Change Your Image
bbbutler-37914
Reviews
New Amsterdam (2018)
Good storyline, but...
I enjoyed most of the first two seasons, but by the time I got to Season 3, the entire script became a vehicle for the characters to deliver lines from a tract of ideological arguments in favor of a liberal agenda in this society's current culture wars. It treats issues such as gender identity, same sex attraction and various medical ethical issues in the same almost monotone voice. Any ideas that varied were placed in the mouths of straw men who were set up to allow the main characters to triumph in a conflct that resulted in predictable results for those who love the materialistic dialectic. The plot to the Three LIttle Pigs was more nuanced. By the end of the fourth episode of Season 3, I felt as if the scripts were written by college sophomores who used as a guide and inspiration a critical essay on critical race theory authored by an adoring sycophant of the movement. Ho hum Next.
Shameless (2011)
This is how American civilization looks as it crumbles into the darkness
This is the modern version of a Senca play. I watched fhe first episode and felt like I had witnessed the emotional equivalent of watching a 100-car pile-up (with death and injuries) on the Interstate. Horrifhing...but I couldn't look away. I wondered whether I was actually contributing passively in the disintegration of US culture by watching Epsode 2.
Now I'm halfway through Season 8, and I feel as if the writers are doing just that: chronicling the fictional version of the final years of our county's demise. And I still can't look away. And it's not just because I feel addicted.
My parents grew up in Chicaogoland--Oak Park ("the community," as Hemmingway referenced it, "of broad lawns and narrow minds."), and I myself was raised on their values and worldview. It was the opposite of the South Side. But it was also a community of white people who represented the immigrants from the UK--just not the dregs of Ireland.
I have no moral real justification for watching this series, but neither can I justify my fascination with watching a magnificent piece of beautiful classic architecture burn to the ground at the genius of a very skilled arsonist.
Acting? Excellent. Writing? Beyond great. Shakespeare for the unwashed masses.
But are these talents that could be used more profitably for drawing a picture for hopeful future? Yes. Instead, this is a hyperbolic telling of a mythic story of who we are in all our depraved and "shameless" social character.
Yet, here I am: watching the series until way past my bedtime, episode after episode, obsessively hoping that these characters, who operate without moral compasses, may make choices that do not emerge from sick, primal desires for self-destruction or a types of foolishness that are outside of their own experience of helpless and desperate insanity.
Damn Yankees (1958)
I still cry at "Goodby Old GIrl"
Musicals are not my favorite type of film, but this one is a keeper for me. Several lines are for the history books, like "Wives, they've caused me more trouble than the Methodist Church.", "I was the ugliset woman in Providence, Rhode Island"< and, of course, "Whatever Lola wants, Lola gets."
I stil have several of the songs comitted to memory. I've seen this film more than 20 times in 55 years, and the one song, "GoodBye Old Girl" still brings me to tears.
Good Girls: Jeff (2019)
Bad Theology
I'd normally let this slide, but the scene in the church service in which the preacher interprets the passage from Romans 7 is the dead opposite of the meaning of the verse and the larger context of the passage. If the writers wanted to chose a Biblical passage to support the plot point they were putting forward, I would have advised a different one. SInce the overall theme of the series is an exploration into human nature and the evil we do, then this particular scene undermines the entire point. Try 1 John 3:6 instead.
Cinderella (2021)
Except for the heavy and transparent socio-political agenda, I loved it.
First of all, I really liked this film. The music, choreography and several other aspects of the production values are Oscar-worthy. I'm sure it will go down as one of the best films of the year, perhaps more. I'm gonna watch it ten more times.
However, this is also an undiguised propaganda tract for a "smash the patriarchy and state" effort. The institutions of the state, tradition, family and marriage are considered uniformly evil in their very DNA. The most direct statement of this attitude is the "carry it, marry it or bury it...down to your grave" lyric of Dream Giirl song at the climax.
Beginning with the opening scene that establishes the conflict between the "rhythm nation" of Hegalian thesis establishment thinking (boo) and behavor and the progressivist "Milion to One" antithesis (hooray), the message is impossible to overlook.
