IMDb > "Life on a Stick" (2005) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
"Life on a Stick" More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 11 reviews in total 

8 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Meh TV

Author: wayneinky from Citizen of the World
27 February 2006

I remember not really having much of an opinion about this show. Just that the male leads were insufferable dorks, that it was nice to see Robey back on network television and that Amy Yasbeck never looked hotter. The one thing that kept me watching this dreck every week was Saige Thompson. I really liked her angst-ridden, girl-next-door against the world character. She seemed like the sort of girlfriend I could have had in high school, if only I had found her. This would have been a much better show if it had been called "Molly Callahan Against the World" and starred Saige as a post-modern Clarissa dealing with teen angst and confusion issues. I hope we haven't seen the last of her.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Evidently graduate meta humour works for me, because this rocks!

Author: owen_edwards from WGC, Herts, England (born Sandfly, Ga)
23 February 2006

I love this show. Amy Yasbeck and Matthew Glave turn in solid performances as the parents, Rachelle LaFevre is a decent female lead, Charlie Finn is a funny sidekick, Maz Jobrani is a hilarious supporting actor as Mr Hut, and Zachary Knighton and Paige Thompson are brilliant stepsiblings.

The lines are brilliant, and Laz (Knighton) and Molly (Thompson) are easy to care about. This is a funny, sympathetic show that shows what a not-quite-adult comedy should be like. People compliment That 70s Show and Saved By The Bell as the apogee of that genre, but, especially for a show only having had one season, this blows them away.

If the humour is graduate meta humour, so be it, I loved this show. Very, very, VERY impressive.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Superb

9/10
Author: augustine_aubergine from Australia
9 January 2008

I loathe- absolutely cannot endure- teen 'comedy' crass. I actually cringe when I change the channel and something like That 70's Show, According to Jim, or My Wife and Kids comes up. It has always shocked me that one genre can be so absolutely void of creativity, wit and intellect. Honestly, they are so predictable and weak it's a wonder they thrive the way they do.

So when my inability to go to sleep at a respectable time has me surfing late night television- though my expectations aren't high- I shudder when I land on what I immediately identify as teen crass. The well lit, obviously-a-set set, attractive young adults, and slight overacting; it's all there. I linger to hear and gauge the next punchline, to see whether it's worth my late night infomercial time.

I only had to wait a minute before realising that this show *actually* incredibly funny and intelligent; the responses to situations were so creative. The plot progressions were interesting, mature and quirky-- things only a week ago I would have died before associating with teen sitcoms.

This was the most original show of it's kind, and actually accessible to common youths. This is why I was appalled to see it get a pathetic 4.5 on this site-- oh my god, are you all insane? THAT 70'S SHOW HAS 8.4. That's EIGHT POINT FOUR. There is no way its stupid, bland humor can compare to the wit and intelligence of Life on a Stick. (Just for perspective, The Matrix has a rating of 8.6!) I know I couldn't write with the creativity and freshness of LoaS, and that's why I like it- it's a new experience.

The show was amazing, but it is more what it represented that had me so excited. A slap in the face to the commercial media that every day underestimates its audiences with the unintelligible crap it spews forth.

I can't believe it was axed. Cheap formulas. Unprovoking. Unchanging. Stagnation. I weep for our youth.

Was the above review useful to you?

Generic mid-2000s FOX

5/10
Author: clubside from Potomac, Maryland
20 June 2013

Life on a Stick was a short-lived multicamera comedy on FOX. Only five episodes aired before cancellation though the full 13 episode order was eventually shown in a number of countries. The show was one of many failed attempts by FOX at extending the family comedy brand established by That '70s Show and while it featured a number of veterans behind the scenes it can easily be seen as by-the-numbers at best.

The major plot line revolved around the romance of Laz and Lily, two young out-of-high-school workers at a mall food court hot dog counter/restaurant. It's not a case of will they/won't they, it's fairly telegraphed like the Eric/Donna romance on That '70s Show. Instead the conflict comes from Laz wanting a relationship while Lily wants something casual.

Laz's best friend Fred also works at the restaurant and is your typical "wacky" guy. Laz is the oldest sibling in a family where the mother and father each have a child from their previous marriages as well as one child together. Laz is the child Rick, the father, while the middle sister, Molly, comes from the mother Michelle's previous marriage. The shared child is Gus who doesn't figure much in the show.

As with Laz/Lily, Molly has a romance runner with Jasper, the boy she likes but who is dating at the time they meet but she stays close as a friend hoping things change. Many plots also revolve around the parents seeking approval from her or her being embarrassed by them.

You would expect pranks and hijinks around the hot dog setting, and there are some, but mostly it's a wasted opportunity. Perhaps the episode where a competing mall food court establishment sings to attract customers and annoys the gang enough to want to fight back shows where they could have gone more to distinguish the sitcom setup. However the show sticks more to the relationship comedy formula.

In the end it's a very throwaway show. Laz is played by Zachary Knighton, nowadays known best from Happy Endings, and some of the other actors are of the "where do I remember that guy from?" type. If there's any breakout actor/character it is Rachelle Lefevre as Lily, but that's not saying much given the general blandness of the comedy.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

It's great

10/10
Author: dipdipgoose from Australia
18 December 2007

I love this show, lol. It's mainly great though because of the actors just suiting it and doing it right. It's random and hilarious and i just love the attitude and light hearted-ness and the way they pull it off, it's hilarious. And every character is hilarious and done well. I kinda wish that it was more popular and got more episodes and more recognition, especially since they only showed 5 shows on u.s TV. The only thing i didn't like is the laughter, even if it wasn't canned laughter (dunno if it was, seemed kinda like it), it was mostly annoying. Some of the comments and ideas are just gold. And its hilarious to see the way they react to some situations. Luckily also there isn't heaps of annoying embarrassment comedy, and even the embarrassment comedy bits are done well.

-D.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

hilarious

8/10
Author: BANG-A-RANG from Scotland :D
2 August 2006

OK some people may not get this and i understand that but i actually can't stop laughing at this. And it's not like i'm some stupid 10 year old. I'm 16. It may be that people don't find the show intelligent enough but it's not meant to be intelligent. It's aimed at people who just want to laugh for a half hour. I just don't know how you couldn't find anything in this funny cause me and my friends laugh at everything in this show. some people may say the show is immature but i think that's the fun in it. Freds one-liners are enough to keep the show running from start to finish in my opinion. And the randomness in this comments are fantastic. Hope this was helpful.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

These people deserve better

Author: SlinkyBird from United States
20 April 2005

This sitcom is a fairly obvious joke about sitcoms. Very graduate school meta humor. And so, so lame.

You've got the precocious little boy. The doofus dad. The sexy mom. The angsty teen. The doofus young male and his dumb friend. The pretty girlfriend. All of them firing out quips in the midst of pure zaniness. Gosh darn it, if only the FONZ could grab his water skis and put us out of our misery, it would be PERFECT here in Sitcom Land! The worst part is all of these people could do at least slightly better. Except Amy. Amy Yasbeck is a charmer, and a thousand times smarter and better than her material. She delivers her "lines" very professionally, without a hint of justifiable, teeth grinding fury over an agent with worse judgment than the captain of the Titanic.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Paint by numbers sitcom

1/10
Author: AdrielFisher from United Kingdom
22 May 2007

Every line is overacted, each thin joke is stretched until it snaps. You can see how each joke is meant to be funny, but somehow only the canned laughter finds it hilarious, everyone else will just be left cold.

I can see, given the right material and the right director, this cast could be funny. They certainly look the part, but they never get a chance to shine in this mess of clichés and forced 'zaniness'.

This is what you get when a group of people with no ideas are told they have to make a new sitcom or they'll be fired. Nothing great was ever made by a committee, groups of writers can write great scripts, but only if there's someone with a genuine spark and passion at the helm to make sure it all goes in the right direction.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 21 people found the following review useful:

Stuck in the 90's

Author: Jim Tindell from Milwaukee, WI
28 March 2005

One could say that the show has "doomed" written all over it after already having an abruptly changed time slot for the season premiere. In the ads for the upcoming show, you saw unfunny little bits of working in fast food (a hot dog stand... who'da thought?), but the show surprisingly didn't have as many scenes in the food joint as the title suggests.

This kid lives with his parents after graduating High School, and his parents are leaning towards kicking him out. Sound familiar? Yeah, a bunch of shows have done this before a long time ago. Nevertheless, the re-married couple agree to have him stay in the house as long as he "hangs out" with his step-sister. Sounds like a deal to me. Wasn't this supposed to take place at a Hotdog stand? He has a buddy too... and you can guess how he is. Yup, the kid probably has less brains than the hot dogs he serves, and it's not funny at all. Think "Bill & Ted" after 12 years of Special Education curriculum. Mixed in with the Apu of Fast Food management and a love-interest and you've got yourself a TELEVISION SHOW! Rock on! Other than that.. between the 4-minute commercial breaks, we're left with about 18 minutes of laugh-tracks and all-around "meh" television. This will leave you wishing American Idol Result Night was an hour long again. This show MIGHT have worked in the early-/mid-90's, but not today in the land of giant elimination/reality shows and teeth-gritting dramas. Even among those genres, I've always wondered if a genuine 30-minute sitcom could still stand tall. I was wrong.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

New Concept in Comedy: "Zing-Com"

Author: Enrique Sanchez from Miami, FL
30 March 2005

OK, OK...here's my claim to fame. I would like to coin a new phrase to describe this show's delivery style. It has a bizarre and perhaps refreshing way of using one-liners or zingers as a way of displaying or developing a story or scene by the sole use of one-liners or "zingers".

The "action" is developed almost exclusively by setting up an endless array of punchlines into one long, connected line. The characters reveal their sardonic personalities by minimalist snippets.

You might think it is one-liner heaven or hell. It's a matter of opinion. The whole feeling is surreal, post-modern and a panoply of pastiches and almost stifling to experience.

After 30 minutes, one comes away with the feeling that we've just seen 10 hours of one-liners in virtual time.

Not sure if it will work with most people because one might become weary because of it continually peaking.

You decide....if this "Zing-Com" is worth the time.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history