Change Your Image
jds10011
Reviews
Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life (2016)
Disappointed - exercise in Palladino laziness
As more and more people are observing, these new episodes of Gilmore Girls would have been better having never been made. The writing was lazy - as though the Palladinos rushed it and were distracted by other projects, especially Daniel Pallidino's work in episode 3 - what a mess! Most of the entire production seemed more about Pallidino self-reference than about taking the time to really consider what the characters would be like this many years later, AND what the viewers would expect in the context of where the show had left them at the end.
As I said, episode 3 was the worst, but none of the episodes were good in terms of the writing, nor with respect to the integrity of the characters relative to the original. Too much of the writers/directors attention was taken in plugging in cameos for the sake of getting air time for these other actors, rather than finding a way to sensibly insert a character opportunity in which a cameo would work.
The fantasy-like scenes and diversions in more than one episode were either plugged in to take up time that the writers seemed to need to fill with anything or as self-indulgent bits that had no relevance to the story, the characters, the history of the show, or to viewers' interests. The abomination of the Stars Hollow play seemed like the Palladino's first attempt at suggesting that Gilmore Girls should be issued as a play - a musical - on Broadway.
Rory has degenerated into something worse than Lorelei's self-centeredness, which takes a lot of doing, and Lorelei herself has grown not one iota. Right up to the final scene, she continues to be manipulative, deceitful and passive-aggressive, even at the expense of Luke on their wedding day (when she takes it upon herself to change a part of the ceremony that he had set up with Miss Patty). Rory and Lorelei even laugh at how it will upset Luke. That's a nice start to their wedding, isn't it...
For some VERY strange reason, the Pallidinos have made Rory into a skank, in addition to - without explanation - losing her drive and considerable abilities as an early-stage journalist and writer. Despite having lived through and experienced the pain - some self-inflicted - of violating trusts and decency in past relationships, the episodes open with her already mired in a selfish and deceitful 'relationship' with two very different men, one of whom we know and probably liked before we see how he, too, has morphed from where we left him at the end of the original show. The new 'boyfriend' is treated, literally, as a running joke for Rory and her mother.
The kind of witty banter that set Gilmore Girls apart when it began has often been recognized in retrospect as having a level of cruelty, and certainly judgmentalism. For more modern times, we would like to have seen how both Lorelei and Rory had grown into less self-centered beings, and into more curious and open people.
I won't repeat more details that are discussed in other reviews, but it seems painfully obvious that this was primarily a VERY self-indulgent, self- centered, self-promoting project for the Pallidinos, and was not something put together for fans of the original Gilmore Girls. We even see examples of Mrs. Pallidino's preferences for her public attire in what Lorelei chooses in some of the wedding-related scenes.
The laziness was also evident in the way the writing circled back to a little heart-tugging around Richard Gilmore when they (the writers) seemed otherwise incapable of constructing a coherent narrative.
I fully expect that the investment by Netflix will pay off, and that many fans will be happy and satisfied. But these episodes will not stand the test of time the way the original - even much of season 7 - will. These are not re- watchable; there is no desire here to go back and see these episodes again, so as to enjoy something that felt warm and rich and maybe rare. These were mostly smarmy and often mean-spirited, and I think a lot of the mean spirit comes from the Pallidinos to the fans, in that they (the Pallidinos) didn't care to take time to regain their sensibility about these characters and the story.
This seemed like an opportunity to 'take the money and run' - to do the least allowable toward putting these shows together for Netflix. I hope Netflix and other outlets think longer and harder before jumping into reviving another fan favorite. At least twice, with Arrested Development and now Gilmore Girls, the efforts to recapture and build upon fan love for a show has failed rather painfully. At some point, maybe even fans will start saying, "Enough is enough. Leave us with our fond memories."
Inside Man (2006)
perfect example of why Jodie Foster is over-rated
In addition to the other criticism that precedes my review, I'll just add that this movie is perhaps the clearest example of why Jodie Foster is so ridiculously over- rated as an actress. Viewers are ALWAYS aware of watching her, rather than getting absorbed in the character that she is supposed to be portraying. She is just saying lines - in this movie, over-acting like a freshman in high-school.
