Reviews

9 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
La source (2013– )
4/10
Good idea, average script, bad execution
20 September 2013
This show should be an example for all young aspiring TV executive, you can seriously feel the life sucked out of it by network decisions.

So we get an old fashion espionage story, where the babysitter/student/environmentalist gets approached by a government agency in order to get information on her boss who works for a company that might be dumping industrial waist illegally resulting in the death of children in Africa. Of course the babysitter is reluctant to get involved but ends up being the center of the story.

So as you can see it's nothing new, but it can make a show interesting, characters can work with the gray areas, morals, conflicts... except for the fact that the script is written for morons. Right at the beginning you can see that the whole series aims to be comprehensible by everyone resulting in a story written by a 12 year old. You get believable characters but easily manipulated, over the top reactions, with a predictable end game and overall weak plots.

The cast is below average except for the main character, but again they might have nothing to work with so... The budget is quite good for French Television (more than 1 million € / episode) so there's really no excuse.

For the viewer it's impossible to get invested, the story is too predictable, there's no finesse to the plot to make it interesting and because it's so predictable it feels so slow. You can really imagine what could have been but due to poor decisions by network executives, we're stuck with something not worth watching.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
One of the best spoof I've come across
13 September 2012
I must say I was not convinced at first when I read the pitch, not sure what to expect really and I will admit after seeing the pilot, I wasn't sure of what I'd seen. But there it was a great spoof, as simple as that.

Forget you typical buffoon / idiot that you feel sorry for, none of that here. Using the plot device that the "hero" is in fact the villain, you get embarked on a dark comedy where everything he says or does can be "excused" and accepted as the wrong doing of a criminal sociopath. To emphasis the comic effect, his partner is quite the opposite, but never limited to simply be "the" counterpart. This gives us great jokes and we avoid the usual idiotic stuff that is now common in the genre. For that full credit to the writer, Alan Spencer, the jokes are well constructed and don't feel imposed or forced on us.

The cast is great and really committed, with the exception of Neil Napier's character in the pilot. Don't know if it was the actor or the director's fault but he was all over the place.

Why not 10 out of 10 ? First, there's the German accent, if you do it for comic purposes, go easy on it. The same could be said for the French accent, but since that character is playing a double role it can be interpreted as device to dissociate her two persona. The other problem was the over usage of a plan where the camera is not horizontal, don't know if it was for style purposes but the faded colors and the dark comic aesthetic were enough in my opinion.
18 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Petty Blue (2010 TV Movie)
8/10
A dynasty of NASCAR drivers
4 October 2010
This story is so interesting that you won't even mind they're talking about NASCAR (personaly I don't have any interest in that sport). As long as you like motor sports you can't help but admire what the Petty Family has accomplished.

This documentary takes you for long ride, starting at the dawn of stock car racing till now with each generations of the petty family being a part of it. Along with the story there's always anecdotes and fun trivia to keep it fresh and down to earth. The family and friends, who were involved share their experience and what they were going through. The overall feeling you get is dedication and passion, even if Richard Petty was blessed with an incredible talent, you still can imagine yourself in his shoes and feel somehow the emotions.

The crew and narrator did a good job, there's pace and you feel connected. The only default is sometime the time-line and the people involved is unclear but it's really a small detail. There's also historic footage which has been restored and many background details which will help neophytes.

I like it, I hope you give it a try even if you're not a NASCAR fan.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stock Shock (2009 Video)
4/10
There's a way to make documentaries...
29 August 2010
This documentary is about a company named "Sirius Satellite Radio" and some of there share holders, where it should have been about short selling, naked short selling and failures to deliver and use the company as a prime example. Those kind of stock trades are probably the most important subject for the first half of the century (at least in economics), but this documentary miss the target on so many levels.

A (good) documentary should start either with a question or statement, then from that there's a process where it explains where and when it starts, how does it evolves and what are the perspectives... Along the way you need to illustrate with examples, interviews, compare situations, describe the main players involved, ...

This documentary starts with interviews which makes you wonder for 30 minutes what's the point. After sometimes you'll even think you're watching an ad for Sirius Satellite Radio's stock. Hopefully it gets better, you're finally explained what the subject is, the "how" and the "who". Sadly it doesn't last and you're stuck again with interviews after interviews. Sometimes it's so confusing with the "who's who" that they have to put under the name of the person speaking what is opinion is... It sums up how bad it is.

In the end, you get the point but you haven't learned anything specific, it barely scratch the top layer of the problem.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Déjà vu all over again...
17 July 2010
The only thing I can compare this movie to, is one of those TV shows from the 90's, with slightly better actors I must admit. You probably know one, there's this boy who's not sure about commitment and this girl who wants to start a family, throw a couple of inside jokes and stay on a conventional path. The actors manage to do a average job with what they've got (which is nothing almost) and you get one or two jokes that actually are funny, but it's not enough. Some say it's realistic, I think it's conventional, it's too smooth and lacks depth.