Without exception the evil characters in the story represent the status quo--those who are malevolent, selfish, mean-spirited, petty and stupid. This attribution extends to all but Ella. Even the prince, and almost all the male characters, lack the ingegrity, depth of character, honesty and hopeful attitude that one would expect from those who support and maintain a decent society.
Only the dreamers and reformers, Ella. Princess Gwen, the mice and the "fabulous godmother" represent the positive. It is an undisguised triumph of the will against oppressive societal structures. The lack of subtlety in plot and theme and nuance of character are an embarrassment to the script writers and does no justice to the original fairy tale--or any well-told story for that matter.
Perhaps the most concise statement in this film comes from Ella herself, who reflects, "I have to try and make a life for myself by myself. Because that is what I want." If this is not the watchword of our age, I cannot find another. It is, in the words of a modern social phliosopher, pure "expressive individualism" and, in the words of historian Carl Truman, "the triumph of the modern self." As Psalm 2:3 says, "Let us break their chains and throw off their shackles." It almost makes me weep with a strange sense of joy at the destruction of the system and its structures as it is portrayed in the story. It holds a similar hope and promise of which the French and Russian revolutions convinced that generation. Romantic love, however that is expressed, is all; the rest can burn.
The resolution to this film, though, is wonderful. Love will and does save the day. But don't let your kids watch it unless they have very well-tuned critical thinking skills.
The Irregulars (2021)
A period piiece of fantasy heavt with historical revisionism
I've only watched two episodes so far, but the series seems to have all the promise of sustaining an audiencel This in spite of the fact that the cast appears to be a concession to some sort of revisonist view of history (in the bad sense of the term) or a capitiulation to the latest trends in critical race theory. Watson is a grumpy and entitled character of African descent as well are a disproportionate number of extras in consideration of the fact that we are talking about turn of the century London. Social class boundaries are ridgid when the plot calls for it and yet fluid when convenient for thw writers..Considering the violatioins in the character profiles and simplistic yet tortured plot lines, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle would have to te lashed down in his chair I suppose. Or delighted. I'm' not sure.
Considering the paranoramal thematic elements, this is clearly a post-modern type of fantasy genre in spite of its well-staged and filmed historical and cultural setting.
Of course, part of the appeal is that the main cast are comprised of young adults who seem to be able to outsmart everyone older than them. This although none seem to have an education and life experiences that would train them in critical thinking skills and the ability ot call on a graduate level of store of knowledge, vast literary references and scientific and mathematical applications..They are able to be explosively impulsive and adolescent and yet socially mannered, emotionallhy mature and coldly logical at the same time. Although characters like this rarely operate in real life, they are quite plausible for an audience of wishful-thinking young adults.
In the Dark (2019)
Insanely well-acted, -written and -directed....
I'm only five episodes in to the first season, but I'm very impressed at how Perry Matfield has completely imbodied her character of Murphy. Most of the other actors do at the very least passable jobs, but most are quite impressive. I'm thinking of the characters of Jess and Max, but others as well.
The writers have done their work too, putting Muphy's character and dialoge into a fully three-dimensional person who is both a disaster on two feet, hard-edged and dysfunctional but also likeable, relatable and believable. Of course, kudos to Perry Matfield again for making the words on the script come alive.
The direction is also impressive, but I'm including the pacing, camera work, lighting, and other production values that create a dark and forbidding world that nevertheless keeps me, the viewer, attached and involved in each character, event and situation.
The Pastor and the Pro (2018)
Poor Acting; Great Message
Except how Cunningham rendered the character of Rachael, the rest of the cast could have used a few acting lessons and some better lines from the writers.
However, the actual message of this film was a fairly good demonstration of the grace of God as actally represented in Scripture. Most of the American and British media represent the Chrisitan faith as conservatism, mere moralism, conformity to societal standards or a form of cultural nationalism; either that or a foil for the triumph of iiberal humanism against an oppressive angry, judgemental and/or remote God or rebellion against the hypocracy of the sourrouding impersonal, industrial, oppressive capitalist society disguised as Christianity--anything but a message of the grace of a holy God for those he came to redeem.
This one actually demonstrated what real grace is about on a personal, human level. That's rare. It's not the best script by far, but the idea is close to a fairly accurate representation of what the Cross is about, al least on a pedestrian level.
War Machine (2017)
One of Brad PItt's Most Interesting Performances
This is a thinly-veiled take on McCrystal's time in Afaghanistan, but with a cynical twist. Brad Pitt did a compellingly interesting representation of the general's character and kept me wondering the whole time whether to sympathize with him or ridicule him. Meg Tilly, Alan Ruck and Topher Grace also did some out-of-the-ordinary roles for their usual style and did great jobs.
Scorpion (2014)
Contrived Plots; Inscruitable Characters; Fun
I just finished watching just the first season on Netflix. The series is worth watching...if you're willing to tolerate some plots and situations that are too contrived and predictable. But this is not my main issue with the series.
My principal problem about the series is the main character, Walter O'Brien. His character is based on a real-life human whose IQ is 197 but whose EQ is in the basement. Specifcially, O'Brien's "handicap" is that he is incapable of "connecting with the emotional states of others" (from the Pilot episode). This is not genetic, but due to his upbringing and childhood traumas related to his mental capabilities.
Nevertheless, O'Brien's character DOES, indeed, seem to have these exact capabilities of connecting with others' emotional states, at least in some fashion. This ability puts him in a leadership position the team based in part on compassion and considering others' issues. In addition, there is a growing romantic connection between him and a female character on the the team (yep, this is the spoiler), which seems in part due to Walter's ability to put himself above the needs of others and is a constant reason for his thoughts and actions in relation to his romantic interest. If he didn't have these abilities, then he wouldn't get the girl, right? Paradoxical, I'd say.
This makes for difficult challenges for the writers and even more difficult challenges for the actor (Elyes Gabel) who plays O'Brien. O'Brien is not autistic, but Gabel does not seem to have the raw material from the writers and director(s) to know how to respond to the other characters or to use facial expressions or body language. Either he does or he does not know how to connect emotionally with other. Which is it? Or is he developing? Neither the writers, directors nor Gabel seem to know what to do with O'Brien's character.
I don't want to parse ALL the characters, but be assured that none of their backstories are satisfactory to explain to the viewer who they are or why they behave the way they do.
Next,as I mentioned, the plots seem to be too contrived. The team is presented every week with a challenge to save either humanity in general or at least a large portion of it. In every episode the world is almost destroyed. It's like a Superman comic. When the dilemma is presented, the viewer is subjected to both a high-tension, no-escape difficulty for the entire team (in which we know, of course, they WILL escape from before the credits roll) and then a subsequent almost too- predicable solution. If not that, the solution presents itself in the form of an inscrutable but scientifically/logically plausible escape. Even the Superman comic writers had better story-telling skills.
The reason that the solution SEEMS plausible is that the writers invent some form of mechanical device or scientific theory that the viewer is supposedly clueless about. They just pull it out of the air. We viewers, many of whom are also scientifically astute (not me), object since the solution is really NOT a solution.
The entire episode, then, undergoes a painfully predictable story arc that allows the viewer an escape from reality, but does nothing to satisfy our "willful suspension of disbelief" when we indulge in such imaginary adventures. I feel that the viewer is insulted because the writers either create a solution that the characters discover but we viewers are too dumb to understand; either that or we are NOT too dumb to understand and the scientifically educated viewer is disappointed by the facile or implausible nature of the solution. If we don't know what's going on, don't worry: the tense music in the background lets us know that the plot has taken a bad turn.
The viewer knows that the cavalry is ALWAYS going to save the day at the end when the main characters are up against the wall--even though the cavalry is dressed in clown suits or appear out of nowhere. The writers insert the solution at the end because their 43 to 47 minutes of air time is coming to an end, and they need SOMETHING to tie up the plot and put a bow on it. O'Brien kisses the girl, hops on his horse and gallops off to the sunset. "Who was that masked man?" we ask. Or actually, "What just happened?" (Music rises; run credits.)
