Reviews

13 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Morning Show: Fever (2021)
Season 2, Episode 10
2/10
Sad to see the show decline
22 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I was a fan of the series in season one, which I found smart, funny and often poignant. Season two, however, was uneven, until the last episode which seemed incredibly disorganized but also self-indulgent, to the point that I doubt I will watch season three, if there is one.

One of the strengths of the show was the way it used cognitive dissonance for great effect, the fact that characters who were self-centered seemed to believe that they were the good guys, when, in fact, they were not, as their self-centeredness led to destructive behavior. The series used this to greatest effect at the end of season one: you likely know that the season centered largely on Mitch Kessler (Steve Carell) and accusations that he had sexually harassed women staffers on the morning show where he was anchor for fifteen years. We are not exactly clear on exactly what he did for much of the season; he seems to believe that he is the victim: he lost his job, unjustly. As the season goes along, however, it becomes clear that he did, indeed, take advantage of women who were his subordinates on the show, primarily an assistant booker, Hannah (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), with whom he had sex. Episode 8 (Lonely at the Top) makes it unmistakable that, although Hannah never tells Mitch directly to stop as he begins to undress her and then has sex with her, she does not want it to happen, something that we learn directly in episode nine: she did not stop him because she did not feel she could say no to someone like Kessler. Nonetheless, Kessler has no clue about this and goes to ask Hannah to act as a source in an interview he hopes will clear his name: he is utterly incapable of seeing the harm he caused her, harm that eventually leads her to kill herself. It's that blindness that makes the character of Mitch so compelling -- that cognitive dissonance.

In fact, in season two, Mitch remains the most compelling character, as he attempts to find his way back to actually being a good person, as he comes to grips with the ways that he has failed others, and himself -- something he ultimately fails to do, as he, too, kills himself by allowing his car to plummet off the road in Italy, where he had gone as a refuge from the fallout for his behavior.

Contrasted with this, however, we have the season finale: much of the second season centers on the beginning of the COVID pandemic (and I admit that the series does a good job, at first, of showing us our collective native about the disease in its early days), culminating with the morning show's other long-time anchor (and Mitch's long-time partner and "work wife), Alex Levy (Jennifer Aniston) contracting the disease. In a miscalculation, the network decides to launch its new streaming app with an hour of a clearly suffering Alex talking about her illness, which she does primarily by whining about what a victim she is, as her own star has fallen, due at first to a tell-all book about the show, which discloses that Alex had an affair with Mitch, and was perhaps complicit in his inappropriate behavior, and then when the information gets out that Alex had gone to Italy (a hotbed of COVID infection in its early days) to beg Mitch for a false statement he and Alex had never slept together, therefore exposing all of her co-workers to the virus. But she is a wealthy woman whining in a penthouse that looks down over the city of New York, and she is culpable for all of her sins. In the first season, the series would have made clear it saw the irony of this -- that, yes, Alex would whine about this, but the series would indicate that the writers understood the absurdity of her whining. Here, it seems clear that the show wants us to feel sorry for Alex, to see her as the victim she says she is. She is disgusting, as she berates the audience for all she has suffered -- and the show is disgusting for trying to move us to pity her.

Season three? No thank you.
0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Ouch -- so painful to watch
2 January 2021
This is, without question, one of the worst films I have seen in my life -- a paint-by-numbers approach to screenwriting, but by people who clearly can't count from one to two without getting lost. The saddest aspect here is that Kristen Wiig is utterly wasted here. Her character was the most engaging early on, but then the filmmakers don't seem to have any idea what sort of character they want her to be. What a waste of time and money.
48 out of 73 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Passage: Pilot (2019)
Season 1, Episode 1
2/10
Surprisingly dull pilot
15 January 2019
I am a huge fan of Justin Cronin's "Passage" trilogy that forms the basis for this series and therefore was looking forward to it as soon I heard someone was making it. Based on the pilot, however, I wish they hadn't.

Cronin's books, especially the first, are amazingly rich narratives. He won prizes for his literary fiction before he stepped into genre work and The Passage succeeded both as literature and as a first-rate horror tale. The characters and world are vivid and compelling and Cronin does a masterful job of grounding us in the people who walk around in his fictional world. He does this in good part with extensive flashbacks that he weaves through the books, giving us bits and pieces until finally we see the entire picture of who these people are -- the heroes, the villains and even the monsters before they were monsters. He spends quite a bit of time letting us get to know Amy and even something about her mother...but in the pilot, since I guess the creators were so anxious to get to the monsters, all we get are small cliched bits that are clearly intended to make us feel sorry for Amy and therefore feel connected to her. In fact, the major flaw here is that the creators of the pilot attempt to convey in a few on-the-nose lines of dialogue what Cronin took pages to convey to us. I understand that TV is not literature and that the two media work differently and that the creators have to trim off bits and pieces here and there for the sake of efficiency and clarity...but they have cut off too much and so we never really get past the surface of the characters as props in an effort to bring us to the monsters as quickly as we can get there.