That's it, you got your movie. After 30 minutes, you kind of wish something's going to happen but no. Not worth the time or a dime.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
This story needs a push...
31 December 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know if had too much expectations but the idea is so great, I can't believe that's all they could come up with...

It's like the story was never fully exploited, you get average jokes, a story that doesn't really need the premise "nobody can tell a lie except the main character", you kind of wait for a climax but you soon realize that's it... It's really a "boy meets girl" movie and you really expect more, at least we should expect more.

The story never leaves 3 points of focus : the looks, religion and love. Between gaps, you get your joke or funny situation about the thing that should have stayed the focus, the lying thing. I don't know why they also keep staying on a well known path like "the boy always gets the girl" or "there's more than looks"... Because of all those things the second half of the movie is so predictable and you feel like there's so many topics left out of it (i.e.: there's so little on the consequences of lying ).

My conclusion is that the main idea was buried under layers and layers of useless or common themes, it lacks of twists and turns. The script needed more work but sadly that's all we get...
16 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Nice but...
28 December 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I'll start by saying I liked that movie... It's a basic action / thriller movie where you don't need to think really about what you're seeing, you kind of tag along for the ride, I enjoyed it, others might not depends on what you're excepting.

The sad part is that you kind of wonder how does everything add up right after the end which is so poor... Even if you're not an expert on demolition, spook stuff and so on, you can't avoid the part where you ask yourself " is that the best the characters can do ? " Let's take a look at the obvious first: - how does one buy even through a offshore company property next to a prison without anybody linking the company, the guy who owns the company and the transaction, even if it's offshore if you buy something in the US, the company name will appear at one point. When you're a suspect of murder, still committing some, everything about you and your know associates is looked up. Still it takes them for ever to link the two.

  • nobody noticed the drilling, well as we can see there must have been a lot of construction material, dirt and movement even if we consider 10 years the period of time, in such a sensitive place it does make any sense. And don't think it's worth talking of the cell's inspection...


  • after the threat is made against all members of the D.A.'s office, everybody leaves in his or her own car... The judge was already dead using her own cell phone. So even after they swept everyone's car, you wonder who's the moron in charge of security. And during the rest of the movie, everybody still uses his or her own laptop, cell phone, ...


  • the public enemy n°1 can travel freely and enter the city hall wearing a mustache and a cap, while the city is under a lock down. The security guard is unaware of the maintenance guy's replacement but still let's him through without checking with the company.


  • of course we don't know how does he gets access to the judge's phone, the cars in a prison parking lot or elsewhere if he planted the bombs before...


  • there's a hunt down for a suspect, a police car is stolen for several hours, the cop can't communicate with his central but nobody cares to check for it... ( police cars are jacked with some GPS device you can't remove ) Well to me that kind of stuff is obvious, if you're trying to convince us that the bad guy is really good at what he does, at least don't make the good guys look as if they were amateurs.


I might add that napalm, C4 and a remote machine gun / rocket launcher is the obvious stuff for someone who's supposed to be a brain for spooks and government's killers.

So even if the action and thrill is still good, there lot's of thinks that don't add up in the story...
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Yello ? Not you typical movie ? Are you kidding ?
16 December 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Well it's not a stupid teen movie that's true. But come on, people are saying this is a good movie, there's a few steps between good and bad.

When you're telling a story (even for teens) and there's a higher message, you don't have to explain every single part of it, stick with what you want to tell not what you mean. People can figure out the topics by themselves.

Another important point about a good movie (with a "higher message") is the following: either you're telling something that most people won't agree with and through the characters they'll change their minds or the topics are really common and there's the context which makes it interesting. Here the topics are really common (even if their important: teen pregnancy, authority, conformity, education,...) and the context is high school, not really something exciting or uncommon.

I think in this case mixing social drama and comedy kind of under minds the real story, don't get me wrong some of the jokes are funny but don't always fit in...
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
90210 (2008–2013)
2/10
Was I the only one to think something's wrong ?
3 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Well like someone said (Can't remember who) "If everything is normal it will not last"...

So OK this family moves to this fancy Hollywood neighborhood but I didn't see something go wrong. Well we can understand they're not immediately into it but it would be unusual otherwise... I don't see anything really mean and threatening to their life styles (mean characters don't count, you can just take that away by avoiding them unless there's something in the story that makes it impossible). So nothing to look forward to...

Some shows avoid that in the early episodes by taking something out of the blue and give you a little spoiler on what might happen but again not the case here.

Are they counting on the reputation of the previous one ? That would be stupid with a lot of similar things on air right now...

PS: I'm sorry English isn't my native language so be my guess to correct if something isn't clear.
34 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed