Perse_phone Reviews

Jessica Jones (2015–2019)

What happened with season 2? Ugh!

[7/10 · 13 March 2018]

I really enjoyed the first season, and the first couple of episodes of season 2 were very promising as well.

Jessica Jones is one of my favourite Marvel characters, and in my opinion, she is perfectly portrayed by Krysten Ritter. She's just perfect for the role. Which is why I was extremely dismayed and disappointed by the lackluster effort the writers put into season 2. Because let's be honest here: season 2 sux big time. The introduction of Jessica's long-lost mother was the last straw that ruined the show for me. Well, the 2nd season at least. Bringing back Jessica's supposedly dead mother is not a no-go per se, better writers, better directors could have certainly done a good job with that storyline, I imagine. But this? No, just no. What were they thinking??

Moreover, the whole storyline with the lawyer and the PI was unnecessary, like a whole, independent plotline that had almost no overlap with the main plot for most of the season. If they wanted to keep the lawyer as a character in the show, they should have done a better job of including her into the show's main plot. I always welcome LGBTQ+ characters in TV and film, so I would be amongst the first to find it, well, let's say questionable, to suddenly get rid of a gay character. But here? The writers, directors, whoever, obviously were quite desperate to keep the strong, successful, female, lesbian lawyer in the show, but ran totally out of ideas on how to actually include her in the story. This is laughable. Embarrassing, really. If this is all that they could come up with for her, then maybe they should have better written her out of season 2!

Season 2 -- what an enormous let-down.

Overall rating is rounded up to seven, because season 1 was absolutely awesome. All actors do a great job throughout the whole show, season 2 included. Looking forward to season 3, hopefully the writers come up with some better ideas then.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

A failed attempt in every regard. Incredibly disappointing.

[3/10 · 7 March 2018]

It took me 3 days to finish this movie. That alone should tell you everything you need to know, really...

This movie is not only shallow in regards to its plot, but manages to destroy everything that was good about 'Man of Steel' and 'The Dark Knight Trilogy'. Its mere existence stains these movies and their splendid portrayal of both Batman and Superman.

For the life of me, I can't relate to any of the characters nor their motivations in the mess of a film. It just makes no sense that Batman suddenly decides to take on Superman, that he brands him as the dangerous bad guy who might or might not be the end of the world. Honestly, the scene in which he was talking about how good, powerful people will or might, at one point, turn evil was ridiculous. Maybe he should have just eaten a bullet himself right then and there. Maybe he should just kill every single person on earth, because you never know who might turn out to be the next evil mastermind. Superman's motivation is no less incomprehensible. Weak motivation seems to be a theme with this movie...

Don't get me wrong, I really loved Batman in the 'The Dark Knight Trilogy', but the Batman portrayed here? Not so much--that is to say, not t all. He was unsympathetic and his motivation, his aggression towards Superman, was rather incomprehensible. Superman was somewhat more likable, but nevertheless I fail to be able to reconcile both Superman and Batman with their counterparts in the aforementioned movies. The writers, directors, producers--whoever--really didn't care about the franchise, didn't care enough to flesh out the characters, to build up a background story that would lead to the kind of animosity between Superman and Batman that they want to convey to the audience. There's just no compelling reason for them to fight each other in the first place! It's rushed. There's certainly no effort put into the storyline. It's just some good(ish) visuals, okay CGI effects and action scenes (although the fight scenes with Batman were terrible beyond belief) strung together that are trying very hard to distract the audience from the otherwise lackluster attempt at a movie. The disconnect in this movie is palpable.

And let's not even get into how Lex Luthor fits into all this. I'm still wondering about what he contributed to this particular movie, other than recognition value. Someone must be the supposed antagonist in a comic movie, I guess. This film's Lex Luthor is ridiculous and painful to watch beyond words. Hell, the Lex Luthor from the TV series 'Smallvile' was genius compared to this. Again, no explanation, no reason is delivered for his evil master plan of pitching Batman and Superman against each other. Dear DC people, take a look at 'Captain America: Civil War', take a look at Zemo and his motivation --that is how it's done. Because despite all my doubt regarding the whole 'let's make superheroes fight each other!' theme, it was done really well in Civil War.

Same with Wonder Woman--what was her purpose in this movie?? It really feels like they put DC characters willy nilly into this flick.

Of course, calling a movie 'Batman v Superman' and then have the main plot (I'm being generous calling it a plot) of the movie about another fight altogether in the end doesn't win any cookie points either. Furthermore, and I stand by this: no way would Batman ever manage to beat Superman! That's just stupid.

Also, why kill off Superman this early in their franchise?? I was under the impression that DC was trying to jump on the success train of the epic superheroes franchise that is the MCU.

How anyone can make such utter horse sh.... with that kind of budget is beyond me! Christian Bale did a very smart thing when turning down the offer to star as Batman once again!

The only good thing I can say about the movie is that I didn't spend any money on it and only watched it when it became available on Netflix.

Another reviewer summed it up pretty nicely, and I'm taking the liberty of borrowing their line: Not BvS, just BS!

Honestly, I'd much rather watch any given Marvel movie or series for the 100th time than suffer a 2nd time through this mess.

Vikings (2013–2020)

Great, intriguing show as far as the first 2-3 season go, later seasons a downright disappointment!

