gjw Reviews

Rebel Moon - Part Two: The Scargiver (2024)

expensive garbage

[1/10 · 1 May 2024]

It was almost as dreadful as its title, a shameless rip off of "Star wars", which sank to even stealing lightsabers from that classic film.

Horribly pretentious, and laughably somber at times, its only redeeming value were a few decent battle scenes, but even those were ruined by the director's tendency to suddenly slow down the action to extreme slow motion, and to linger on melodramatic shots of supposed mourning and sacrifice, which nobody really gives a damn about in a film like this.

The director seemed intent on making a classic, but instead he simply revealed himself as a pretender with no original thoughts, who only understands the surface of great films and attempts to mimic them, but is incapable of pulling in the audience to actually care about the characters.

A study in how to waste $166 million on worthless trash.

The Incredible Hulk (1978–1982)

Limitations of the era...

[7/10 · 24 April 2024]

The only problem with this show is that before the perfection of modern CGI, it was simply impossible to create a Hulk creature that looked like the Hulk in the comic books - who is 7 or 8 feet tall and weighs over 1,000 pounds of muscle.

The best they could do was to hire a bodybuilder, paint him green, and put him in a fright wig. (Come to think of it, they could have done a better job with that wig.) it was better than nothing, but it didn't really capture the essence of the Hulk, who is an inhuman personification of anger and rage. It wasn't until the 21st century that modern computer graphics and Marvel Studios finally enabled Hollywood to give us a Hulk who actually resembled the comic book character.

On the other hand, Bill Bixby did a great job as Bruce Banner, the human side of the Hulk, the Dr. Jekyll to the Hulk's Mr. Hyde, And working within the limitations of its era, it was an entertaining show, one that helped pave the way to today's Marvel Cinematic Universe.

The Pyx (1973)

What is a pyx ? explained...

[7/10 · 6 February 2024]

For those who don't know what a "pyx" is, it is a small container for holding the Holy Eucharist (the bread & wine communion wafers), also known as "the host".

The plot of this movie probably only makes sense to those who are either Catholic or who have a strong understanding of Catholic theology.

In Roman Catholic (and Orthodox) theology, the Eucharist is literally the body and blood of Christ, as the bread and wine is miraculously transformed during Mass, a belief known as "transubstantiation". And as such it is the holiest of objects in Catholic worship, treated with the utmost reverence. It is seen as the literal presence of God.

Without this perspective, the desperate actions of the prostitute (Karen Black) won't make sense. But from this theological perspective, her actions are a courageous act of personal redemption.

The Newlywed Game (1996– )

a cruel streak

[5/10 · 7 September 2023]

What ruins this show for me is host Bob Eubanks' regular abuse of the show's contestants.

He was always willing and eager to throw the young couples under the bus and humiliate them by deliberately egging them on to say embarrassing things that he knew they would regret later.

And I'm not talking about just the contest questions (which war embarrassing enough), but Eubanks would constantly pry at a contestant's answer to try to get them to provide even more humiliating details, against their best judgent.

He didn't care that he might be causing serious problems for the contestants at home with their family or at work, he simply wanted to get a laugh or snicker from the audience at the expense of the captive contestants.

That Girl: The Night They Raided Daddy's (1970) Season 4, Episode 21

Out of touch

[6/10 · 15 August 2023]

It seems that most TV executives of the 1960s and early '70s were terribly out of touch with youth culture, and with rock music in particular. As the lyric goes: "You know something's happening, but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr Jones?" And this episode is a typical example of that ignorance.

Notice, for instance, that every rock band we see auditioning is just playing music, with no vocal accompaniment - no singers Anyone vaguely familiar with rock & roll knows that instrumentals are extremely rare, and that singers are essential to the genre, from Elvis to Little Richard to the Beatles. Rock instrumentals rarely made the charts in that era. Yet if you listen to most fictional TV shows from that era where a supposed rock band is playing, odds are that, unlike in real life, they will be playing an instrumental.

