Reviews

I don't condone murder but I don't feel for the victim in this case. He was a cad. He tells his pregnant wife he's leaving her for another woman. He tells her she can support the baby and that he won't be able to provide much money; despite being a police chief. I'm guessing he couldn't provide much money because he was spending it all on his girlfriend.

She never should have murdered him but taken him for all the money he had in child support. Probably his girlfriend would have left him; him not having money to spend on her. He would have also had to pay alimony.

The problem with this show is that the husband is portrayed as a victim.

I like Diane Keaton. She is one of my favorite actresses but the movie is one of the most contrived watches I've ever seen. It isn't logical and worse yet it puts a person down if they don't want a child in their life. The movie insults your intelligence.

I have to include spoilers to give examples.

1. Someone cannot just give you a baby like that. It would have to go through child services and i believe you would have to be checked out before you could become a foster person.

2. Humor is predictable baby humor that you would expect and to make it work a smart business woman has to all of a sudden become the three stooges. She can't figure out how to diaper a baby or feed it. If she was from another planet then it might have some believably.

3. Despite being a smart business woman she buys a farm without checking it out over the phone. Most states require home inspections unless bought as is. No one in their right mind would buy a home like that; let alone a smart business woman.

4. She produces massive amounts of apple sauce yet her kitchen is spotless; no dirty dishes in sight when she's cooking. Barrels of apples are picked in one day.

I get that they are trying to show that she can start her own business and make it work on her terms but to accomplish what she did in the movie would take more work than what she did in the firm.

If you like Diane Keaton and don't care about the quality of the movie then this is the movie for you.

Spoiler:

I was very disappointed in Hitchcock because it was very easy to prove the lady was lying about being hypnotized. It was given away at the beginning of the episode. The psychiatrist had said that the subject would only be able to feel his touch and hear her voice. He told her that they were both alone while under hypnosis. She would not be aware of any other people in the room. How would she know the stab-bee was there if she thought it was just her and the psychiatrist? Also if the spirit thought she was in 1819 how would she know about the pruning shears on the table or where the stab-bee was? I was fully expecting the DA to reveal a lot of things but no real gotchas like in his other episodes.

I started out liking Charlie's Angels but this episode is morally wrong. Apparently if the angels think that when someone steals something from you for a noble cause and you hire them to recover it, they help the thief steal it if it's for a moral cause. Chris falls in love with the head thief and even though he tries to kill her she stays with him at the end of the episode because he couldn't kill her because he loves her. If it was a normal person he would have killed him or her but that's Okay with Chris. Worthless episode and condones stealing money from people and also staying with a batterer. I'm assuming trying to kill you is battering.

What's really bad is that Charles Townsend agency is hire to find stolen art. When the thief is caught, he agrees to return stolen art to owner for 1 million dollars. The owner of the art switches suitcases giving the thief and empty suitcase so the thief gets nothing and Chris secretly switches it back for her boyfriend. Their is nothing crooked or bad about the owner. The angels then wave to Chris and her new beau (Bert Convy) riding off into the sunset and commend her for her actions. The angels themselves have pulled more cons and worse to get money back in some cases having people beaten up. I Would write a part 3 to this episode entitled Charlie Townsend gets sued and three angels get put in jail for fraud. Bear in mind that the Angels were hired to get the art back. The thief deserved nothing but jail but was never put in jail.

The show is a nice fantasy reminiscence. I grew up in the 60's when being an airline stewardess was considered glamorous. All girls wanted to be stewardesses.

The plots, however, are light, non-original simple worn out plots from past years designed to keep you tuned in to the next episode. This is Love Jet instead of Love boat. Since the series is set in 1961, the same old plots about woman's lib, equal rights will be re-explored again.

you can predict sweeps plots. (Hijack1,Hijack2.....);(Engine blowout1, engine blowout2 .....); passengers get food poisoning; passenger has contagious disease; etc.

The pilots are way too young for their roles, especially for a new type jet's maiden voyage.

Pilots in the 60's and 70's were mostly retired air force jet pilots. They were ruggedly handsome in their 40's and 50's. These pilots in the series look like they're straight out of a college fraternity.

This show is nice if you like to reminisce.