[8/10 · 3 January 2018]

Seasons 1 and 2, even season 3, were great. Awesome even. Ragnar is an intriguing character; intelligent, curious as to what else is there, open to new ideas and new ways of life. He seems to always be one, two steps ahead, is mysterious, intense and sometimes quirky. I really loved his character in the first 3 seasons. Same with Lagertha, Raganr's one true love, a strong woman who deals with the betrayal of her husband and the loss of one child. She is strong-willed, strong in general, intelligent and can hold her water even around the best of warriors.

Really, the Viking world presented in this series is equally fascinating, beautiful and gruesome. You want to hate the characters for their brutality and cruelty, e.g. killing, no, slaughtering, harmless farmers, women and children instead of only warriors. Enjoying murdering innocent people, raiding whole cities and leaving behind a trail of destruction and death. On the other hand you grow to like them, suffer with them, root for them.

Vikings is an unique show that kept me on the edge of my seat. Great, captivating plot, intriguing and refreshingly different and flawed characters, great scenery and cinematography.

Up until season 4, that is.... Unfortunately, I might add.

Same as with so many other great shows, writers and directors seemed to have run out of good ideas, but tried to keep milking the cash cow. The lack of new ingenious storylines is "compensated" by inventing stupidly overdone, implausible, soap-y storylines. Adding drama for drama's sake. Destroying characterisations, letting characters act in ways that is in (utter) contradiction to their previous behaviour.

While Ragnar was my favourite character throughout season 1 to 3, he slowly but surely progressed to a pathetic, laughable, weak caricature of his once great self. The storyline became ridiculous, convoluted, and downright unbelievable at times. Ragnar's (sudden) downfall is simply not believable, the loss of his high-spirited, ambitious self and his sudden drug addiction facilitated by the introduction of the Chinese slave/princess just totally out-of-character. Lagertha's grab of power to become Queen, or at least the way she does it, is not thought-out, stupid and, if you ask me, not quite in character with her previous characterisation either.

Talk about beating a dead horse....

I can't help but be disappointed at how the makers of this show managed to mangle, destroy all their previous good work with the stupidity that follows in the newer seasons.

So my rating of this show is somewhat ambiguous... Season 1 and 2: 10 stars, Season 3: 8 stars, Season 4 and 5: (weak) 6 stars

Overall a very weak 8. A shame really, because seasons 1-3 were utterly amazing.

Quantico (2015–2018)

Suspension of disbelief times 500...

[3/10 · 5 August 2017]

First of, the positive: I must say that the show managed to keep me guessing as to who the big bad terrorist is till the end. So kudos for the well done mystery part ...

Other than that, I'm sad to say that this is about it when it comes to praise regarding this TV series...

Many of reviewers have said it already, but here we go again:

This show doesn't feel like a serious, thrilling FBI crime show for adults, at all. It rather feels like a show dumbed down for shallow, self-indulgent and, quite frankly, stupid teenagers who'll believe anything without questioning or thinking for themselves. Hello, teenage high-school soap drama! That is the impression I got, at least. Because this TV series requires its audience to suspend disbelief anew with every single episode! And tbh, I can't anymore. It's too much. How many bloody bombs can they blow up? How many times can these supposedly ingenious, capable and talented FBI recruits make stupid & unreasonable decisions? Time and again they surprise by their horrendously idiotic decision-making. FBI finest, you say? Well, luckily I don't live in the US, I say. God. How the hell is anybody supposed to believe that this bunch of idiots managed to get recruited by the FBI? Recruits that were supposedly vetted beforehand, but nevertheless happen to have contacts to or even be terrorists? Everyone of them poses at least in some way a security threat! Or even a big one. And each and every character experiences an abundance of drama, it's not even funny anymore... Yes, of course most TV shows and movies overdo it in regards to drama in order to hold the attention of their audience. Without drama and action one would be bored to hell. The trick is to find the right amount of drama & suspense without overdoing it to a degree at which the plot loses all credibility. For example, how the hell is anybody supposed to believe that, in the event of a major threat, like multiple bombings and hundreds of casualties, the best the US (or any country for that matter) can do is to throw a bunch of half-baked FBI "agents", still wet-behind the ears, fresh out of Quantico with no experience whatsoever at said national security problem?!? Are we supposed to believe, that after some willy- nilly "training" the perfect, smartest best FBI agents are born and, on top of that, immediately get major cases? Are we supposed to believe, that these recruits (or even just the MC Alex) are highly talented and smart, if all the show ever does is confront the audience with their idiotic actions?

And don't get me started on the looks of every single character in that show. Alex, beauty queen done up to the nines including pouty lipstick-red lips, smokey eyes, perfectly styled hair and perfectly filled in eyebrows and fake lashes each and every day -- may that be right after getting up or after a highly-demanding (I assume it's supposed to be demanding at least) physical training. Let me just say: wow. She always looks like she spent 2 hours getting ready, more done-up than me when going out on a date or partying.... While Alex is not alone in that regard, she sure as hell stands out the most (and no, not in a good way). Don't get me wrong, she is a beautiful woman, if you go for that look. But bloody hell, if there ever was a miscast, she's it! She'd be much better suited, let's say, for a YouTube make-up tutorial video, for example. More believable, too. On top of that most grievous (imo) problem, she's overacting most scenes. It's simply too (way too) much.