Also notice in this episode that, although the performers are holding guitars, the instruments we actually hear are overwhelmingly just an organ and drums. Apparently, they got the visuals right, but didn't understand that the sound of electric guitars is the heart of rock & roll. Keyboard instruments existed in rock, of course, and occasionally even played a significant role, but the classic rock setup was three guitars and a drum set. Yet instead of hearing the typical rock sound (human voices backed by electric guitars), 60s sitcoms usually gave us instrumental music, often without guitars. They just didn't get it.

It wasn't as if there wasn't real rock music on TV. All you had to do was tune in to shows like American Bandstand, Soul Train, Shindig, or even The Ed Sullivan Show, to hear actual rock performances. Yet the sound never seemed to get through to most TV sitcom producers.

And it's particularly odd, since the hit sitcom "The Monkees", which featured actual rock music, had debuted in 1966. Yet by 1970, when this episode was made, producers still didn't get it.

And then there's the whole Issue of nudity in this episode.

There was a moment in late '60s Broadway theater, when nudity briefly became trendy with avant garde shows such as "Hair" and "Oh! Calcutta". But those were on the Broadway stage. Rock performers running around naked on stage was not something you encountered often during the '60s. Long hair? Yes . Smashing their guitars? Occasionally. Nudity during rock performances? Not so much.

So the episode comes across as rather cringe worthy.

Mayberry Man (2021)

A novelty film that's strictly for diehard fans

[4/10 · 3 August 2023]

The concept of this movie had potential. "The Andy Griffith Show" is a classic, with some of the most memorable characters in TV history. So the idea of making a movie around those characters and the town of Mayberry definitely has potential . But that potential is squandered here.

It's as though someone came up with an interesting idea, but no one involved in this film was capable of turning that idea into a professional film.

The script is paper-thin, most of the actors appear to be rank amateurs, and the one semi-professional, in the lead role, doesn't really have the kind of charisma it would take to single-handedly elevate this effort.

I suppose that isn't surprising, when you consider that the script was written and the movie was directed by a guy whose past credits are predominantly for Saturday morning cartoons.

Once we are in in the mock Mayberry town, and have met the people doing impressions of the classic characters such as Barney Fife and Floyd the Barber (some of which are pretty good, at least in small doses), the movie sort of runs out of gas - and ideas.

The film has its heart in the right place, and was obviously hoping to wring a profit from Mayberry nostalgia, but that just isn't enough.

In sum, if you are a diehard fan of "The Andy Griffith Show", who is easily thrilled by anything Mayberry, then this novelty film will amuse you, at least for a while, and you may be able to ignore its obvious flaws. But keep your expectations low.

I suspect that the main fans of this movie will be the town residents of Danville, Indiana, where the movie was filmed, and the friends and family members of the people doing the impressions of the Mayberry characters, who will doubtlessly be thrilled by seeing their hometown starring in a movie.

(But come to think of it, Indiana is a long way from North Carolina.)

Hazel: My Son, the Sheepdog (1966) Season 5, Episode 21

cringe worthy

[2/10 · 25 July 2023]

There is no question that the 5th (and last) season of a "Hazel" was by far the worst. But this particular episode Is the nadir of the entire series. It's downright embarrassing.

This episode was made in 1966, about two years after the Beatles' immensely successful arrival in America, and the same year that NBC began "The Monkees" hit TV series, yet the out-of-touch writers here are so confident that everyone hates long hair and rock music that they blatantly ridicule what they assumed was a passing fad. Little did they know that six years later, virtually every American male would be sporting long hair, and that rock would become the defining music of America for the next several decades.

The episode is made even worse by the fact that the young actors involved, who were around 14 at the time, look like elementary school students, and seem silly even talking about forming a serious rock band. But not nearly as silly as the adults here or the writers, who were definitely out of their element.

"Hazel" was a great sitcom at start, but it went on one season too long , and this inane episode is simply cringe worthy.

Based on a True Story: The Universe (2023) Season 1, Episode 8

What the hell?

[4/10 · 14 June 2023]

No spoilers here, but the "ending" to this final episode was absolutely ridiculous. It just basically stopped in mid-plot. No resolution of anything, no guarantee of a second season, it just abruptly ended right in the middle of a tense moment. Talk about frustrating.

At first, I assume there had to be more episodes, and was forced to come here to the IMDb and checked to make sure that this was actually the final episode. I was shocked to see that it was.

