IMDb user comments for
"Friday Night Lights" (2006)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 18:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

179 comments in total

---

210 out of 333 people found the following comment useful :-
Still as bad as ever, 4 November 2007

Author: mike lones from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

It's a mystery as to why NBC chose to return the ratings-challenge Friday Night Lights and didn't improve it.

Getting rid of the awful camera-work, which is more akin to the work of someone suffering from muscular spasms than to a documentary would have offered the show a chance to recapture the audience that it lost last year, but NBC apparently believes its own advertising and P.R. and thinks that Friday night Lights is a good show.

It's not.

It's currently unwatchable and shaking the camera to try and pass it off as something it's not is simply not working.

But then again, nothing on the NBC schedule is working this year.

Maybe GE should have massive layoffs.

---

114 out of 198 people found the following comment useful :-
MSCL vs FNL ...it's really no contest., 7 November 2007

Author: crispy_comments

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

After reading quite a bit about how Friday Night Lights has quality writing and acting, with several people saying it's the most realistic TV show since My So-Called Life, and reassuring non-sports fans like me that "it's not really about football...it's about life"...I caved in and watched the first few episodes.

Are you people nuts? Football *IS* their life. Not my life. There is nothing I can relate to, and nobody for me to care about.

If there was true depth and analysis going on here, I guess I could stomach watching a show about annoying football fanatics in Texas who constantly burst into public prayer. Maybe. But the storyline (that I've seen so far) is clichéd & predictable, the writing provides no insightful moments, the characterization is superficial, and the acting is unremarkable...from what I can tell, although it's not easy to judge the level of the actors' abilities when the camera refuses to stand still for a minute and let me SEE the performance.

I don't like pretentious documentary/indie-style camera work. Luckily I don't get sick from shaky-cam, but the same cannot be said for certain members of my family who get headaches/nausea trying to watch that sort of thing. Luckily they're not missing much by avoiding FNL. Is there a good reason for the jumpy camera-work and quick cuts/zooms? A reason that serves the story? I think not. They're just trying to be edgy or fit in with reality shows, I suppose.

Here's why Friday Night Lights is NOTHING like My So-Called Life, OK? (Despite the fact that Jason Katims has written for both and W.G. Snuffy Walden has written music for both)

1. MSCL has real cinematography. It's like a beautifully shot film. Gorgeous framing of characters in shots, innovative transitions from one scene to another, stunning dream sequences, etc. Many people have admitted taking ideas from MSCL, like the director of Jerry Maguire, and Joss Whedon. Most importantly the visual style and techniques used on MSCL actually have meaning and purpose in telling the story and helping you understand the characters.

2. MSCL is not afraid to use silence and stillness. MSCL allows the viewer to breathe and to think.

3. MSCL has excellent writing. The characters are not stereotypical or one-dimensional. They have layers, and their development is never contrived. The dialogue is memorable, and the observations are smart and TRUE.

4. MSCL has a spiritual element without being preachy or emphasizing a particular religion. MSCL encourages compassion and understanding among different types of people. On MSCL you'll find gay people and other minorities. Not portrayed as villains or comic relief or there to be politically correct either. Just real people.

I could go on. Let's just say I never had any of the following reactions while watching MSCL:

"She can't act. What a grating voice. And ridiculously cutesy dialogue. Barf."

"Cliched black guy. Wow, they're really portraying him as a selfish opportunistic jerk who's totally heartless about his paralyzed teammate and...Wait, did his mom actually diss "that white girl" her son was making out with? So she's a tramp but he isn't? Nice way to deal with racism (I didn't know blacks persecuted whites in Texas) AND offend feminists at the same time."

"Are there gonna be ANY female characters on this show whose function doesn't revolve around providing support/sex/baked goods to the men? Really not a show for feminists. The Coach's daughter doesn't count since they're telegraphing it pretty plainly that she's gonna end up with the replacement QB and so her anti-football player stance is just a "cute" obstacle...bleh."

"How did I know the star would get injured and the backup QB would save the day?"

"Why is the camera taking a stalker's viewpoint in this scene between the Coach and his wife?! Lurking, peering around corners...it's not supposed to be an ominous scene. Do they want us to feel like uncomfortable voyeurs? Guess so, 'cause now there's a totally unnecessary extreme closeup of them kissing! Back up, back up! I reeeally don't need to be that close!"

"I'm bored."

---

73 out of 117 people found the following comment useful :-
Shows the Peabody Awards are a Joke, 27 March 2008

Author: SusannahPruett from United States

We're supposed to give Friday Night Lights a chance because it got a Peabody Award... Well, after watching an episode, all I can say is that the Peabody Awards don't mean anything when it comes to quality television.

This show is amateurish at best, except that amateurs would not be trying every opportunity to downgrade their own show.

Visually, this show is a disgrace. The much talked about and rightly derided shaky-cam is a major hindrance for anything good to come out of this enterprise. But worse, the use of unneeded and unmotivated rack focus just attracts the attention to the fact that people who don't know how to tell the story visually are at the helm.

Film being a visual medium, not much good can be seen after such bad camera work.

I give them points for having good older leads, but they are wasted in this dread enterprise.

Friday Night Lights is one of those shows that most people won't watch, and for good reason.

---

405 out of 781 people found the following comment useful :-
Annoyingly Badly Made Show, 5 April 2007

Author: Patrick from United States

I just don't get why some producers seem to think that shaking the camera to and fro is somehow making you feel like you're watching something real.

It doesn't.

It makes you feel like you're watching a bit of horridly badly made TV that makes the so-called "reality" shows look like masterpieces of film-making.

Friday night Lights was promoted with a lot of fanfare (and still is) as some sort of "quality" show. That's why I tried to watch it.

Boy was I disappointed.

The Critics and PR hacks once again put their ever-diminishing weight behind yet another unwatchable loser.

Maybe it's time Hollywood start paying attention to the quality of its film-making, rather than the quality of its PR.

In the meantime, I hope FNL will be canceled so Kyle Chandler can get a job doing something worthwhile... or even just watchable.

---

411 out of 793 people found the following comment useful :-
Shaking the Camera = Bad Television, 2 April 2007

Author: tomobrian from United States

Apparently, from what I 've read, the producers of Friday Night Lights are under the impression that shaking the camera to and fro is giving their show a sheen of "reality".

Let me be the one who disabuses them of this notion.

Shaking the camera does not add realism to a show. It actually subtracts from it. For you see, realism comes from the writing and the acting, and shaking the camera, well... it's just shaking the camera. It's annoying and detracts from whatever realism exists in the show. It also makes a lot of people reach for the remote.

At this point, there are two mysteries about Friday Night Lights: 1) Why did NBC put this on the air? After all, they must have seen how unwatchable the pilot was. 2) Why is NBC still airing FNL? After all, they must have seen the ratings.

---

417 out of 805 people found the following comment useful :-
Another Low Rated Night for Friday Night Lights - Why? It's Unwatchable!, 23 March 2007

Author: Zach Morris from United States

This Wednesday, Friday Night Lights hit yet another ratings low (3.8/6 in the overnights).

How is that possible if this show is so great? The answer obviously is that Friday Night Lights is very far from "great".

In fact, it is awful, really awful.

The culprit? The oft-mentioned camera work.

For you see, when you can't see the action without getting a headache or nausea, you just don't keep watching the show. Whether FNL delivers a realistic view of life in a small town becomes completely irrelevant since the show is plainly unwatchable.

Somehow, some incompetent producers and directors thought that shaking the camera would help their show.

Maybe they should have gone back to film school instead of reading ridiculous hype in trade reviews written by incompetent critics.

---

430 out of 831 people found the following comment useful :-
An Unwatchable Travesty, 26 February 2007

Author: (jamesherrmann) from United States

The PR for the show purports that it somehow "captures" high school life.

Unfortunately it does no such thing.

I guess that the creators of the show decided that the best way to "capture" high school life was to make a fake reality show. After all, reality shows are the rage, right? The result is a show that looks many times worse than a reality show, to the point where it's unwatchable.

The nausea-inducing camera-work is so bad that it makes the cheapest reality show look like an Orson Welles masterpiece in comparison.

No wonder NBC went from first to last under Jeff Zucker if that's what he thinks is good television...

---

440 out of 851 people found the following comment useful :-
The Worst TV Has to Offer, 10 February 2007

Author: Simon (simonsmeaton) from United States

Where to begin, where to begin? Oh wait!!! I know where to begin, because it begins and ends in the same place: Friday Night Lights looks like it was produced by a couple of 8 year old afflicted with Attention Deficit Disorder.

In other words: it's bloody unwatchable! I have no idea where the people behind the scenes got the idea that unprofessional camera work was going to enhance their series, but it's backfired on them.

The only people saying positive things about the show are the critics, which in itself says a lot about what critics look for in a TV show: they certainly don't look for quality, because there is none to be seen on Friday Night Lights.

---

441 out of 853 people found the following comment useful :-
Simply Unwatchable, 7 February 2007

Author: Christine Pasquale from United States

No, shaking the camera is not "original".

It has been done a hundred thousand times recently and it's a style that has failed every single time.

That director and producers still try it just shows how bad they are and how little they understand the language of cinematography.

Moving the camera around doesn't allow you to cover more. It actually covers less of the action as you waste the time that it takes the camera to switch back and forth. You also disorient the audience, which is a valid technique in some very specific situations, but is awful and counter-productive when you're doing it 100% of the time, which is what Friday Night Lights does.

It's also completely unimaginative and an extremely lazy way to direct (ie. you're not directing, you're just doing the same darn thing on every shot of every scene).

The producers and directors of Friday Night Lights should be ashamed of themselves.

The audience has apparently already left. Clearly it knows more about film-making than the Friday Night Lights producers.

UPDATE: The Directing has not improved. The Audience is still avoiding Friday Night Lights, but for some reason NBC keeps making more episodes that nobody watches... Go figure!!

---

442 out of 855 people found the following comment useful :-
A Pale Excuse for a TV Show, 31 January 2007

Author: Dominic Barbera from United States

I don't know what's wrong with the people in charge of programming at NBC.

Maybe they think the surge in ratings for unscripted (illeterate ;) ) programming is due to their poor camera work and they've decided to do them one better by intentionally sabotaging some of their shows...

It's just baffling how a clearly costly show like Friday Night Lights can look so dismally poor and awful.

Yes, Mr. NBC (or whomever's in charge), shaking the camera and playing with the zoom does not make a good TV show. It makes an unwatchable piece of non-entertainment.

It's too bad because Friday Night Lights otherwise had the elements for a sleeper hit.

But the way it's shot it's just DOA.

---

---

Page 1 of 18:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Official site	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history