The movie overall is a bit confused, and substitutes veering off track for 'plot twists'. The trick, revealed at the end, is painfully obvious and sophomoric, and should have been too much of an embarrassment for a major studio release. But, I suppose they figured it was better to just it over with.
It teases in the beginning, with potential for being a smart film, but when the banker and Jodie Foster characters come in, it degenerates into a wannabe 'film' that just falls into mediocrity at best, and - honestly - is just a waste of time.
I Origins (2014)
Wanted - expected - better
I like what Brit Marling and Cahill try to do, and that they are making their films. This one could have used a more mature touch - perhaps an adviser to help them avoid a level of pretentiousness that pervades the entire movie.
One way this is on display is the movement of the camera and/or some of the camera angles. More of a problem is the too-frequent setting of a dark room or night or some place that is dark, for no reason that adds to the story other than the unnecessary and obvious 'young filmmaker making a moody film' statement.
My opinion of the story arc and some of the writing is that it is not nearly so profound as the writer obviously hoped it to be (or as some other reviewers interpreted). It is simplistic and shallow, actually, and pretends toward profundity, with very little substance underlying the heavy layers of melodrama.
Ms. Marling is better than this material - she struggles to make her lines meaningful and real, and to avoid the pretentiousness that is written into some of them. Mr. Pitt displays a range that rivals peeling wallpaper. His modeling background shows through here, with his persistent one blank look. He did have different glasses, at least once, though. And, I think his hair style changed, too...
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)
Stunning and surprising
This is a stunning beautiful movie, visually and in all ways that a film can be. It bears little relation to the Thurber short story or Danny Kaye's movie, and the originality - Ben Stiller's choice to make a new film - leads to a wonderful result. This film rewards watching many times, again and again.
The performances are uniformly excellent, with Stiller and Kristin Wiig delivering completely captivating, finely nuanced and subtle characterizations that have depth and truth that is very rarely ever seen on screen. While both have been recognized to have skills that go beyond comedy, these performances push them toward the elite levels of acting anywhere. I'm tempted to say, 'Wiig especially', but Stiller actually did just as remarkable a job - perhaps more so, considering how much time he is on screen.
And, enjoy Sean Penn's subtle and gentle delivery when he and Walter finally meet...
As happens too often, I suspect that Hollywood didn't really know how to market this film. It's great to see it get so much exposure now on cable and digitally-delivered TV.
And, have you noticed that Stretch Armstrong has made a comeback appearance in a car commercial!?! That tells you how popular this film has become.
Legends (2014)
Typical and conventional, re-tread of what we've seen before
Sean Bean is very good, and could have been SO much better if he had writers, directors and fellow actors who were up to his level. I was interested and hopeful for something other than ordinary, but it quickly became completely standard and predictable.
For some sad reason, the producers have chosen to just take the easy road, following the typical conventional model for a TV show of this genre. Scenes, dialogue, characters, story elements, gimmicks, etc., etc., etc. are just re-treads from a score of other shows of this ilk.
The producers and writers have obviously also chosen to not learn much about police/FBI work and culture. The FBI characters are about as shallow as Saturday morning cartoons. All the usual standard characters are here: the semi-rogue insider (Morris Chesnut) who could be a threat to the lead character; a female mid-management/ FBI agent team leader (Ali Larter) who seems to have no insight, no emotional maturity, no leadership qualities, and no apparent FBI training. Her boss (Steve Harris), is, well, the same character that Steve Harris plays in every other TV show he's been in.
And, of course, Ali Larter has to play a stripper in one episode - gosh, who could have predicted?!? There is nothing that resembles anything like professional FBI/ investigative behavior. Again: as with the good ol' fashioned standards for network TV from the 50s through today (apparently), we see a mostly inept team of stock characters (including this shows version of the quirky lovable female tech geek with goofy hair) always missing the obvious, committing shockingly stupid mistakes, mouthing pseudo-glib little comments about ...whatever... and bumbling their way from one near disaster to the next.