All characters seem to be an extreme caricature of clichés that are supposed to be a diverse and intelligent group of FBI recruits. The plot is, if at least somewhat engaging in the beginning, a convoluted mess. The jumps between now (Alex trying to clear her name and finding the real terrorist) and then (training at Quantico) is (sometimes) confusing and, more importantly, disruptive. More than once did it kick me right out of the story line. Any semblance of me feeling entertained slowly but surely dwindled away. I couldn't care less about the characters, their well-being or even about the whodunit part of the plot (and that is a first for me!).

At episode 20 of season (with some skipping) 1 I finally must admit defeat. Enough is enough. Good-bye.

_________ ETA: Alright. in the end, I did give the last 2 episodes a go after all, in order to see who's supposed to be this "incredibly smart evil mastermind" is. And I have to say this resolution is rather disappointing due to the villain's flimsy motive (kind of) behind all the terrorist actions... Also, after all this waiting and guessing, it felt a bit... rushed? I don't really know. Overall this show can only be described as an embarrassing disappointment....

Fifty Shades of Grey (2015)

Fremdschämen at its very best!

[2/10 · 27 October 2016]

Boy, boy, boy. I don't know where to begin with this one.

Okay. So, did I expect much? Nope. Because I (kinda) read the 1st book of this glamorous series called "Fifty Shades" by one E.L. James. Morbid curiosity got the better of me... "Kinda" because I was very much unable to finish even the first book. To even get to the 50% mark.

But. I told myself that the movie had to be better. Firstly, because of Jamie Dornan, an actor who crossed my radar way before that whole train wreck of a film (and book). I really liked him. (Still do, although I hope that he won't be branded too much by the whole "Christian Grey" affair.) Secondly, the movie had to be better because a film couldn't possibly contain all these god-awful and painfully cringeworthy ramblings and inner monologues of one Anastasia Steele... those of her "subconscious" or her beloved "inner goddess". That brings me to thirdly (and lastly): because the script could only be an improvement of E.L. James' writing, or so I thought.

Well, to be totally fair, the film actually manages to not be as dreadful as the book it's based on. Kudos for that. But that doesn't mean it was good in any sense of the word. Far from it.

The film (same as the book) is a series of scenes of "Fremdschämen" strung together, to say the least. "The cringeworthy" simply never stops. The extremely cringeworthy dialogues between Christian and Ana. (Oh man, are they ever not?) The cringeworthy way Cristian Grey's stalking behaviour (and behaviour in general) gets romanticised. The cringeworthy (and wrong) portrayal of BDSM and people being into more, let's call it colorful sex. People taking home the message that Christian's general behaviour is okay because "he's a Dom" doesn't make it any better.

It's funny (or not), how Christian always says „That's not something I know", „This is who I am", „That's not how I do it", „You'll like it", and at the very same time, while arguing that he doesn't know any other way, he's trying to impose his lifestyle on Ana. A lifestyle that she knows nothing about, that is obviously very alien to her. And is not at all "the way how she does it" or „who she is". But „she'll like it", it's for her pleasure after all, according to Christian, who, strangely enough, never once considers that Ana won't, in fact, like it. The thing is, Ana is clearly not very keen or enthusiastic about the whole BDSM idea, about playing the role of being submissive (because she is only that, playing a role, or trying to, as opposed to actually being submissive). Of course in the wonderfully world fantasised by one E.L. James, she'll either learn to love it later on (in the sequels). Because of him, Christian (imagine lovey-dovey eyes). Magic d*ck, come quick. Or, Ana will cure poor Christian of his bad, bad deviancy. Because looove. Either way, both are a total bag of utter nonsense, or, you know, cr...p.

Oh, and don't get me started on the "reason" for Christian's deviant preferences. Because clearly, the only possible explanation for this kind of sexual deviance, for straying from the norm and liking BDSM and/or other fetishes has to be, gasp, an abusive childhood. Wow. Way to go, Mrs. James. Really. Chapeau. (No, wait. Are you bloody serious? ....)

The only redeeming quality of the characters in the film is that Ana doesn't come across as the total blubbering, naive and insecure virgin that she is in the book. Emphasis on total.

Also, what I don't get is (some) people being shocked at the degree of nudity in this film. Seriously? This is a film based on erotica, an erotic novel, or an erotic romance book in the very least. And it's (or wants to be) about BDSM – a sex fetish. So (kinky) sex scenes and nudity are to be expected. Come on.

Well, to come to an end here: compared to the source material, this is practically a master piece. The acting is okay, as far as that is even possible considering what the actors have to work with. But compared to other films, I'm sorry to say, this was a disaster. On all counts. Ultimately, even the best actors (and writers) couldn't turn this into a grand film without throwing away the piece of rubbish that the book is and completely rewriting the story from scratch. I guess, you simply can't turn sh!!t to gold... I'm still amazed how they managed to fill two whole hours with barely anything happening.

Coming In (2014)

Gay to straight conversion? Straight for you? Really?

[2/10 · 26 October 2016]

The premise alone could (very well) be perceived as problematic if one looks too closely. Namely, if one wanted, one could take the message from the film that homosexuality isn't part of who a person is, that people actually "can change".

