Change Your Image
rhearob
Reviews
Looking (2014)
Unremarkable and Not Memorable
I was initially excited to see this show. I even set my DVR for it. I was excited by the promised "realness" of the series.
First, the format. 30 minutes is WAY too short an episode length for a story of this pace. These are characters you need time to get to know and develop an interest in. The first episode should have been a double episode if you are going to keep it at 30 minutes.
Second - this isn't a comedy. At its best it is a dramedy. Is angst-edy a word? If not this show should trademark it. Thats what this show really seems to be, an executive summary of gay angst. I didn't expect it to be Big Bang Theory or Will & Grace. I didn't expect it to be boring and barely make me crack a smile either.
Jonathon Groff oozes a boyish charm off the screen almost effortlessly. It makes you want to know more about his character, like a fleeting eye contact with someone you find interesting. Unfortunaltely at the end of the episode I didn't even remember his characters name until I came here.
Dom I found interesting by reference. He reminded me very much of Michael Tolliver from Tales of the City. He seemed like where Michael may have been if I didn't have all of those other Tales of the City books to already complete Michaels story arc. That was really the only reason at the end of the episode that I remembered Dom.
The other one - Agustin? He's just parsley to the other two characters Protein and Side dish so far. You could take him completely away from the story and it wouldn't matter one bit. Oh yeah, he had some milquetoast threesome and the most sex of anyone on the show. So what?
To follow on a previous posters comments and compare to QaF. At the end of the first episode of that show, I had some sort of investment in the characters - love them or hate them. I wanted to see what happens next to them. Right now with Looking, not so much.
With only 7 episodes left if there's not some major developments, I see a one season run. Right now this is not "must see TV". Its not a show that I will care whether or not the DVR is set for. Its good background noise if I am working on something else. I was hoping for more.
Watchmen (2009)
Billed as Unfilmable - The result is Unwatchable
This film will undoubtedly be a paen to the Watchmen fans out there. If you are not already steeped in the mythology of the Watchmen universe, don't waste your time. This movie is a collection of short films for each of the main characters. These independent films are loosely strung together by a silly plot that is revealed with a sophomoric plot twist in the last 30 minutes.
Unless you're a hardcore Watchmen fan, or have three hours to waste avoid this movie like a venereal disease. I stick it through this movie hoping that there would be some point where it became bearable. By the last 30 minutes I was jealous of the people who got up and walked out in the first hour.
If you are looking for any bit of action, there is scant little of it in this film. The action stops and starts intermittent. When there is action it tends to be violent and cruel. Its like the imaginings of a nascent sociopath.
The dramatic scenes don't offer much more to hope for. The dialog is overwrought, over thought, and overacted. Mostly its just BORING. Even the sex scenes are BORING. The blind groping of arthritic octogenarians would be more inviting.
Bad movie, too long, and not worthy of the actors in it.
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Good Movie but lacking the books thrills
I read and found the DaVinci Code an entertaining, fast paced read. Like most I prefer Angels and Demons to the DaVinci code. Given that all of Brown's books are the same story with different details any of them could have made a good movie. DaVinci with its massive sales and popularity was the natural choice.
This movie, as directed by Ron Howard, has tense action sequences and phenomenal craft shown in the making of the movie. My favorite sequence was the last in the movie where Tom Hanks' Robert Langdon finally breaks the last code and realizes where the sarcophagus of Mary Magdalene has found its resting place. Throughout the rest of the film the establishing shots for the location scenes are spectacular.
The failing of this movie though is basically in its scripting and character development. Robert Langdon in this movie is not the Robert Langdon of the novel. Langdon, in the novel, is the reluctant adventurer who is again dropped into a Catholic conspiracy and must use all of his knowledge of theology and symbolism to escape. In the novel Langdon is quick witted, a bit whimsical, and decisive.