Too bad. I had never seen Sean Bean very much, and didn't really grasp England's popular fascination with him. But, he is acting circles around the rest of these B- and C-level actors, hamstrung by the choices made by the producers and director(s), and the sophomoric writing.
The story could have had genuinely interesting nuance and shading, doubt and mystery. It could have been compelling. They got the right lead actor, probably by accident. Their opening artwork is derivative of True Detective. Production values are on par with prime-time broadcast network shows.
But, other than Bean (and possibly a couple of frustrated character roles), this show is fatally weighed down by lousy off-screen and on- screen talent (Sean Bean excepted). It will likely see one season, and, if no fundamental and substantial changes are made, Legends will find its way to the growing scarp heap of re-tread crap.
Kill Your Darlings (2013)
appropriately sophomoric
First of all, before the 'acting' and script are addressed, ...the sound! Horrible!! The music is played at a ridiculously LOUD volume, which slams the viewer (listener) suddenly, for no reason whatsoever. It's just one of several examples of a surprisingly poorly made movie. No, this is not a 'film'.
The writing and acting are perfectly appropriate for the young kids who think they have discovered the angst of life like no one ever has before them.
This is a very shallow depiction of the self-aggrandizement that the Beats built their 'revolution' on. The script is as shallow as the Beats were ultimately shown to be - as most readers and devotees come around to realize. For the most part, they were entitled little rich brats who indulged and were indulged. The acting, then, is constrained by the writing: complete absence of subtlety or nuance; no restraint; no pacing; clichéd and stereotyped - like watching a junior-high-school play rehearsal.
There are no surprises here. You watch, waiting for something to build to something - anything. There is no examination of these characters or any historical or socio-economic context, just the assumption that they are smart, insightful, and 'right'. The movie is based on stupid assumptions.
Perhaps the problem with this movie is, after all, the material. But, no, it just really is a very bad movie. It looks, feels, and sounds like a student infatuation with the Beat myth. Maybe people who like open-mike poetry slams would like this; I wouldn't know. But, I do know this is dreadful.
Murder in the First (2014)
Stock characters, re-tread ideas, no surprises
There's nothing new here. These characters are pulled off the shelf of the basic Hollywood police show writer. Bochco was original several years ago, but this is just running the same material through updated cameras.
The lead actress over-acts everything; she has no sense of pacing, no subtlety. She's there to fill the space of the female character, and she brings nothing special to the role, whatsoever. She seems painfully obvious about just playing on the 'hot chick' motif of so-called actress.
But, she's consistent with the writing and directing in general. Taye Diggs is out of his element, and can't bring most of the other 'actors' up to to a higher level. Richard Schiff is wasted in a minor role of yet another stereotype.
The show has the feel of people simply fulfilling contractual obligations: very little effort behind the writing. Peopled by too many sub-par 'actors' who are either being allowed or encouraged to overplay roles, and to make sure that they don't go deep into character development. This is all about telling instead of showing. And, the stuff that is being told is stereotypical and therefore boring.
The Big Year (2011)
under-rated; VERY good movie
The Big Year is under-rated; there is little if anything to criticize. It's a 'small' film, in that it isn't action-based and it's not a laugh- out-loud raucous comedy. What it IS is a warm-hearted yet genuine movie that avoids the maudlin and obvious clichéd sentimentality. The writing, acting and directing are all very, very good. And, the story is very good, as well. As another reviewer said, we gain insight into the community of birders, some of whom are obsessed and a little eccentric, but others who are about as average as one could think of, with the exception of a particular interest in birding. The movie could have taken another of a number of alternative hobbies as its center, but but birding allowed for travel and outdoor scenery, and keeps us from becoming relegated to a 'basement' hobby. We get to see that birders are real people, and the story is about the people.
The warmth of these relationships is beautifully conveyed - again: without being sappy or maudlin. The Big Year is not strictly a comedy, but it is lighter than a pure drama. Highly recommended!