It makes no sense whatsoever, I' D like to know what idiot came up with the idea of just ending a series with nothing resolved one way or another.

The series has a lot of flaws (notably, the lead married couple both act like morons), but it was a fairly fun ride. At least until they completely blew the ending. What on earth were they thinking? It simply ends, as if the last episodes are missing. It seems insanely incomplete. A really bad decision on the part of whoever opted to end the season this way.

The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel: Four Minutes (2023) Season 5, Episode 9

Good, but could've been better

[8/10 · 28 May 2023]

I think "The Marvelous Mrs. Meisel" is one of the best shows to come down the pike in ages.

But I wasn't particularly impressed with this final episode.

There are two scenes that revolve around laughter, and hence need the script material to be funny, to justify that laughter.

Normally, that wouldn't be a problem for the show's writers, because they are masters of witty dialogue.

But for some reason, when the time comes for Mrs. Maisel to do her critical four-minute standup routine on the Tonight Show (or whatever they're calling it in the script), the monologue she delivers just isn't very funny. This is important because the scene depends upon the audience roaring with raucous laughter, such that the host (Gordon) is so impressed by how hilarious her material is that he can't help but invite her over to the desk afterwards (despite his initial opposition), and hail her as a marvelous comic.

The problem is that the material in her standup bit simply doesn't earn those kind of laughs. It is mildly amusing, but to someone unfamiliar with Midge's family, it doesn't really rise above average standup comic gags. The audience roars like it's hilarious, but you have to ask why? It simply isn't that funny.

They should have revised the script until it WAS that funny.

Then there is the final scene, which also depends upon laughter. This one sees Midge and Suzy talking on the telephone and roaring with laughter over a skunk joke. But once again, the conversation just isn't that funny.

Now I am more forgiving of this scene, because it involves two individuals, and two people can easily get caught up in a giggle-fest even if the material isn't all that funny. Or maybe it's just their individual sense of humor. Either way, I'm OK with it. It just would've been better if their final conversation had been genuinely hysterical.

But that isn't the case with the Tonight Show bit. Studio audiences have predictable senses of humor, and similar tastes about what is and isn't funny. And her standup bit just wasn't that funny, at least not funny enough to suddenly launch her career into the stratosphere, as it is supposed to do.

This final comment is strictly a personal matter of my own preference. But I would not have ended the show with a flash-forward to a time when both women are very old (especially Susie, with long white hair), and both seem to be living alone, on opposite coasts. It's somewhat depressing, and not the way I personally would have ended an otherwise upbeat TV series. It makes it seem as if she was a huge professional success, but a relative failure in her personal life.

In the early seasons, Joel, her ex-husband, deserved to be treated as a reprobate for cheating on her, and ridiculing her attempts at a career in showbiz.

But in the latter seasons, the show chose to reform the character and to present him in such a favorable light that he was even willing to sacrifice himself to the mob and go to prison to spare Midge from possible harm. And in this finale, he wants her to succeed so much in her Tonight Show debut that he encourages her to make fun of him on stage, to get laughs. That kind of devotion alone might make an eventual reconciliation likely, but the writers went beyond that and made it fairly clear that Midge herself was still in love with him. So, if the two still wanted to be together, and were each still devoted to each other, then why not allow for that long overdue reconciliation at the show's end?

Midge going back to Joel in the first seasons would've been an admission of failure, but reuniting with the reformed Joel in the latter episodes, on her own terms, after a dazzling success in her chosen field, would be a major personal victory, and certainly seems preferable to an ending in which Midge is living out her final years alone in a huge, empty mansion.

Bewitched: Nobody But a Frog Knows How to Live (1967) Season 3, Episode 32

Decent episode, but the writers keep conveniently ignoring the obvious

[6/10 · 4 May 2023]

One of them problems with this TV series is that they made Samantha so magically powerful that in order to give her problems to overcome, they are often are compelled to ignore obvious, simple solutions to keep the plot going.

