Reviews written by registered user
|9 reviews in total|
I stumbled across this one day while scanning through the channels. I
saw "Hitchcock" in the description, so I decided to have a look. Now
I'll admit, I don't know all that much about Hitchcock. I know he's a
great director, but I know next to nothing about his personal life or
any controversy that may have lead to this movie. Instead I focused on
the movie itself. After watching, I decided to look it up, where I came
across the rather large controversy that this film has created. So
here's my humble take on the film.
"The Girl" is a brilliant film from a mechanical standpoint. The acting is brilliant. Toby Jones sounds almost IDENTICAL to Hitchcock. It was really quite eerie to listen to the two. He seemed to capture the mannerisms from the director quite well. Sienna Miller was okay, but was a bit dry in some parts. Otherwise it was a fine group of actors. Likewise, directing, cinematography and editing were all exceptional, so why does this film fail?
A question I have instead of all the "is this a true story?" is, if you have all of the makings of a great film-a great cast, a great director, great camera-work-why base the story on such a controversial and doubtful series of events? Why not use the tools you have to make a biopic of sorts? This is what baffles me. If this film had followed a different story, it would probably have a much better rating. Everything points to a successful film EXCEPT the story, so why do it?
I suppose this is the problem with film these days. People are more concerned about the shock factor than an actual quality film. It's a shame too, because this could have been much, much better and free from controversy.
Other people in the family enjoy this kind of stuff, but I think that
this show is a joke, especially from a technical aspect. The topics
covered are typical daytime talk show schlock, which in and of itself
isn't bad, but rather predictable. However, the production values are
laughable. Because the show is filmed inside a "real house", filming is
incredibly awkward. There are crew members constantly walking into
frame, realizing that they just walked into frame and abruptly walking
out. The hosts are running about to different parts of the
house....sometimes they don't make it in time for their cue. Much of
the time, there's some sort of audio feed issue with a guest, which
just adds the the awkwardness. Also, the hosts (Steines and Davis)
accidentally read each others lines, or those of their guests quite
often. Paige Davis, while pleasant and upbeat, usually degenerates into
a goofy mess by the end of the segment. I don't blame this on her, I
blame it on how badly the show is run. Steines is a bit more composed,
but you can tell with the guests that things are awkward and they would
rather be somewhere else.
The concept is novel (filming in an actual house), the hosts can be likable and the topics are fine, but whoever is running/directing this show needs to be fired ASAP. I know it's a daytime talk show and I would normally never write anything about this sort of thing, but the way the show is run is just terrible, one of the worst I've ever seen. It's an insult to the viewers and to the hosts.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I'm not a big fan of FX comedies. Crap like "It's Always Sunny in
Philadelphia" is painfully unfunny and woefully over-rated. However,
I've enjoyed Wilfred from the beginning. It's one of the funniest shows
that I've seen in a while. It takes a lot for a T.V. comedy to make me
laugh, but Wilfred does it effortlessly. The comedy comes from the
sheer absurdity of it. Seeing Jason Gann dressed as a dog doing "dog
things" and other "non-dog things" is hysterical. Yes, some of the
humor is crude, but it's well-balanced. The director's scene in
"Honesty" was hilarious and I don't see how they made it though that
Elijah Woods is an excellent Ryan. Likable sometimes, unlikable other times and down right pitiable other times, Ryan is the unlucky guy who has to put up with Wilfred's schemes while dealing with his own shortcomings and, possibly, "mental instability". Wilfred's schemes are usually a lesson for Ryan, but sometimes not.
What I really enjoy about this show is the darker aspect. In almost every episode, we're lightly reminded of the fact that Ryan may not be "all there". We're also reminded of Ryan's past mistakes and their consequences. Sometimes Ryan fesses up to them. Sometime's the truth works out, sometimes it's disastrous for Ryan. We also see that not fessing up can be disastrous for Ryan, as we saw when he lost Amanda. A lot of people call this tedious, boring and "not funny man!", but I see it as what I like to call "an intelligent plot". So many comedies out there are cheap, tired, unintelligent garbage that's degenerating into seeing how many lines the writers can cross for the sake of crossing them. The irony of people saying Wilfred is boring is that is ISN'T boring! It's fresh, new and original! It's trying something different instead of adhering to the same old formula. So yes, the gratification isn't instant, it isn't a constant knee slapper and the plot isn't so simple and predictable that a 5 year old could have written it, but that's what makes it great! The show has a brain and a heart, which is sorely lacking from many of today's comedies.
I really wished this had a higher rating and I hope that it continues. I also hope more writers take after Wilfred and create a show that's a little...."different".