Or, more precisely, it could be assumed that nobody has to actually be homosexual. Because one has to merely find the (one) right person of the opposite sex somewhere out there. Et voilá, cured.

Yes, open minded people who don't give a bloody fu** about a person's sexuality, their religious background or whatever won't actually be, let's call it affected, by the aforementioned "message", but people with certain prejudices, might they be internal, external, big or small, might do so. And that is what I find problematic here.

Sure, the film aims to be a lighthearted, silly, romantic comedy that mustn't be taken too seriously. And it does achieve that. Partly. Maybe even mostly, depending on who you ask..

It's a love story. And in the end, it doesn't matter who you love, who you're with. Be that man or woman, the important thing is to be happy and not to care about other people's opinion. Love conquers all. And isn't that a nice sentiment? I certainly prefer my fiction to be of the happily ever after variety.

So one should just lean back, chill and enjoy the film for what it is, for what it's supposed to be.

And if you can watch it this way and enjoy yourself, great! I really mean that.

I, however, can't do so, not fully at least... Because fact is that homosexuality still is perceived as wrong or unnatural on some level in many countries. Politically, legally and socially there's still prejudice and discrimination to some degree (in most western countries) and to an extreme degree in others. Even in Germany, with anti-discrimination laws in place and everything, homosexuals can still not marry! Sure they can enter into a registered partnership, but that is still miles away from a "real" marriage, legally speaking. (And isn't that discrimination in itself?)

Considering all this, I still think that making a film like this (however lighthearted and silly it is meant to be, even done by a supposedly very gay friendly, gay supportive film team in general) is problematic. Maybe even more so, because the director of the film, Marco Kreuzpaintner, is gay himself.. I really can't understand what he was thinking, making this film. Because fact is heterosexuality and homosexuality are not on the same level (legally, socially etc.), are not considered to be equally okay or normal. Because fact is there are still desperate people trying to convert, to pray the gay away, or are bullied, or forced into such "measures". If that wasn't the case, if there was total equality and no discrimination whatsoever, then sure go ahead. Make that film.

And why the hell not make the lead bisexual? Or, let him discover that he wasn't 100% gay, but bi? This film however very carefully avoids bisexuality (like so very many other films in this and most genres) altogether. Because the protagonist, Tom Herzner, himself says very clearly and colourfully that he is, in fact, very gay. He identifies as gay. Not as bi. Not even a little bit prior to this sudden heterosexual relationship. Why? Maybe because bisexuality and bisexuals are sometimes (or more often than I'd like) perceived as neither here nor there, or as greedy. There seems to be the misconception among some people (heterosexuals and homosexuals alike) that bisexuality equals playing the field, not being able to commit to anyone for good, because there'll always be the question "Is he/she faithful? Is one gender enough?"... Maybe it was explicitly excluded to avoid that very question, to avoid doubts whether this actually is (or can be) a HEA.. Yes, that whole box of issues is neatly sidestepped here -- remember: Tom is not bisexual, after all.

SO, to clarify, I don't negate that this plot could happen in real life. People are not always simply gay or straight. Sexuality can be fluid. The Kinsey-Skala is a thing. Bisexuality is a thing. What I am trying to say is that this film is problematic in a society in which homosexuality is still seen as something "lesser". In which teenagers commit suicide because they're gay, because they can't change however hard they try, because they simply want to be "normal" and feel that they aren't. And such a teenager seeing this film? I really can't (don't want to) imagine the damage this could do!

Another problem I had with the film was that every character is totally clichéd. Over the top so. It's boring to say the least. And has been done like a 100 times before. And sometimes it's even offensive (against women, against homosexuals (& bisexuals), against lower-income people etc.). In my opinion, the film lacks charm and wit, the kind that would have made all the aforementioned clichés and issues less problematic, even funny.

_______________________

ETA: Here a very good ("official") review of "Coming In" that I stumbled across after writing this review and wholeheartedly agree with also. It points out some other very good problems I had with this film as well. If you're interested, just google "Andreas Scholz Coming In Siegessäule", it's the first link. (That review is even in German.^^)

Luke Cage (2016–2018)

Another splendid Netflix Marvel production! But beware: lots of POC characters (#sarkasm)

[8/10 · 2 October 2016]

So, I'm going to side with all those reviewers who liked, enjoyed or even loved this new Marvel superhero TV series.

I actually wasn't going to write a review for this TV series, because I thought my rating would suffice.

But then, I read some of the reviews, and....

You know what? I'm not very proud of being white right now. Seriously. I know, I know, some folks will probably yell something like "Black Propaganda" – or some totally f****ed up sh*.t like this.. Sigh.

I'm sorry, I don't usually curse as much or single out people or reviews, but I literally can't keep quiet about this, right now...

Because. This is just so stupid.

People, like one reviewer, managing to insult gays and people of colour in one sentence. Or others bemoaning the lack of "diversity", since, ya know, only very few characters were white, the majority were POC. Or better yet, people whinging that they did only see black people in the first something minutes and "not a single person of any other race". Like, are they bloody serious?? They watched a whole 20 minutes of I don't know how many hours this series consists of and whinge about there only being black characters. Because, and I paraphrase: America consists of "people of all races" and not just African-Americans?!