For instance, in this episode she has the man who used to be a frog in her house shooting his mouth off to strangers (about being a frog) and causing trouble. Now, given that she is a witch, there are countless things she could do about this. She could have easily zapped him into an upstairs bedroom and kept him there until the guests were gone. Or, she could have taken his voice away temporarily, so he couldn't talk to anyone. Or, for that matter, she could have temporarily turned him into a lamp and stood him in the corner until the guests had left. But instead, she lets the stranger stand in the middle of her living room and talk crazy about being a frog, not only to the always-suspicious Mrs. Kravitz, but to Darren's boss and his visiting business client as well. It simply makes no sense.

And for that matter, why does Samantha never simply wipe the memory of Mrs. Kravitz, so that she forgets about everything she sees around the Stevens' Ihome? There has never been any rule on the show that witches can't make people forget things. But obviously that would make it far too easy for Samantha to solve most of her problems, so the writers simply ignore that obvious option and make the situation more complicated than it should be.

Knives Out (2019)

Hard to get past the Cartoonish accent...

[7/10 · 1 January 2023]

This is a reasonably good mystery movie, although perhaps a little too clever for its own good.

The sequel ("Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery") is actually the more enjoyable of the two films.

But I have the same problem with both movies: the ridiculous Southern accent adopted by British actor Daniel Craig in the main role as the detective. Honestly, it sounds like the cartoon rooster, Foghorn Leghorn, and it is endlessly distracting.

(The next time you hear an Englishman complain about Dick Van Dyke's fake British accent in "Mary Poppins", remind him of Mr Craig's absurd effort to sound like an American in these two movies.)

The Man from the Diners' Club (1963)

The worst of the Danny Kaye comedies

[5/10 · 15 November 2022]

This movie attempts to replace Danny Kaye's usual verbal fireworks with adolescent slapstick, and it doesn't work. Slapstick can be very funny, when done properly, and Danny did a good job of it in "The Court Jester", but here it falls flat. I honestly didn't laugh at a single gag in the movie. It obviously wasn't tailored to Danny Kaye"s unique talents, which his earlier comedies were. It's much too generic. But worse, it's simply not funny. And since Danny Kaye can be an incredibly funny performer, the fault obviously lies with the weak script, which plays like a throwback to an old Buster Keaton silent movie - without the laughs. Don't waste your time. Instead, go watch one of Danny's classic comedies, like "The Court Jester" or "Wonder Man".

Quantum Leap: Mirror Image - August 8, 1953 (1993) Season 5, Episode 22

A terrible way to end a great series.

[4/10 · 5 October 2022]

Some TV series are based around a problem that must be solved, but the solution of which is delayed For the length of the series, teasing the audience until the problem is finally resolved in the final episode.

A perfect example of that is "The Fugitive", where the lead character spent the entire series on the run from the police, trying to prove his innocence. That show got the ending right, and was the most-watched TV episode of all time when it aired. Likewise, Quantum Leap was a series that continually teased the audience with the Sam Beckett's efforts to solve his problem problem (of being trapped in the past), and as such, it demanded a satisfying resolution in which Sam finally gets back home.

Instead, we got a rather bizarre episode that left the audience in limbo, followed by a final, slapdash card saying that Sam never got home, without even explaining why. In short, Quantum Leap blew the ending - big time.

And that's a shame, because Quantum Leap was a great series, and it deserved better - as did its loyal audience. NBC should be ashamed of itself.

Thor: Love and Thunder (2022)

An insult to Marvel fans, and the character of Thor

[2/10 · 16 September 2022]

Ironically, Thor was always one of the most dignified of all Marvel superheroes. (Perhaps only Namor (Sub-Mariner) came close in nobility.) Thor was, after all, a literal god, and the son of Odin.

Yet this movie insists on playing him as a simple stooge. In fact, the writers aren't satisfied with making us Thor a laughingstock, it paints the entire Marvel pantheon of gods as cruel, bellicose egomaniacs, worthy only of scorn.

Marvel has always had humor, it's one of the things it makes Marvel superhero movies fun and make their characters (relatively) believable. But in the past, Marvel has always known how to balance drama, adventure, and occasional humor.

This mess is a flat-out comedy, complete with screaming goats.

The movie plays more like a parody or send up of a Thor movie, reminiscent of Leslie Nielsen farces such as "Airplane!" or "The Naked Gun".

