Reviews written by registered user

4 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Did we really need a THIRD version?, 30 July 2003

Another entry for the "Unnecessary Remake" file. It's bad enough to remake what some would consider a classic (a dated classic, but classic nonetheless), but to re-remake it? Oy. Instead of this, I think it would have been interesting to see a follow-up to the 1976 original. Get Jodie Foster back as Annabelle Andrews, now a single mom trying -- and failing -- to avoid the same pitfalls with her daughter that she had with her mother. She's also trying to avoid another Friday like she had before, but the plot being what it is... Add the obligitory "Oh, god, not again" scene, and we're good to go. If they had only done it again one time, I'd be fine. But the third-time-around just feels like studio execs trying to avoid having to think up new material. But what's done is done. Whatever.

"Dragnet" (1989)
10 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Close, and yet..., 9 February 2003

"Dragnet" (1989) was a pretty straight-forward re-do of the classic Jack Webb series, just swapping out Joe Friday and Frank Smith (or Bill Gannon, depending on your era) for Daniels and Malina. The format was the same: a half-hour police procedural drawn from real LAPD cases, complete with the requisite "The story you are about to see is true; the names have been changed to protect the innocent." My only real problems were the omission of the classic "Danger Ahead" theme (you know: "da da-dum da"), and the obnoxious music-video-style opening titles. Not that anyone else noticed, as the show was gone in a year, a victim of really real police stories on "COPS". Note: Despite the time-frame, this show was unrelated to the 1987 Dan Ackroyd film.

"Dragnet" (2003)
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Drag-not quite, 9 February 2003

This is another well-written, tightly-paced crime drama from "Law & Order's" Dick Wolf... but it ain't "Dragnet." It's really a fourth version of "Law & Order" set in LA with Jack Webb's characters plopped into it. This show is all-but unrelated to the classic series. Don't get me wrong, Ed O'Neill does a good job as a hard-nosed cop -- just as he did on "Big Apple" -- but much of what made "Dragnet," "Dragnet" is lost here. One of the founding principles of Jack Webb's series was that the episodes were dramatizations of actual LAPD cases. Here, "inspired by actual events." It looks to be a good cop show, but it's "Dragnet" in name only.

3 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Apologies to Conan Doyle, 26 November 1999

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When I first heard about this show, I was curious. Now, having seen it, I feel sorry for all Holmes fans who have been insulted by this travesty.

The notion of a chryo-frozen Holmes revived in the future is nothing new. But at least the writers could have taken the time to write some original stories! Each episode is billed as "based on" or "inspired by" the stories of the Canon, but should be credited as "b********* from." Example (consider it a spoiler if you want): An episode titled "The Hounds of the Baskervilles," "inspired by" the original tale. I don't recall werewolves on the moon being part of the novel.

As for Holmes himself, I don't know who this guy is, but he's NOT Sherlock. Wearing a deerstalker and saying "elementary, dear Watson" doesn't make him Sherlock Holmes. This 'toon is way too laid back and friendly. He makes me ill.

Bottom line, Holmesians: AVOID THIS CARTOON AT ALL COSTS!!!