Honestly, I'd love to laugh out loud right now if this didn't make me wanna throw up a little bit. Or a lot. I feel stupid even saying this, because this shouldn't have to be said! But here goes:

1. There is like thousands of movies and TV shows of, e.g. American origin, that consist of an all or mainly white cast! So, seeing as America is so diverse with many different races making up its population, where are these people crying for "diversity" then? (And really, there were plenty of "different races" in this series if one cared to watch more than 20 minutes...) And than saying, more or less, "I'm not a racist, but turnabout is fair play"... I'm very sorry, but that is very racist. Like, if you don't understand that, than... well, I don't know. I really hope that people will realise that racism comes in many shapes, and not all of them in the form of flat out hate slurs against other ethnicities. But in the shape of "little, everyday things". Hope dies last, I guess.

2. As I understand it, this whole series plays in Harlem, a major African-American residential, cultural and business center, at least that's what I got from the series and from Wikipedia. So.. you may guess where I'm going with this, right? Right. I guess, considering that little tidbit of information, one might be able to realise that, ah yes, it makes sense that the characters are predominantly POC, ya know? But well, I guess it's like talking to a wall in some cases. Sadly.

_____________________

WELL, I'll stop with my rant here. Sorry people, if you were looking for a simple review without all this nonsense. ;)

Because, this show actually deserves to be rated without going into all this stuff.

I watched this series in more or less one session (hello binge watching^^) -- and that's how good this series was!

The show was totally, absolutely entertaining. Netflix (and Marvel) have produced another hit series, in my opinion. But to be perfectly honest, while I enjoy most comic book film adaption quite a lot, I haven't read any comics in my youth. So, more often than not I go into these things without any knowledge or expectations of the characters or their original storyline.

I can understand, maybe, that some people were a bit disappointed by the lack of a proper, "allmighty villain" who matches or surpasses the heroes strengths in most ways, as seems to be usual for comics... and which was also the case in Jessica Jones or Daredevil, for example.

Here however, the hero is confronted with more than just one bad guy. Although the main villain (or what I perceived to be the main villain in the end) didn't excel in fist fights and physical strength, but in ruthless scheming and plotting and politics, by playing the media like a pro. So, not you're usual comic book villain, I'll give you that. But then again, this villain is a woman, so scheming is much more appropriate for her than the blunt force that men usually seem to prefer in this genre. Well, more than women anyhow. ;) But don't despair, there's plenty of action and fights and blood and guns to be found as well.

So yeah, I was fully engrossed and entertained. Luke Cage, as Jessica Jones is, kind of an anti-hero. Bad past. Treated unfairly by the universe. And still holds on to a heart of gold, a conscience and fights for what's right. So, in short he is a hero who doesn't see himself as a hero.

In my opinion this show was a very well done: a high quality Netflix production with some great acting and a suspenseful plot. I also liked that Claire (from Daredevil and Jessica Jones) played a bigger role in this series, because I really enjoyed her character.

All in all, this series was everything I expected of this Marvel superhero series. Netflix clearly didn't disappoint (me). Maybe, it wasn't as good as Daredevil (especially the 2nd season), but it surely is right up there with Jessica Jones, which I enjoyed immensely as well. (And I actually liked JJ way better after I re-watched the series right before the release of Luke Cage.) I'm really looking forward to the next season!

Preacher (2016–2019)

Awesome, compelling, boring & disappointing in equal measure

[7/10 · 1 August 2016]

I totally loved the hell out of this one the first half of the season. The actors, the pulp fiction like feel of the show, the "fantasy" aspects, the plot, the world building. It's different, the good kind (mostly).

I was, quite honestly, very intrigued and hooked.

But then. Well.

I'm not sure what really happened here, but for some reason the quality of the series, of single episodes, just dropped somehow and with it my excitement for the show slowly (but surely) ebbed away.

The dialogues fell flat, the plot became boring insofar that I wasn't sure what the point of some of the episodes was. A couple of episodes in the 2nd half seemed to hardly contribute anything at all to the overall storyline and simply dragged on and lost their "vision". Don't get me wrong, I really don't need action in every episode, far from it actually. I like slow world-building. But just some episode (parts) seemed to be, I don't know, pointless..?

Moreover, I'm not sure what to make of that ridiculous season finale, especially the church scene... I mean, all that build-up for this??? Sorry. Just. No. Anticlimactic to say the least.

I am more than stumped, really, because this show started out so very promising and then failed to deliver all that it has promised its audience.

Well, the actors are top notch despite everything. I loved Ruth Negga (Tulip). And Joseph Gilgun (Cassidy), I don't need to talk about him, do I? I mean, he single-handedly made the show worth watching in those episode instances when nothing else seemed to be anymore.

So, my overall verdict: ambiguous. I mostly enjoyed it, sometimes loved it ... and felt let down in the end. Will I watch season 2? Yes, definitely. I'm still intrigued where the writers will take Jesse's story.

Hap and Leonard (2016–2018)

Gritty, quirky, thrilling drama with some awesome acting

[8/10 · 11 June 2016]

Hap & Leonard is a gritty, suspenseful show with interesting, 3-dimensional characters portrayed by very talented actors.

This was truly a fun ride. As other reviewers might have already mentioned, the story and the characters are introduced slowly but you get a feel for the plot, the southern atmosphere and the relationships between the characters. The chemistry, friendship and banter between Hap and Leonard is highly entertaining all on its own, even without the suspenseful, dark "turn" of events which takes place later in the plot.