That might be OK for a 30-minute Marvel TV series such as "She-Hulk", but when the customer pays full-price for a movie ticket to see a major, $250 million superhero epic, they shouldn't have to put up with some imbecile making fun of the very characters they have come to see.

And wacko humor is particularly ill-fitting for Thor, who, as mentioned earlier, was always one of the most sober and dignified of the Marvel superheroes.

Will it ever be possible for audiences to take the character seriously again?

While a few of the movie's moments are indeed funny (I must admit, the screaming goats were rather hilarious), it was far too often burdened with silly, repetitious gags, such as Thor constantly talking to his new weapon as if it were a jealous woman.

And when the movie was forced to resort to the usual dramatic/adventure ending, it flubbed those rare serious moments as well, which mostly came across as illogical and unjustified.

They should never let this writer/director get within a hundred yards of another Marvel film. He just doesn't understand the genre.

Becker (1998–2004)

A disappointing effort

[4/10 · 4 September 2022]

I don't know how "Becker" stayed on the air for six seasons.

Its existence must be a testament to the popularity of Ted Danson and to how much the public missed seeing him every week on "Cheers" (when that show finally ended after 11 seasons).

Honestly, other than Ted Danson, the show has virtually nothing to offer. It is relentlessly depressing. It features the only Harvard-educated doctor on TV who is not only poor but stingy, living & working in the ugly slums of New York.

He's a total mess, constantly grouchy, irritable, with a deeply pessimistic outlook on life, taking out his undefined rage on everyone he meets.

At his office, his secretarial staff are stereotypes, especially the younger one, who is a typical TV airhead. If patients are predictably eccentric and one-dimensional.

The show's other regular setting is a sleazy diner where Becker sits at the counter (perhaps someone at CBS thought Ted Danson needed another bar-like environment), owned by a pathetic young woman (Terry Farrell, for THIS she left "Deep Space Nine"?), little more than a waitress, sadly reliving her glory days in high school while stuck in this greasy spoon. Becker's two friends at the bar (excuse me, "diner") are a blind black guy with a dispiriting lack of luck in love, and a ratty, little creep who seems intended to fill the sitcom quota for irredeemable slimeballs (previously filled by the likes of 'Louie De Palma' or 'Kirk Morris').

The writing is so-so, almost entirely dependent upon the premise that everyone on the show is an angry, bitter loser, Backer's caustic rants, and the terrible things that regularly happen to the characters to reinforce their loser status. (How many times can you wring a laugh out of a grouchy, 50-year-old doctor saying something mean-spirited and atrocious?)

And it suffers badly by comparison to the truly witty writing on Danson's previous hit, "Cheers", a show that won 28 Emmys (compared to Becker's 0).

The "com" in sitcom stands for "comedy". Sitcoms are supposed to be funny, not bleak and discouraging. They are supposed to lift your spirits. Spending a few minutes in Becker's dismal world would make almost anyone more dejected than they were before they entered it.

I'm glad for the cast members that the show managed to survive as long as it did, but honestly, it is not for me.

Westworld: Que Será, Será (2022) Season 4, Episode 8

Dreadful conclusion

[3/10 · 17 August 2022]

What can you say about a final episode that concludes with the end of all sentient life on earth?

Literally, they killed every single being on the planet, both human and host, except for one disembodied artificial intelligence.

And even the method of ending all life on earth was Illogical.

In the plot, there were rebels living outside the city who were unaffected by the tower which was causing the city residents to murder each other. And Hale destroyed that tower's broadcasts, so even if everyone else died, those pockets of rebel fighters would have survived, and eventually repopulated the earth.

And that's not to mention others, such as those living in very isolated areas, or survivalists hiding out in bunkers, who would have survived the initial riots. It would be virtually impossible to kill everyone on the planet through that sort of violence, because it only takes a few survivors to reproduce and start it all up again.

It also made no sense that Arnold/Bernard was unable to stop the annihilation. He supposedly looked at countless thousands of potential scenarios, yet we're supposed to believe that out of those thousands of potential futures, there wasn't one of them in which he was able to simply kill the Man in Black before he could begin the carnage? If Bernard knew that much about the future, he would know exactly when the Man in Black would be vulnerable, and could go there prepared with the necessary weapons/manpower to end him.