I will give this series another chance next week and will watch episode two but I suspect I will give us then and go back and re-read Cronin's original trilogy.
4 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
David and Olivia? (2018– )
8/10
Quirky, fun but too bad it's only three episodes
29 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoyed this engaging short series and I suppose it's a comment on how much I enjoyed it that I was disappointed it was only three episodes since the fact that I wanted more speaks to its quality. It really seems more like one rom-com movie divided into three episodes than a TV series but it's quirky and funny and the characters are engaging; David and Olivia? are great foils for one another and the mystery of who Olivia? is and how she came to be naked in David's car is intriguing. I will say the climactic scene when David and Olivia? confront "the bad guy" did seem a little contrived and resolved itself a bit too easily. On the other hand, the whole plot about the "bad guy" and Olivia bringing the envelope to him was really just a MacGuffin to connect Olivia? with David and give them somewhere to go so that we could ride along with them on this long and enjoyable car ride with them so I don't think it would be accurate to mark down the series too much for that aspect of it. I want to add that when David takes his shirt off, the thought occurred to me that the actors first met at the ab machine at the gym and said, "Hey! Let's make a movie together!"
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Disappointing
8 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
At the end of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, I remembered a line I had once read in a book: "Disney is not in the business of making movies. Disney is in the business of making money." This film demonstrates that fairly clearly--largely because of it's non-ending ending: at about 2 1/2 hours in, with things looking dire, with an important character seeming lost, I was thinking: "All right, how are they going to tie this up?" Well, they don't: they fade out, and this sequel to the marvelous first Pirates of the Caribbean becomes little more than a tease for the third film they've promised us. I know other film franchises have done the same: the Lord of the Rings series, the dual Star Wars trilogies (although the first set of three movies were each satisfying in their own right.) You would think, however, for the full price of a ticket, the filmmakers would be able to bring the current film to a satisfying close--but they don't.

Aside from that, this film is a pale shadow of the first. Its opening--in which Will Turner's and Elizabeth Swann's planned wedding is interrupted when the two are arrested for their part in helping Jack Sparrow escape at the end of the first PotC and then offered a deal, their lives in exchange for tracking down Sparrow--is creaky, as if the writers couldn't take the time or expend the effort to give us a proper set-up. From there, the story becomes confusing (even if you have seen the first, if you see this one, you should watch the earlier film just before going to the second, as characters pop up and the filmmakers clearly expect us to remember who they are from the first film to understand their significance in their scenes in this film) as the filmmakers are clearly interested in only providing the slimmest of threads to move the story from one big, rollicking scene to the next one--at the expense of clarity and an interesting structure.

There are scenes that are fun to watch, and Depp as Sparrow is as good as he was in the first (where his performance earned a deserved Oscar nomination), but you should do yourself a favor: see it at a bargain showing: half a movie doesn't deserve full price for a ticket.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
16 Blocks (2006)
9/10
Bruce Willis keeps getting better
12 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I still believe that Bruce Willis is one of moviedom's most under-appreciated actors. Yes, he works a lot and makes millions doing it, but as he moves through his career, he just gets more impressive in his performances. I thought his work in Hostage was magnificent but here he's even better, especially early on the film, when he's tired and sore; at the start of 16 Blocks, Willis--who's portrayed some of the most macho characters in films over the last 15 or so years--is almost unrecognizable. He's old, all of a sudden, and got this little pot belly that probably came from his character's heavy drinking. But it's not just the make-up job and a (I assume) prosthetic gut, but his entire demeanor. At one point, when another character asks him an annoying riddle, he snaps, "Life's too long and you make it seem even longer." It's the perfect mantra for his character, and we believe it--that the character is done living and can't wait for it all to end--because of Willis' performance. The rest of the film is an amazing ride, sort of Die Hard meets The Odyssey. The plot simple: Willis's character, Jack Mosley, the tired cop even more tired after a night's work sitting in an apartment where some drug dealers have been killed and waiting with the stiffs until the medical examiner can get there, has one more chore to take care of before he can knock off and go home--most likely to drink himself to sleep. His job: transport a witness, Eddie Bunker (Mos Def, in an amazing performance) 16 blocks from the jail cell where he's been held to the courthouse where the witness is to testify before a grand jury probe of a crooked cop. There's a deadline (of course there's a deadline); Willis has to get him there in less than two hours. The simple transport job gets more complicated when it turns out that people want the witness dead before he can testify--and those people are cops, led by Mosely's former partner, Frank Nugent (David Morse, who--as he always does--turns in a riveting performance that's marvelously restrained). The scriptwriter, Richard Wenk, really knows how to structure an effective film as, once the chase begins, the film doesn't let up until nearly the end: time after time, you wonder: how's he going to get out of this? Okay, he miraculously got out of that last mess, but he can't possibly get out of this mess, can he? The only reason I give this film a nine instead of a ten is because there is one moment, late in the film, when the film uses a kind of tired trick on the audience; in case you're not as cynical as I am, I won't reveal what that moment is--but you'll recognize it just as soon as the moment begins to unfold. Sitting in the theater, I recognized exactly what was going on as it was going on and I felt annoyed more than anxious for Mosley and Bunker. That may be a small quibble, but it's enough to keep this film from earning the perfect score.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Junebug (2005)
9/10
An amazing, if slightly flawed film
25 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Junebug was a surprise of a film for me; my fiancé rented it and I had no idea what it was about and ended up just floored, just absolutely floored by it.