The movies Langdon comes off as more than a bit slow. He is a college professor who relies on cheap photographic tricks to get his point across in lecture. Except for a little bit of quick work with anagrams in the Louvre sequence, he has to be practically hit over the head everyplace else. I think that this, more than anything, is what makes the movie seem like a less intellectual thriller than the book. Revelations come more by accident than through insight.
Sir Ian McKellan, though, plays Leigh Teabing to perfection. This character is everything he was in the novel brought to life on the screen. The wit, quiet brilliance, and fanaticism that McKellan layers into the character makes for the only real tension in the film as you slowly realize that Teabing is in fact driving everything.
The other characters and their relationships are downplayed quite a bit more. You get no real sense of the depth of the devotion between Aringarosa and Silas. The audience also develops no real affection for Sophie until her final scene. During the rest of the movie the audience could care less if she lives or dies, unless you have read the book and know who she really is.
As for Sophies revelation at the end, it was well played if different from the book. It comes across a bit darker than in the book. I do wish they had left her brother in the scene though.
All in all, a decent movie. If you have seen National Treasure, you have seen this movie too. A good job by Ron Howard and the cast and crew. An excellent job by McKellan.
Its decent entertainment but not the classic thriller it could have been.
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
More Correctly Titled: X-Men:The Ruin That Ratner Made
After seeing this farce of an X-Men movie one can only hope that there is a second version that is more competently made. I also understand why studio executives had to trumpet the comments of a studio cafeteria waitress in Entertainment Weekly to extol its virtues. I only hope the poor girl gets to keep her job.
The special effects in the movie are impressive as are the fight scenes. Technically the movie is well made. That is unfortunately the best praise that it can be given. The movie lacks any of Bryan Singers subtlety or artistry.
The characters are mere shadows of themselves in the first two movies. Storm, who we see becoming fiercely devoted to Mutant Rights in X2 is merely cranky in this movie. This Storm in a X-Man on the rag. Magneto is saved from caricature only by the sheer talent of Sir Ian McKellan. It seems that is his role in film this summer.
As for the key emotional points in the film, they are given almost no attention. The deaths of Scott Summers, Professor Xavier, and Jean Grey (again) are almost only incidental to the film. The emotional an mental struggles that the Dark Phoenix character are going through are not explored at all outside of a cliché "Kill Me to Save Me" plea. The ethical struggles of Professor Xavier as he strains to contain Phoenix are completely unexplored except for a tame outburst at Wolverine.
As for the new characters, the Archangel character has less screen time than James Marsden's crotch. Ben Foster is nothing more than an Abercrombie-esquire marketing campaign. The same is true of Colossus, Iceman, Pyro, and Rogue - except we do see more of them than Cyclops' inseam. I will give Kelsey Grammar credit for doing an excellent job of breathing life into Beast. As with Magneto it couldn't have happened without an extremely talented character actor.
I saw the movie once and will wait until HBO to watch it again. I know the temptation to run out and see it is huge, If i could give one word of advice it would be WAIT. There is no reason to suffer through Holiday crowds for this waste of a great franchise.
Date Movie (2006)
Truly Dreadful
I have generally been a fan of Alyson Hannigan since My Stepmother is an Alien. Given that she was starring in this movie, along with Fred Willard, Jennifer Coolidge, Eddie Griffin I thought this would be sure fire. To put it simply this is the worst movie I have ever seen.
The movie is a series of low level skits loosely tied together by a plot. Imagine if you will, sitting through a 90 minute series skits rejected by SNL or Mad TV. The scenes are only loosely associated with a plot.
There is the obligiatory T&A and toilet humor you would expect in a spoof. None of it well done or even original. To call it sophomoric would be elevating it by an order of magnitude.
As for the writing, if this was written by two of the 6 writers of Scary movie as the tag line suggests, we mus assume the other 4 writers had all of the talent. There are porn movies that are better written. I mean the cheap ones they sell in quick marts.
After seeing this movie I felt like suing the studio to get my money back. Short of that I'll have to use a power drill to get the memory of it out of my head. Thats how bad this movie is.