But, for some bizarre reason, the writers obviously wanted to end the season with the extinction of all sentient beings - essentially the end of the world. So they weren't terribly particular about how they accomplished that. Go figure

What a waste of time. This show has been going downhill since the first season, getting more and more ridiculous as it went along. Early on, this fourth season showed signs that they might finally be getting back on the right track, but instead they through that all away and settled for an orgy of nonsensical, nihilistic slaughter.

They should have ended this show after the first season.

My Favorite Martian (1963–1966)

Not what I remembered

[5/10 · 4 August 2022]

I remember liking this show when I first saw it as a kid. But watching it now as an adult, in reruns, I have to admit that it's pretty dreadful.

Don't get me wrong, the Man-from-Mars concept had potential, and the cast is good, especially Bill Bixby and Ray Walston.

But the scripts and writing are simply terrible!

And the longer the show was on the air, the more awful and illogical the plots became. I didn't see that as a child, but as an adult, the absurd writing is unavoidable.

Granted, one can't expect realism from a fantasy shows like this, but at least "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeannie" (from the same era) managed to stay reasonably consistent with the rules they had established for their particular magic.

But "My Favorite Martian" eventually throws all of the rules out the window, and ends up having Martin able to do basically anything they can think of. There is no consistent logic, even within the context of their imaginary universe. And without rules, things quickly go from sci-fi/fantasy to just plain silly.

Alas, 60 years later, the show simply doesn't hold up well.

Hazel: Who's in Charge Here? (1965) Season 5, Episode 1

The beginning of the end...

[4/10 · 31 July 2022]

This final (5th) season of "Hazel" Is a major letdown, and the show would've been better off if they had ended the series after the 4th season.

The show had been based around Hazel's close relationship with the Baxters, who considered her one of the family. But in a bizarre move, CBS dumped both George and Dorothy Baxter (Don DeFore & Whitney Blake), and then moved Hazel into a new home with a new family, keeping only the Baxter's son Harold in the cast.

The rationale the show used was that the Baxters had temporarily moved to Baghdad (of all places) for business purposes, and had left Harold behind with Hazel, who moved in with George's brother Steve.

It was a terrible idea, and the show never recovered, ending after this first revised season. This final season serves only to besmirch the memory of the previous four seasons.

Bewitched: Samantha's Magic Potion (1970) Season 7, Episode 12

Another bad slogan

[5/10 · 26 July 2022]

One of the problems with this show (and with this episode in particular) is that most of the campaign slogans that Darren comes up with are an pathetic. And the slogan in this episode is absolutely dreadful. No amount of self-confidence would allow him to sell this poor excuse for a campaign to any discerning businessman.

So many of the plots from Bewitched revolve around the idea of Darrin (or Samantha) coming up with some brilliant advertising idea to save the day, but nine times out of ten, that idea is terrible - yet the audience is supposed to believe that it's brilliant.

The reality is that the show's writers simply weren't very good at coming up with slogans and advertising ideas. They were, after all, TV script writers, not advertising executives. They probably would've done better to farm out the creation of these slogans and campaigns to genuine advertising men who that knew how to write them.

Three's Company (1976–1984)

Sexy tease, b this isut inherently innocent

[9/10 · 19 July 2022]

"Three's Company" was a hit back in the '70s because it gave TV audiences what they wanted back then, and gave them only what they could handle.

The show had a very sexy premise (a young man sharing an apartment with two attractive young woman) that suggested all sorts of sexual hijinks, but in practice, nothing sexual ever really happened. When you come down to it, despite its reputation, it was a very chaste show.

During all the years the show was on the air, poor Jack Tripper never once managed to get any of his sexy roommates into bed, despite living in their apartment. There was no nudity, no sex, only an occasional glimpse of the girls in slightly suggestive outfits, and a lot of double-entendre gags.

And that fit 1970's America, when audiences were attracted by sexual teases, but didn't really want to see anything explicit on TV. Chrissy bending over in her shorty nightgown and inadvertently showing her cute, ruffled panties was about as much as TV audiences back then could handle.

