Can. Hear. Them.
That's right - as the spaceships go zooming past, or the laser torpedoes (or whatever they are) explode, they make a huge noise. Noise! In space! I thought that basic, unforgivable error had gone out with Flash Gordon (if even he thought it was right), but no - it's alive and well, and flourishing on Tripe Mountain.
Let's give the makers the benefit of the doubt, and assume that they know this is rubbish, but that's the trouble with having a target audience who mentally are still at primary/elementary school. When nine-year-olds see lots of really, REALLY cool flashes and colours, they demand very, very loud bangs and whooshes to go along with them. So that's what they get - and to hell with common sense.
But there is something far, far worse than what I have written above; and that is the utter tragedy of a whole generation - maybe two or three - who have been dumbed down to a point from which, I fear, there is now no going back. They believe that this is not just a good, but a great, movie, and that means that, intellectually, they are lost, utterly lost. It is almost as if this franchise has taken the place of something bigger in their lives - religion, maybe. We all need something larger than ourselves to believe in, and the generation under 40 have found it, tragically, in these cruddy movies.
I will now stop, so that the true believers can savage me for my impertinence in not treating these films with the respect they deserve and bowing down before them. I would only ask anyone who reads their comments to check out their spelling, punctuation and grammar. If nothing else does, that will testify to their mental and emotional age.
The Man in the High Castle (2015)
Big hole
I have only watched the first episode, but already I have seen a hole a mile wide. In both the Japanese and the Nazi sectors, we see as many black faces as in modern times. Really? When the Nazis have ruled half of America for 17 years? That just isn't possible - they would all be dead or in concentration camps
Also, when Juliana takes the bus to Canon City, I'm pretty sure I saw two Down's Syndrome people on the bus. Again, I know she is in the Japanese sector, but the Nazis must have an influence - and I don't suppose it would have taken much to convince the Japanese of those times to get rid of those their allies considered expendable.
But apart from that, the series is already gripping, with a fog of menace hanging over the most ordinary scenes. I am looking for forward to the rest, even with these flaws.
Scott & Bailey (2011)
Fair shake for men!
I added this paragraph while watching the latest series. A serial killer, or more than one, is slaughtering people across Greater Manchester. And Rachel Bailey is leading the police inquiry - a sergeant, and a brand new one! Come one, get real.
Back to my original review: I agree that this is a worthwhile show, and I watch it regularly for its good writing and acting and strong story lines. However, it has one major flaw, which is not duplicated in any other TV show I can think of, and I believe it's high time someone pointed it out.
Scott and Bailey was created and is written by women, its producer and executive producers are women and its three main stars are women, and their characters are all good, strong personalities. Nothing wrong with that, you say - women should get a fairer shake on TV - and I agree entirely, were it not for the fact that the male characters are all, without exception, rubbish, ranging from useless to psychotic. And these are not the villains the main two characters pursue, who are often sickening, but the back-story people. Janet Scott's husband Ade is a whining, selfish baby who complains about her mother, loses his temper and is generally a waste of space. Her admirer Andy Roper is a stalker in the making, who can't take no for an answer and turns up uninvited in the pub and at her home, pressing his by now unwanted attentions on her. Oh, and he's sorry for himself - actually, most of the men in this show are sorry for themselves. Rachel Bailey has had two boy friends so far: the current one, Geoff Hastings, is a breezy male chauvinist who never listens and thinks she wants decisions taken for her; the previous one, barrister Nick Savage, is a psychotic womaniser and possible killer. Her brother, Dominic, was in prison for armed robbery, can't keep or even get a job and hangs around her house all day feeling sorry for himself (see what I mean?). Gill Murray's ex, Dave, is a loud-mouthed aggressive drunk (and a womaniser, natch), who - you've guessed it - feels sorry for himself most of the time. To sum up, the men are pathetic caricatures - except maybe Kevin Lumb, of whom the best that can be said is: "cheery, nothing much up top". The rest have few or no redeeming features.
Just imagine the squeals of outrage if a show was aired in which most of the credits went to men, all the main starring roles were for men, and women only appeared as tarts, hysterics, nags or bitches. Those responsible would never hear the last of it. Come on, ladies, let's have one or two halfway decent male characters ordinary men can identify with!
Charlie Bartlett (2007)
Not another movie about misunderstood teens!
I watched this film because of the previous comment and its current rating, and I have rarely been so disappointed. The acting is by numbers, the script is derivative and repetitive, it has nothing to say and it says it at length. I could hardly believe that it is supposed to be funny - I never even smiled. Talk about an utter waste of the talents of Downey, who I regard as one of America's finest actors. How he came to be in this instantly forgettable mess, which hardly deserves the lowest IMDb rating, I will never know. I regret the 90 minutes of my life I spent watching this utterly awful movie, time that I will never get back. File under "pointless teen tripe" - and AVOID at all costs.