Essentially, it's the story of a couple from Chicago--an art gallery owner and her husband--who come to North Carolina when the wife is trying to court a rustic artist for her gallery. It turns out that the artist lives near to her husband's family--whom she's never met--and so husband and wife come to stay with his family. It's a clash of cultures--she's cosmopolitan--the daughter of a British diplomat who's lived all over the world, and the husband's family seem never to have traveled more than a hundred miles from their home. Other films have tackled this subject matter with mixed results, but this film is perhaps the best of this sub-genre I've seen in years.

There are flaws in this film, sure, that's true--the ending, for example, just seems a bit too neat: characters come to a resolution that seems a bit too easy, as if the filmmakers realized they needed to have some sense of closure, but it doesn't seem to arise with full inevitability. That said, I can forgive that because so much about this film works so well. Amy Adams performance as Ashley, for one, as a manic and eternally cheerful pregnant woman trying to convince the taciturn members of her family that life is wonderful--as if she can turn their sullenness with her own good will, most of all her husband, the high school drop out Johnny. The performance has great range, especially near the end of the film when her optimism is put to a difficult test. There are moments in this film that just break your heart. In one them, Johnny--who has shown not an iota of affection for his pregnant wife--is downstairs in the rec room watching television, while upstairs the house is full of women attending his wife's baby shower. At one point, he finds a documentary about meercats. His wife is crazy about meercats and he gives the one sign in the entire film that he loves her as he first tries vainly to call her downstairs and then, when she cannot hear him over the chatter of the baby shower, desperately tries to videotape it for her--but fails when he persists in inserting a tape into the VCR that has had the tab broken out of it. It's a heartbreaking moment and one that can stand for all the mute ways everyone in the film tries to connect, feebly, to one another.

One caveat: the opening ten minutes or so of the film were not entirely engaging and I was ready to switch it off but stuck with it and, once the gallery owner and her husband finally arrive at his family's place, I was sucked in entirely. Rent this film; you'll be utterly amazed.