At the time, free broadcast network TV was all that was available to most people, there were no pay channels yet showing explicit content. So all TV content had to be family-friendly. TV was essentially a G-rated medium (or, at most, PG). Porn was virtually nonexistent in most people's lives (unless you count Playboy magazine). Viewers were watching the show in their living rooms with their kids, and they would've been shocked if Jack had ever actually scored with either of the girls.

For most Americans in the '70s, who had relatively conservative attitudes about sex, it was enough to have shows that SEEMED sexy, but which were actually very mild. Lots of bluff, plenty of suggestiveness... but no follow-through.

'70s TV was filled with examples like "Charlie's Angels", "Love American Style", "The Dating Game" and "The Love Boat", which seemed to promise sex, but only delivered pretty young girls, sometimes in mildly skimpy outfits, a little romance, and some pseudo-sexual situations that never really went anywhere.

"Three's Company" was a product of its time. It was a sexy tease, but ONLY a tease, and that was exactly what American TV audiences wanted back then.

Come On, Get Happy: The Partridge Family Story (1999 TV Movie)

OK, but superficial

[6/10 · 6 July 2022]

This TV movie bio is very similar to "Daydream Believers: The Monkees Story", which was shot the following year (although the two productions weren't the effort of the same company or crew).

Both are somewhat simplistic biographies about the making a fictional pop-rock band that starred in a TV show, and the friction behind the scenes.

Both movies used look-alike actors to play the original cast members. And both movies focused on young men who got a tremendous break in showbiz, and achieved teen Idol status, yet who weren't satisfied because the roles they played didn't represent who they really were.

In the case of the Monkees, the boys resented the fact that they weren't originally allowed to play their own music, and spent much of their time trying to become a real band. In this case, it is David Cassidy who is the disgruntled member, chafing at the fact that he has to play a high school student on the show and be a heartthrob to a lot of little girls, when he was really 20 years old and apparently a bit of a scoundrel in real life. And it appears that members of both groups resented being on rather silly, unrealistic shows.

Yet they all sought out those parts, auditioned for them; they were actors who knew what they were getting into, and their job as actors was to play the roles written for them. If they didn't like the parts, it seems they shouldn't have taken them in the first place, rather than whine about their roles once they had them.

In the case of the Monkees, their effort to perform their own songs did not turn out well in the long run. The group had some of the best songwriters in the industry, and churned out a large number of hits when they were performing them. But once they switched to their own music, they started sliding down the charts into obscurity.

And according to this movie, David Cassidy's adult antics and threats to leave the show apparently resulted in them canceling the sitcom earlier than they otherwise would have. And his post-Partridge career didn't exactly set the world on fire.

In both instances, it seems that the adults in the room actually knew what they were doing when they were making the shows, and the kids rocking of the boat ultimately just cut short their own careers. They would probably have been a lot better off if they had just kicked back and enjoyed the ride on the fame train while they were on it.

But back to the movie itself.

It kept repeating the same beats: focusing on Danny and his sullen, unemployed father who resents his son's success; the youngest boy on the show, who is constantly pictured as a hyperactive, out-of-control child; and David's resentment about playing a younger role and being a teen idol.

Honestly, David Cassidy was incredibly lucky to land this role to begin with, so it's a bit irritating to hear that his character complain about it not reflecting his real life. Fictional TV roles aren't supposed to reflect an actor's real life; the actor is supposed to pretend to be the fictional character. That's why it's called acting.

And they spend much too much time focusing on Danny's grumpy father. Since he never turned out to be an ax murderer or anything, there is no reason for the camera to spend that much time staring at the sad guy, except for a poverty of other ideas.

They throw in mock concert footage of most of "The Partridge Family"'s major hits, so newcomers can at least get a taste of what they sounded like. And the songs are still catchy today.

There isn't much new here. Most of the anecdotes we see are probably already well-known to fans of the show, via various biographies and cast interviews. And those situations are presented in a very abbreviated fashion.

But the movie is also dotted with scenes that seem exaggerated.

One example is when David "kidnaps" Danny, steals the Partridge Family bus, rams it through the studio gate (breaking it), and then the bus just happens to break down next to a private school so that obsessed teenage girls on the playground can spot David and mob the bus. And if that's not enough, a public school bus stops at the same exact moment, so the girls from that bus can join the screaming mob. Good grief.