The show combines a southern, serene and at times somewhat glum atmosphere, the story of an amusing, maybe even (at times) unlikely friendship of two guys and my favourite kind of crime comedy -- not lacking gore and violence on top of that. The latter is bloody but overall very fitting, meeting the tone and the general gritty feel of the show.

Overall, this was a very positive surprise of a (fairly unknown--as it seems) show with a great variety of interesting characters and an entertaining, dark-ish plot. I'm so glad that I found this on amazon prime! Totally recommended.

Wayward Pines (2015–2016)

What. Was. That?! or Welcome to Wayward Pines - where plot holes are ignored, no matter what.

[3/10 · 28 May 2016]

Sooooooo.

I guess, I didn't expect this. To be perfectly honest, I admit that I had no idea what to expect when starting to watch this series. Well, what I actually was kind of expecting was a mystery. In the beginning I thought that the MC was in a coma and that this town and the crazy things happening there are the result of his comatose brain's activity.

But soon I realised that I was very wrong. I hoped for many things, but certainly not that holey, stupid thing that some people are referring to as a plot. Because. What?! Are they serious? This is ridiculous and unbelievable on so many levels that I can't even...

Well, many other reviewers already described what's wrong with this show (possibly more coherent than me, too—but it's 3:45 am, I'm very possibly suffering from sleep deprivation and English isn't my first language, so there's that) but I'm going to add my two-cents nevertheless.

This was illogical and irrational, to say the least! And I'm only at episode 6. (But this "twist" caught me unawares and turned everything to, excuse my french, sh!!t, that I had to consult google in order to find out whether this was really, really going where I very much feared it was going to. )

It did.

So, a mutation that changed mankind. Or the "devolution" of the human race to these savage, super-strong aberrations, monsters, that lurk & live like brain-dead, naked beasts in the woods. And they don't only survive by killing big game with their pointy teeth and sharp claws, eating raw flesh—bye-bye fire and cooking, medicine, technology, even houses..—but manage to be at the very top of the food chain and are now the biggest threat to human kind.

Yeah. Human kind is devolving into those things and we are meant to believe that—while they so obviously lost all of human ingenuity and are a step down in the evolution—they are superior to humans? Are responsible for the almost-extinction of men? Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that humans are at the shiny tippytop of evolution (ever), but what I am certain of is that these creatures would definitely not win against human (nuclear) weaponry. But that is only the very start of what's wrong with this series!

We have hibernating human beings that are being woken up thousands (!!) of years in the future (in 4028) to live "happily" in Wayward Pines to ensure the survival of the human race. Unbeknownst to the residents of this lovely small town, of course. Because they are kept in the dark about everything that matters. All they know is that they've been abducted (in the 21st century, which is still the century they're living in as far as they're concerned) and are now kept prisoner in a town in which everybody's forced to put up a happy front and silently obey some stupid rules (let's sum them up as "don't-ask-don't-tell") or be publicly executed.

Instead of telling people the truth about anything they're executed for spray-painting walls! Very logical, especially when every human being and their genes are so very important for ensuring the survival of the human race!

But what is even worse and more unbelievable is the fact that all adults are supposedly too weak to stomach the harsh truth, whereas teenagers and children are not. The so-called adolescent "first generation" is taught about the creatures and everything at school and they're forbidden from repeating anything to their parents. Because adults can't handle it, will kill themselves rather than live in a world in which humans are almost extinct. Teenagers, though, are supposedly resilient, and are equipped to not only handle the truth but to do so on their own while lying to their own parents about it all.

Why some adults (like the teacher or the scientist and his sister who build Wayward Pines and ALL THE OTHER 200ish PEOPLE WHO SECRETLY ENSURE THE WORKS of Wayward Pines) are capable of living with full knowledge of the truth, despite „being of age" without trying to commit (mass)suicide is not explained, though…

It's quite a mystery as well where the lovely residents of Wayward Pines get their supplies like food and electricity etc. from. There's, after all, only so much that 200 behind-the-scenes people living in a secret facility can do without ever venturing outside, or anywhere. Or are we supposed to believe that these handful of people are (stock) farmers, scientists, electricians, and so on,who manage to solely ensure that the unsuspecting people of last-town-on-earth don't lack anything material like food, clothes, houses, toiletries and all the different stuff that they're accustomed to from before?

Or are they pulling all these supplies out of their asses? Or did they "deepfrost" these supplies as well? If so, is no-one concerned with them inevitably running out of these supplies at one point? Wouldn't it be much smarter to have the townspeople learn how to grow crop and so on instead of playing "real-estate agent"?

There are so many glaring plot holes I can't even begin to list them all in this review!

Have only a handful of Americans been deemed worthy enough to ensure the survival of the human race? Genetic diversity, anyone?? Have the writers ever heard of the word gene pool or do they have any idea at all how evolution and mutation work? Did they have biology at all in school? One can only guess. And, as far as I'm concerned, this guess isn't really in their favour, to be honest.

Well, I'm deeply disappointed by this series, which actually started out rather promising. Don't get me wrong, I'm not averse to science fiction in general, quite the opposite actually. But it has to be believable and make sense. It needs to have a solid plot that doesn't immediately collapse at the tiniest scrutiny...

Battle Creek (2015)

Why cancel a bloody promising show?! Why? :(

[9/10 · 3 January 2016]

Just finished binge-watching this series on Netflix and I gotta say that I bloody loved it. I know, i know, cop shows are hardly a new genre and there are a 1000 fish in the sea "like" this.

BUT.

They're not really like this particular buddy-cop show at all. Josh Duhamel and Dean Winters are bloody awesome in their portrayal of these seemingly very different tempered officers of the law. Gotta love this duo: Russ' sometimes ill-tempered behaviour and his somewhat cynical approach at life (while at heart being a secret romantic) and Milt, the do-gooder FBI agent who seems to have some skeletons of his own. Both characters have depth, are totally interesting and. I'm just totally in love with this new series by cbs.

And I was like: Oh man, can't wait for season 2!

Until I had to find out that they already canceled this show again??? WHY? Seriously, people? Why the bloody hell do always -- at least in the last 1-2 years -- the promising, and you know, the awesome new series get canceled?! Totally disappointed right now. Damn.

Sense8 (2015–2018)

Intriguing, well-done new Sci-fi drama. Loving it.

[9/10 · 6 June 2015]

I very rarely write reviews here on IMDb, but after reading some of the other reviews of this amazingly diverse, colourful and new show I actually feel the need to do so.

There have been a few reviewers complaining about "all the gay and/or transsexual people in this series", going as far as claiming this to be "gay propaganda"(!). ... Well, okay. I admit that I am shocked because really?? Yes, there are gay and even one transsexual character in Sense8.. Oh, and they even get to be main characters! Wow. That really must be gay propaganda - because surely no Scifi TV show intended for the mainstream could possibly have normal, every-day gay characters in it -- that aren't even there for the usual comic relief. I mean, of course there are TV shows and films that have plenty of gay characters and plot, and that's apparently OK, because they're mostly intended for a gay audience. And most importantly, they advertise beforehand that the show "is gay". And Sense8? It had the bloody gall to not follow this fine established etiquette. (Boo hoo.)

Seriously. There's plenty of straight sex to be found in your average film/TV show and no one would ever call that "heterosexual and/or anti-gay propaganda". It's simply two (or more) people, in the nude, having, ya know, sex. Nothing new in the world of TV. Considering the fact that there are plenty of gay, bi, trans etc. people out there one might possibly find it strange how most shows or blockbusters have so little glbt lead characters... But no, instead we're confronted with a scandalised outcry because gay sex. And gay people's problems. (Okay, the slippery strap-on dildo wasn't really necessary, I'll give you that. But on the other hand, there're plenty of other TV shows showing similar or even more explicit sex scenes/stuff - and with those being of the straight variety there aren't half as many people complaining about it as here.)

In my (very humble) opinion, Sense8 is a very engaging, well-made and super interesting science fiction drama with a very interesting and varied bunch of characters. And I really mean interesting - there isn't even one character that I can't bond with, don't want to know more about or find interesting here, which on it's own is quite an accomplishment considering that there are 8 main characters who couldn't be more diverse.. Made even more intriguing by all these developing connections between culturally very different people.

The show is not fast-paced, and far from your average sci-fi action show. I get that this show might not for everyone and understand how one might be disappointed and call the series (too) slow - especially if one started watching this show expecting it to be a fast-paced, action-packed SF mystery.

This is, imo, more a drama about very different people who start connecting in the strangest of ways despite all their differences - may it be culture, gender, sexual preference, job (policeman vs. criminal) or social background. And in the first few episodes the show mainly concentrates on exactly that development - introducing each character, their history and the world they live in. (Yes, that includes a bit of "gay plot line" or "cliché"-characters as well - i.e. a parent not accepting their transsexual daughter or a guy being afraid of facing the possible consequences a coming out might entail.)

The so-called "clichés" are unfortunately still a harsh reality for lot's of people - may that be the poor African guy with an HIV-diseased mother, a women working in a business in which there's seemingly no place for a woman or a policeman confronted with a world in which saving a kid might possibly mean saving the very gangbanger who might kill your partner/friend at some point in the future.

Who the hell would wanna watch a show with characters that live totally happy, trouble and drama free lives anyway? Right, no one.

The mystery SF element unravels slowly, yes, but the show picks up and draws you right in with intriguing & very vivid characterisations. I recommend sticking with it, because the show and the 8 MCs really grow on you. :)

____________________________________________________

Short update after having watched season 2:

Chapeaux. Season 2 was every bit as good as I hoped, even better. The show picked up some speed & the plot was gripping af. In short: I bloody loved it! Can't wait for season 3.

Drive (I) (2011)

Boring.

[3/10 · 31 May 2015]

I am sorry to say this, but this movie and me didn't work at all. Don't get me wrong, the acting is superb -- and although I've never understood the hype around Ryan Gosling as a "womaniser" (yep, I've got a number of friends who would faint at his feet) he really knows his stuff.

Some reviewers complain about there not being enough dialogue and/or acting on Gosling's part to call it "acting" in the first place, but I have to disagree. I see where the director/producer was going with Gosling's character -- the mysterious, gentle man of few words who cares deeply, but who can turn into a lethal weapon in an instant if he has to.