I stumbled upon this when they re-ran it on the Discovery Channel. It
looked fishy (no pun intended) from the beginning, but, since this was
the Discovery Channel, I thought that it was a reenactment of actual
statements. Wrong. It was very easy to tell that the "scientists" were
actors. They were trying too hard to look "candid" and genuine. So that
struck me right off the bat. Then we were treated to a "video" of a
teenager stumbling across the body of an alleged mermaid. Again, very
obvious that it's fake with blatant, poor CGI.
I have no problem with any of this. It's a free country and there are people who believe this stuff. However, I do have a problem with this kind of stuff being shown on the Discovery Channel. The Discovery Channel has (or had) a reputation of having legitimate scientific programing. They've had plenty of ACTUAL documentaries in similar style to this and to put this program on the channel, regardless of how many times they alluded to how it was fake, is completely inappropriate. I expect this kind of stuff on the SyFy Channel, where it would be appropriate, not on a channel like Discovery. I believe this program, more than any other in recent times, speaks to the poor state of U.S. television.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This show was great when it first came out. I loved seeing these guys modify and build cool new guns. Unfortunately, as the seasons progressed, the show become less and less about guns, and more about stupid reality show drama. First, we had the Stephanie-Kris love crap, then we had the Vince crap. Now we have the Kris getting jealous of Stephanie goofing around with Jessie James crap. Come on guys! This show was great when it was solely about the guns, but when you add in this stupid reality show stuff, it just becomes a detractor. That said, these guys have always done some really cool stuff. I like seeing the design and building process, as well as the some of the old guns that come along. I just wish that they would go back to making guns and not trying to make this a soap opera.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I'll start off by saying that I'm not the biggest Costner fan in the
world. I don't hate him like a lot of people do, but I find that he can
be quite wooden when he acts. That said, he did an awesome job with
this one! Everyone did an awesome job!
We all know the story, but this drama brings it to life vividly and highlights an important lesson. The series is beautifully shot, fully capturing the grit of the period. The set's and props also look great.
Kevin Costner, who, like I said above, is usually rather wooden, shines here as someone who originally wanted no part in the feud, but as time goes on is fully drawn into it. Appearing more level headed as McCoy, in truth, Devil Anse is just as hateful.
Bill Paxton made the series for me as Randall McCoy. We see how McCoy, who is inexorably screwed at almost every turn, grows more and more bitter, and hateful. The more bitter he get's, the more he gets screwed and we see an enormous downward spiral. The character invokes massive amounts of pity, because he really did go through a lot from the beginning. This is only added to when the feud begins. He loses several children, his home and his wife goes mad. At the same time, the character makes you want to slap him because his stubbornness causes most of his troubles. Toward the end, he's a broken, hollow man that has lost most everything, but still refuses to let things go. A brilliant performance, as it shows where bitterness can lead.
The supporting cast is great as well, with the likes of Mare Winningham giving the most profound lines of truth toward the end. The musical score is great in some places, but it lacks in others.
So haters are gonna hate (as you can see from the message boards), but it really is a great series. Is it the most accurate? No, but it captures the spirit of the feud and the real tragedy that it was. Were the performances perfect? No. They rarely are. Was it shot in Romania? Yes, but I don't know the reasoning over that (probably money), so I'm not going to judge. No film is perfect, but this one is great and finally presents some actual HISTORY on The History Channel that has been sorely missed.
When I first heard about this series, I was excited for many reasons.
One reason was that it was actually something that involved history on
The History Channel. It seems that for the last few years, The History
Channel has pursued a policy of forsaking almost anything that has to
do with history in favor of stupid, unoriginal reality shows, "ancient
aliens" and other things that just don't belong on a channel about
Another reason is that, each of our states have such a rich, deep history that's unique to every single state. It's good to learn about that kind of thing. I mean, it's our own country for cryin' out loud! We should want to learn more about it! A show that teaches us that is okay with me.
Not only is the show educational, but it's entertaining. We follow Mr. Unger as he visits all fifty states and along the way he'll visit some interesting sites (some that have been almost forgotten), speak to some experts and even talk to the residents of the various states where he asks them questions about their own state, as well as others.
The quest goes far beyond geography, because the show explores the deep history and eccentricities of each state, such as the battle over BBQ, the different accents around our country and other cultural differences. It even shows us some states that were lost, such as Franklin and Deseret.
If you've ever seen and enjoyed Stephen Fry's America, you'd enjoy this as well. If you've never seen either, you'd still enjoy this, because it's a deep, but fun look at the history of our country.
For the record, I love sci-fi. I'm an avid fan of Star Trek, Stargate
SG-1 and the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica. A new show that has even
a hint of sci-fi elements can be exciting, but this one just fell
short. From the minute I first saw the trailer, I knew that this was
not going to be very good. I was right.
First of all, the plot of this series is an unoriginal mish-mash of better works. Someone compared it to Jericho, which I kind of agree with,except it's got some War of The Worlds thrown in. The aliens even make a weird noise like in the War of The Worlds movie that came out recently. But despite having a similar look to Jericho, it's no where near as well done.
The writing is poor and unoriginal. It tends to lead to several clichés and situations that have been done so many times before.The characters and situations are predictable, and not very exciting. The story itself isn't complicated. In essence, it's about human survival like Jericho and BSG, but if you just throw that in without anything else, things get boring quickly. Jericho had a rich, mysterious plot, as did BSG, but I don't really see this story unraveling. Aliens have invaded. There's no complex mystery and probably no other goal except to "survive". Mr. Cliché General said so.
The CGI is pretty bad and while the cinematography tries to be original, it generally just dissolves back into regular T.V. stuff.
What I'm getting at is this: The bar has be raised fairly high by shows like BSG and even The Walking Dead in terms of writing, cinematography, acting, story lines and even effects. You just can't put something up that looks like it was made ten years ago with an unoriginal plot and expect it to be a success.
So Stargate SG-1 is one of the most beloved sci-fi series ever. It
slightly continued the Star Trek theme of exploration, but it did it in
its own way. It had plenty of action and adventure with a few lightly
themed episodes. It also had a great cast that had a lot of chemistry.
When they introduced Stargate Atlantis I was a little apprehensive, but
I grew to like it. It continued the tradition of action, adventure and
exploration that its predecessor had, but in its own way. But just as I
was beginning to like it they canceled it. For Stargate Universe. One
big mistake. Where to begin with this slow, dark, dank, petty attempted
rip-off of both Battlestar Galactica and Star Trek Voyager. The
producers said they wanted something younger and edgier which meant
they wanted to rip-off BSG. So with that in mind they decided to make a
horribly hopeless, dark, violent and depressing show with a shaky
We start with the cast. I don't like them. Why? Because they all act like they would rather shoot each other than find a useful way home. There's no chemistry and there's no one to either like or relate to. They're constantly at each other's throats and it just isn't enjoyable to watch. Everyone has their over the top quirks from annoyingly arrogant, to annoyingly sarcastic. What did the writers want to create Stargate: The Hills?
So in the writer's attempt to make the show young and edgy and show how humans really act in times of trouble like BSG they totally miss the point. Battlestar Galactica was dark and at times depressing and I believe it did a good job of showing humanity in the midst of tragedy. But the thing that made BSG great was not the dark side of human behavior in the midst of tragedy, but the good side. It's a little thing I like to call "Sacrifice". The show was full of it. Adama just wanted to be with Roslin, but couldn't because it would create a tense political situation. Instead he opted to find survivors a new home. Likewise, Roslin also wanted to be Adama, but couldn't because of the tense political situation it would create. She also could've taken it easy due to her cancer, but instead opted to help lead an idiot filled civilian government. See where I'm going with this? Human behavior in bad situations usually brings out the best in us, not the worst. Unfortunately, no one told the writers of Stargate Universe this because everyone is a petty selfish jerk looking out for number 1.
The show has none of the chemistry of past series'. I don't even know anyone's purpose. In SG-1 everyone had their purpose; O'Neill was the leader and military dude, Carter was the brains, Jackson the diplomat and archaeologist, Teal'C was the warrior searching to free his people and Hammond was the father figure general. Here, it's anyone's guess. Who's in charge? At times that jerk Dr. Rush and then an assortment of officers and it's all confusing. Needless to say they all hate each other. Except when they fall in love. Oh wait! That person already loves someone else and couldn't care less about you! So yeah, they all hate each other.
SGU is the Stargate franchises "Nemesis". Nemesis was the last movie in the Star Trek: The Next Generation franchise and it was needlessly dark and violent. Previous Stargate series' had dark and violent parts, but they didn't last long. They were there long enough to move the story along. There was usually a happy outcome. This show is just stupidly violent. Stargate has always been a family show, so how are you going to explain to little Timmy why the soldier is getting burrowed into by a giant leach thing? It's just overly depressing and not in keeping with the past series'
So why this long rant against this show? Well, because I consider it a slap in the face for Stargate fans and it's also because it's a terrible rip-off of BSG. It has no depth and no entertainment value to it. It's a daytime soap in space, but this time everyone has guns. You can't just be dark for the sake of being dark. There needs to be a purpose and some heroes. 'Tis a blemish on a grand series.