There's probably just a grain of truth to that story. David probably did once borrow the bus and drove some of the kids that around the Valley, but, as usual, Hollywood just can't resist goosing it up into nonsense territory.

On the positive side, the actors they found to portray the original cast members did actually resemble the original players (at least to some extent), although the actor playing David Cassidy lacked that somewhat debauched look that David often had, despite his young age.

Overall, there are worse ways to spend 100 minutes. But it's sort of like reading a Reader's Digest version of a gossip magazine.

Bewitched (2005)

A bad idea

[5/10 · 21 June 2022]

They would've been much better off if they had simply made a straight remake of the TV show, one of the most beloved sitcoms in the history of TV. That's what most viewers are going to expect to see when they go to watch a movie called "Bewitched", and most likely what they WANT to see.

Instead, there is no Samantha or Darrin in this movie, no Endora or Larry Tate. They came up with a nonsensical plot about a moronic Hollywood actor trying to restart his career by starring in a TV remake of "Bewitched", who, coincidentally, just happens to cast a real witch in the role of Samantha. And if you think THAT sounds ridiculous, wait until later in the film when characters like Aunt Clara and Uncle Arthur start showing up, in some unfathomable way that makes no sense at all in the context of the movie. Will Ferrell hams it up too much. Nicole Kidman is decent in the role, but it's impossible to avoid comparing her ditzy character to the clever character of Samantha, and the comparison isn't flattering.

They definitely would've been better off sticking with the original concept.

The Patty Duke Show (1963–1966)

Recommendations

[7/10 · 31 May 2022]

If you like The Patty Duke Show, you should enjoy these other gentle family sitcoms from the 1960s: Gidget, Leave It to Beaver, The Donna Reed Show, Father Knows Best, Bewitched, My Three Sons, The Dick Van Dyke Show, The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis, and (If you don't mind a rural flavor to your sitcoms) The Andy Griffith Show and Petticoat Junction.

I Dream of Jeannie: Please Don't Give My Jeannie No More Wine (1970) Season 5, Episode 15

Simple solution ignored - again

[5/10 · 28 May 2022]

When Dr. & Mrs. Bellows become invisible (due to drinking a magical wine), Major Nelson and Jeannie spend the entire episode trying to deal with the problem.

Yet all Jeannie had to do was blink the couple into their beds and make them fall asleep (or simply "freeze" them in place) until they became visible again.

This sort of thing is a frequent problem with "I Dream of Jeannie" (and also with "Bewitched"): the writers make the magical characters virtually omnipotent most of the time, but then make them unable to deal with even simple problems when it's convenient for the script.

For instance, on "Bewitched", it is shown more than once that Samantha can "freeze" people in mid-stride and keep them motionless until she chooses to unfreeze them, at which point they just start up where they left off, without even realizing that anything happened.

Now think about how many times on that show just "freezing" someone temporarily could have easily solved the problem at hand (such as when a visitor to the Stevens home is about to see something peculiar, and Darren & Samantha have to scramble to head them off).

Yet the writers conveniently forget that she can do this whenever doing so might interfere with the writers' desire to stretch out a simple problem into a 30-minute episode.

The same thing happens often with Jeannie, and this episode is just one example. It's hard to enjoy a plot when the simple solution to the problem is so obvious, yet the characters seem too dumb to think of it.

Anything Goes (2021)

Disappointing

[4/10 · 18 May 2022]

I love most musicals, but I certainly couldn't recommend this one.

Given the number of classic Cole Porter songs in the show, and a talented lead actress, I assumed this had to be well worth watching. I was wrong. The acting was cartoonish, with the performers virtually winking at the audience. The corny dialogue was like something out of a bad vaudeville routine, the attempts at humor fell flat, and the juvenile plot was dreadful. The sets were uninspired and one-dimensional. And there was virtually no choreography during most of the songs, with the performers just standing there and singing. The vocal talent was about the only thing this show has going for it, but it was wasted in this effort.

It was so weak, that I eventually stopped watching less than halfway through.