I actually like the slow pacing and the sudden turn from calm and quiet to fast paced and violent.. usually. Some of my favourite movies share those qualities.

But here? I gotta say that I was utterly bored throughout the whole film. And believe me I tried. I even gave it a 2nd chance thinking that when I last watched it a year or so ago I simply might not have been in the right mood for this. But sadly no.

Contrary to some reviews here that claim this to have more depth than your average action flick I've got to admit: I don't see it. Sure the "driver's" character has mysteriousness going for him - starting with him having no name - but seriously, that's hardly new. I really can't understand what's supposed to be that original (in this "time and age", so to speak - considering the fact that this is deliberately recreating the style of some 60s-70s movies back in the day...) or crafty about this film. This has all the ingredients of today's average action film, only with fewer words, slower pacing and no explosions. Which isn't a bad thing - quite the opposite actually. I sure can appreciate the one or other explosion or shoot out scene the action genre usually seems to be so fond of, but to be honest most action movies use those scenes way too generously. Most of the time it seems that they want too distract from shallow script/plot more than anything else... And no, I didn't miss those particular action scenes here at all, as those wouldn't have made the plot more interesting or captivating. I can't really point my finger on what exactly made this so painfully boring for me, but my point being that it was.

Well, sorry. This wasn't for me. I've seen better.

Homeland (2011–2020)

Annoying characters and a far-fetched, dragging and dull plot.

[3/10 · 2 September 2014]

I actually started watching this series first when it first came out - and I'm somewhat surprised that "Homeland" survived this many seasons and has such a good rating overall....

I watched the first 10 episodes of season 1 and I gotta say I am far from impressed. Which is to say: I was immensely bored and couldn't bring myself to keep watching.

Because. Well, many reasons.

The plot is not only totally far-fetched (as I'm sure a number of reviewers have mentioned before me), but didn't manage to hold my attention for more than roughly 5 episodes. But I soldiered bravely on for another 5 with the only result being that I. Was. Frustrated. Beyond hell. The plot moves such slowly that even my non-existing plants are growing faster than this. Sure, one just watched an 50 min episode, but essentially NOTHING has happened. How other reviewers can call it a "gripping mystery, thriller, drama" is beyond me, because (as I mentioned before): boring.

And don't get me started on that Carrie FBI person! That character is totally annoying, unbelievable, stupid, pigheaded, obsessive and so, soo much more I can't even begin to explain How Much I Hate Her. She oversteps all boundaries and rules and laws only to point the finger on the bad, bad US- soldier-turned-traitor-terrorist, and in the name of anti-terrorism and patriot act and what-the- hell-not she justifies spying on a whole American family 24/7 and watches even the most private and intimate moments, has no qualms watching them literally f * ck and sh * t (excuse my French) -- all that even unauthorised by the FBI at all (later on). Which sorry, anti-terrorism or not is just WRONG.

And to top it all she then thinks for some unfathomable reason that sleeping with in her eyes prime suspect of all that is bad, turned traitor and terrorist is the way to go.

Yay. Good idea, gurl! Why didn't I think of that before? Why didn't any self-respecting and law- abiding officer of the law think of that before!? F * ck your suspect to confession... (And in this case him supposedly being (or not being) a terrorist takes care of all possible arising problems when it comes to arresting and convicting. Because terrorism. And Iraq. (Gasp!)

Not to mention that after 10 years under excessive torture and captivity most people would break and go crazy, in my eyes at least, can't be held accountable for their actions. But this is a different topic altogether.. I could go on and on with my rant here -- both about "Carrie" and the plot -- but I'm willing to spare you guys and me at this point.

After having said all this, I must also mention that the actors do their jobs quite well. I've always liked Damien Lewis (which is why I started watching this series) and he certainly didn't disappoint. As for Clare Danes (playing "FBI agent Carrie"): I have never seen her in anything else (at least in a major role) before and therefore can't say if her interpretation of Carrie makes it that much worse or whether that character was exactly written and intended like that. (Probably the latter, but you never know.) Good acting, good camera team and all the technical stuff that goes into "movie-making" (you see, I am a pro in this area. Lol.) are about the only good thing the show has going for it. But a big enough budget probably usually leads to quality filming, I imagine. Plot-wise though? Yeah. No, sir. Just. Nope.

Sleepy Hollow (2013–2017)

Gritty New Fantasy Series (?)

[7/10 · 17 September 2013]

After three minutes into the first episode I was thinking "Man, this is going to be right up my alley!"

The first episode was great, and I sure hope that the rest of the series won't disappoint (after all, I've experienced a "high" during the first episodes of a new TV series only to be hugely let down by the rest of it before, e.g. The Following, but that is a different story altogether...)

Anyway, I was literally yearning for a new series to watch within the fantasy genre, preferably a grittier and darker one without going all fairytale on me.. ;)

From what I've seen so far, the acting and the setting are rather good, the plot is (so far, at least) very much to my liking and will hopefully continue to be so.

If you like fantasy, and want something different than the usual werewolf/vampire or even "once upon a time" plot, then I recommend to give this one a try.

ETA (2/9/15): After a few episodes this proofed to be an entertaining enough new TV series, but desperately lacks profound and deep characters and plot. The show is OK and I think I will keep watching, but it certainly isn't overly gripping and intriguing, and can't compare to the movie this is based on!