Unlike procedural crime dramas when you might learn something new about the law, or unlike medical dramas when you can learn something about disease, chemistry or the human body, do NOT rely on this series to help you learn anything new about science, math or logic. The characters talk too fast and the ideas may or may not be believable or have substance. Finally, any literati should not expect to hone their story-telling skills with unpredictable plot twists or subtly-fashioned characters.
Just grab a beer and enjoy the ride.
Suits (2011)
A World-class Pissing Contest
I'm almost finished watching the end of the second season on Netflix. It's fascinating in many ways, but the overall tone of the interaction among characters is akin to watching gladiators on steroids duke it out under high-stakes conflict. You won't learn much about the legal profession here. Go to see Law and Order or any other legal procedural drama series for that. But if you want to sit back and relax WHILE there's an overabundance of adrenaline running through you, this is a series to watch. Even the female characters must get testosterone injections. Its' Conan the Barbarian against Xena Princess Warrior in tailored suits. I wonder how some of the egos can get though doorways. If the world were really like this, we would be nuclear ash before we were half-way through Season 1. Have fun. Bring popcorn.
Daredevil (2015)
This is good storytelling
I am not a comic book fan or even reader, not even when I was a kid, and I've only seen the first ten episodes of Season 1, so keep this in mind. Given this, kudos to the writers and many of the actors, especially D'onofrio.
This is good character development. I like the complexities of both the main character and the villain, especially D'onofrio's portrayal of the latter. On the surface the Daredevil character is the "good guy" and the villain character the "bad guy", but the lines are blurred as the episodes unfold and all characters become more complex and humanized.
The violence is extreme, but fits with the nature of the story and setting; hence, it is not gratuitous. It is a battle in Hell by people who are trapped in a world without redemption or grace. It is a battle against good and evil by people who are complex and wounded. Theologically-speaking, it is a spiritual battle, but without supernatural grace. The main character, the Daredevil, is a flawed human too, and unable to provide salvation for those he cares about; the villain is unable to gain redemption for what he's done, no matter how much we sympathize with him.
Suffering pervades the entire environment. No one is able to escape, even though all yearn for it. Just like in a classic epic, the Daredevil is the hero with the tragic moral flaw, the villain is a character with whom the reader/viewer can sympathize, and all the supporting characters are emotionally accessible. And all these human characters are trapped in a setting from which they cannot escape--not just Hell's Kitchen, but from themselves.
I've seen other reviews by those who've watched more of the series and from those who are fans of the comic book series. To them I may not be able to disagree if I were to be in their position. But to me, this is good storytelling...so far.
The Crown (2016)
John Lithgow as Churchill is his best in the Assassins episode
I'm writing this primarily to praise John Lithgow in his role as Sir Winston Churchill. I haven't seen all Lithgow's film work and none of his stage work, so my praise is somewhat limited. Nevertheless, the scene in the "Assassins" episode when Churchill has his final sitting with the artist who paints his portrait--well, Lithgow obviously pulled it all out when he portrays Churchill's grief over the death of his daughter, Marigold, and the meaning that Churchill imposes on his own landscapes of the pond in his own yard...the delivery of dialogue, posture, and especially the expression on his face and the skill of the director and cinematographer--all combine to make it one of the most tragically human moments I've ever seen on a TV series. Perfect. The product of a lifetime of acting experience. I hope that Lithgow would look back on this scene as one of his best, although that's not my business to tell a man how he ought to measure his own life's achievements.
I'm not finished watching the series itself, but I'm hooked. Excellent dialogue in the writing and fantastic delivery by almost every actor. Costuming, set design, lighting, music, direction, cinematography: bravo.
Royal Pains (2009)
Very fun and worth a watch
If you live in Cabot Cove, I'd advise that you NEVER interact with Jessica Fletcher, the mystery writer turned homicide detective in the series Murder She Wrote. In spite of it's small town setting, EVERYONE who meets or has interaction with her becomes a victim or suspect in a murder. That's just too much for any one cozy New England town to accommodate.
Similarly, if you live in the Hamptons (a much larger demographic), you can be sure that meeting or having any interaction with Dr. Henry (Hank) Lawson, the main character in Royal Pains, will guarantee that you may suffer from some exotic malady or injury. This in spite of the statistical probability to the contrary. Hence, being a viewer of the series, not a character in it, makes it much more likely that you will neither suffer the fate of many in the cast nor become swept up in the Sturm und Drang of the various romantic and familial relationships therein. Not only that, but you will also pick up on some great medical vocabulary and may become entranced with the clever "McGuyver-like" inventiveness of Hank's character. Warning: do not practice medicine, especially diagnose medical conditions, like Hank does. This series is NOT a reasonable substitute for a medical school education or a good model for choosing romantic partners.
While this is not genius, groundbreaking TV screen writing a la Madmen or Twin Peaks, it is nevertheless good entertainment, suitable for "obsessiviewing" on the available video streaming service of your choice. Good character and plot development without leaving you unsatisfied with simple cardboard characters or nauseatingly predictable outcomes. It's fun TV. Don't expect more.
UPDATE: Now having gotten deep into Season 4, I see two more interesting trends. First, there seems to be a subliminal running commentary on the state the medical profession in the US and its conflicts as an art/science (Hank's take) vs the business of medicine (his brother, Evan's take). I'm not sure if the writers are simply making observations about the eternal struggle of humanitarian concern vs the commercial impulse in the microcosm of the medical profession or they are actually promoting a vision that is neither the Affordable Care Act of 2014 nor the free market version of medicine of the ACA's opponents.
Secondly, as I mentioned before, each episode is a medical education for the literate masses in the form of certain exotic syndromes or complex conditions that are demographically impossible to be represented in such a small population as the Hamptons; nevertheless they still manifest constantly--again, just as magically as dead bodies pile up every time Jessica Fletcher of Cabot Cove appears. If you're in the general vicinity of Hank Lawson, M.D., the likelihood that you may spontaneously faint, become dangerously dehydrated, experience a TIA, cardiac arrhythmia, etc., escalates exponentially, especially if you're a pretty female or rich and attending a gala event involved in some sort of "do or die" project, enterprise or competition.
So, yeah, it's both fun and educational, though it still requires the standard "suspension of disbelief."
Hart of Dixie (2011)
Enjoyable romantic comedy series, but....
I've gotten though the first half of season 3 so far, and I've enjoyed much of it. It's a good escape. But two things annoy me.
First, the entire series seems to be built on the efforts or apparently good-willed people making stupid moves. There's lying, concealing, manipulation and general lack of consideration that normal people wouldn't do. The whole town is like this. Many times the decisions or actions are based on some sort of strange sense of Southern cultural mores, but more often it's based on less complex motives, like simply being selfish or greedy. This is a good formula for making comedy work, but it gets old for me as a regular strategy for getting laughs...unless you have a single character, like Lucille Ball's, who is the fly in the ointment of everyday life and the rest of the cast plays "straight".
In almost every episode, some character, usually Zoe, ends up apologizing--over and over and over. It's tedious. And it's hard to believe that a person sharp enough to be a cardiac surgeon would be lacking so many simple adult skills. (Although, I must admit that, having grown up in a household of medical people, surgeons are often the most egotistical and self-involved type of medical professionals.)
My second problem is what I consider the "elephant in the room" problem. This is a small Southern town in Alabama, and yet every single character in the town seems to be completely unaware that Alabama culture has been associated with some of the most horrific practices of slavery, Jim Crow laws and other forms of institutionalized racism. It's one thing to portray a town such as this as having gotten over it and found reconciliation; it's another to have the entire town seem to have amnesia that it ever existed. Even the Founder's Day episodes don't address the issue. For instance, when European- American and African-American characters begin to become romantically involved, the problem with their relationship is not their ethnic background. Come ON! What used to be color barriers are crossed constantly in every episode: good. Pretending the barriers never existed a century ago: bad. At least SOMEbody's parochial grandma had to have a problem with this relationship or other aspects of Bluebell's change in racial attitudes over the last 50 years. Willful suspension of disbelief in fiction can only go so far, then it gets awkward.
This willful omission I blame on the creator and writers. It could have been a much better series by occasionally tackling the issue head on, addressing the realities of healing and change and then blending it in with some of the other positive aspects of Southern life that the writing does showcase so well.