The Oscars are this coming Sunday, and Amy Adams, who was nominated for Best Supporting Actress, probably won't win the award, because other performances (Michelle Williams in Brokeback Mountain and Rachel Weisz in The Constant Gardener) have just gotten so much hype, but Adams' performance deserves the prize; she's just amazingly good. If you rent the movie simply to see her, you'll have more than gotten your money's worth.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Baxter (2005)
10/10
Heck, I really love this movie
29 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I picked up The Baxter about a week ago on a Friday at the end of a long week when my girlfriend and I were looking for something light and entertaining and was amazed at how much I loved it. It's the funniest romantic comedy I've seen in years. . .I don't give movies a "10" lightly, but this one earns it because all of the pieces work so well together. The star/writer/director seems a perfect sort of nebish, a perfect dull but steady and reliable guy. He's the sort of character who shows up in so many romantic comedies: the Bill Pullman character in Sleepless in Seattle or the Ralph Bellamy character in His Girl Friday--the guy who gets dumped by the girl when someone more exciting comes along. Eliot in this film may be the quintessential dull, steady, reliable nice guy: he seems always in a sweater vest and his favorite day of the week is Monday. I know some who have commented have said that Michael Showalter is the weakest cast member; one person commented that he wasn't Cary Grant. Well, no--but that's the point. You need someone who can handle the delicate balance between being an interesting protagonist but who also is believable as a male wallflower. This movie is not about the character Cary Grant would have played but the character that Ralph Bellamy would have played--and Showalter is brilliant in the role. The rest of the cast is stupendous. Michelle Williams is perfect as the girl we root for and the supporting cast is also outstanding. A hint: if you're not the kind of person who sticks around for the end credits, do so for this film. There's an extra scene in the middle of the credits that's funny but also casts the entire film in a new light.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A funny, funny show
13 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This was one of the most charming, funniest shows ever to appear on television. Banks' character was engaging--a well-intentioned guy who never seemed to get what he wanted, especially the love of his life, the super of his building, Mariana. The humor was quirky: in one episode, a Beatles' obsessed Banks bids his rent money on what he thinks is a guitar once owned by John Lennon, only to find out that what he bought was one of Julian Lennon's. . .guitar cases. Banks is an outstanding comedian and a highlight of nearly every show was one of his song parodies. In one episode, as he anticipates attending a Bob Dylan concert, he sings a song in which he imitates--and well--not only Dylan, but Johnny Cash and Tom Waits--and I think others. One of the remarkable aspects of the show was that the three principle actors portrayed nearly every role in the series. It's a true shame that the show is not available on DVD or even VHS--or that PBS has not chosen to rerun it.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
What a cosmic disappointment
30 April 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I have been a fan of Hitchhiker's Guide for more than 20 years, ever since I read what was then a trilogy and saw the wonderfully funny BBC six-part series based on the books, and so I was looking forward to a big screen version. . .and was I ever disappointed. . .but this is not surprising, since Walt Disney had its hand in the production. The film lacks the sharp satire of the books and the BBC series. . .and the ending! Without giving away the ending of either the BBC series or the movie, let's just say that the absurdity of the BBC series' resolution was one of the most memorable aspects of the series. . .it meant that all of the machinations and drama--of the series and, at least in Douglas' vision, human existence--were essentially absurd. The film cops out and cops out big time, so that it could bring us a pat ending where everyone is happy. Everyone except the audience, that is.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hostage (2005)
9/10
An intense thriller
15 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This film works on so many levels: it's incredibly unrelenting--well-structured, a model of how a film can build suspense. Bruce Willis, I think, continues to be an under-appreciated actor. Sure, he works a lot and has box office power, but I think too many people don't really appreciate his talent and range and power as an actor. A lot of this may be because of his choice of projects, like this one, in which the special effects distract from the performances. There is great economy in Willis' performance here. Take the scene, for example, in which he learns his family has been kidnapped, the way he shifts from rage and fear for them to determination. It's a small moment in the film (I mean the moment when his character makes that shift, going from the futile, almost impotent rage to the determination) but watch Willis in the scene, the way he expresses that transformation. This film is full of such moments. If I had one disappointment with the film, it's that while Kevin Pollack gets second billing in the film, after Willis, he's not in as much of the film as I would have thought, given the billing, because Pollack is an enjoyable actor to watch.
12 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sideways (2004)
10/10
I agree_ Giamatti should have been nominated
26 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Sideways is a terrific film; like all of Taylor and Payne's films thus far, it's intelligent, engaging and even moving. The novel on which it's based is entertaining, but if you read it, you get a sense of how smart Taylor and Payne were in their dramatic decisions: one of the rare films that is better than the original source (not that the book is bad, it's just that the film seems better at engaging the audience, at moving the audience). As he has been in everything, Giamatti is terrific: sure the other principle actors were good, especially Madsen, but Giamatti is the spine of the film. You could imagine any number of actors in the other roles, but Giamatti seemed to put on Miles as if the character were his own skin. If you haven't seen the film, watch for the scene in which Miles rhapsodizes about why he loves Pinot Noir so much when he's talking to Maya on the porch in their first date scene. It's riveting: the speech Taylor and Payne wrote is moving: a man bares his soul, tells us all we need to know about him through the way he talks about wine, but Giamatti's performance in that one monologue is powerful. One of the finest film moments in years.
1 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Monk: Mr. Monk and the Candidate (2002)
Season 1, Episode 1
A True Original
7 August 2004
The "mysteries" each week are not as interesting as you might expect from a detective series, but the show as comedy and character study is one of the best things ever to come along in TV. Tony Shaloub is terrific, and he has wonderful chemistry with the also excellent Bitty Schram. If you have never seen the show, the first season is on DVD--but I think the best episodes came a little later, most notably the episode in which John Turturro plays his equally disturbed brother ("Mr Monk and the Three Pies"), the episode in which he goes on his first date since his wife's death ("Mr Monk and the Blackout"), and the one in which he loses his detective's license ("Mr Monk Gets Fired").
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed