Reviews

If you have watched World War Z, San Andreas or 2012, you've watched this movie. A couple with marital issues? CHECK! A kid with health problems? CHECK! Family separated and/or lost the kid's medicine because of a super dumb reason? DOUBLE CHECK! That scene where they have to stop at the store to pick up the medicine for kid while the store is being looted? TRIPLE CHECK!

The movie attempts to stand out from other disaster lore by focusing on the family, rather than on the disaster itself or the bureaucrats managing it, and that's where it fails the most because none of the characters here acts or speaks like any human beings you've ever met: How do you root for their marriage or even their survival when the writing is so AWFUL that there's nothing relatable or even likable about these characters??

Totally forgettable movie Hope Gerald Butler's check cleared!

THE GOOD: Josh Groban is perfect in this role (which is just not fair)! Tony Danza also shines as the always ethically-challenged former cop! TJ and Cora's banter is endearing, although the show piles it on so heavy you start hoping they don't bone in the middle of the precinct!

THE BAD: The show was created by Andy Breckman, the same genius who gave us Monk and that becomes a problem out of the gate, because The Good Cop doesn't so much try to reproduce the magic of Monk as it copies and pastes the characters!

TJ, the annoyingly clean socially awkward genius detective with a photographic memory, is clearly a clone of Monk. Also, Tony Danza's character, a former cop who is obsessed with the death of his wife, that may or may not have been an accident, is a rehashing of Monk's obsession over the assassination of Trudy! Hell, even one murder victim's name (Ms Landau) was recycled from Monk!!

As enjoyable as the show is, you have this "it's been done before" feeling that leaves you wishing Andy Breckman had tried to reinvent the model. Alas, that wasn't the case!

It has gorgeous animation and deep themes of friendships, loss and sacrifice. You just wish there was a story to back it up.

A young girl, Mai, lost and full of anger to the world in he wake of her parents' separation, accidently awakens a next-generation robot at a robot tech show, which is a big deal in this high robotized society. The robot immediately imprints on her, and there starts its journey to find and befriend the girl. Discovering its advanced weaponry, Mai enlists the robot in her plan to take revenge on the world. But there's a catch: the robot was damaged along the way to find the girl and it has to clear some of its memory to remain functional and since it's determined to save all the memories it has shared with Mai, it must choose between forgetting her and retaining its full functionality. Meanwhile, the tech mogul, Ares, who owns the company that manufactures all kinds of robots, but who was kept in the dark about thi particular robot, is in pursuit.

That's where the story falls apart. We suddenly find out that Ares has a "final solution" type plan for all humans, but are told little of why and what he's hoping to accomplish. When he finally catches up to the robot and the girl, the former has decided to sacrifice his functionality to keep memories of Mai. HOWEVER, after a fight with Ares' mind-controlled robot, he opts to kidnap Mai's mother instead. WHY? Because it serves to manufacture unnecessary fight between Mai and the robot, who accuses the robot of selfishness for choosing memories over everything else. But Ares did not set out to kidnap the mother, nor is it part of any plans beyond helping the writers to shoehorn in this last tension before the end.

Lastly, the movie is clearly targeting a young audience, but you wouldn't know it by the music choice. From the eardrum blaster at the start of the movie to the expletive-ladden songs peppered throughout the movie, it's clear the movie is more concerned with being edgy than being mindful of its audience.

The movie is enjoyable and touching at times, but it definitely leaves you with a feeling that it could have, should have been better.

The comparison to Arrested Development is inevitable, but Schitt's Creek is different in that it has character growth which, for me, is as much an important driver of these "from riches to rags" stories and the humor in them. A note about the cast: this is one of those shows where you can'timagine any of the characters played by anyone else. Catherine O'Hara and Dan Levy are unforgettable in their roles and ..someone give Eugene Levy's eyebrows an oscar already! :)

The first 4 seasons are a treasure, but season 5 feels like the show is getting dangerously close to the bottom of the comedic barrel. It's evident the writers are manufacturing the same overused conflicts in every comedy: Johnny walking in on Stevie taking nudes, the whole "your boyfriend kissed my boyfriend" bit between Alexis and David, etc. Also, as the show goes on, you start wondering whether the town was as rundown and off the beaten track and it was orginally suggested: in how many dingy towns does a shop selling upscale body lotions, lipbalm, candles and luxury cheese stay profitable???

All that said, watching the Roses out of their element, and how they try in their own clueless, haughty, self-absorbed way to start over, gets one to care a lot about these characters, what happens to them, the lessons they learn and the victories they manage to score: they may not be 100% relatable, but they are lovable!