Change Your Image
twistysnacks-50953
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Stars on Mars (2023)
It's not actually Mars, people
I sat here reading some of these reviews out loud to my husband while we laughed hysterically. Some of you need to get a grip. He teaches astronomy and we both know perfectly well that nothing about this "simulation" is realistic. Of course it isn't. They're in the middle of an Australian desert - Fox couldn't afford to send them to Mars, sorry to let you down.
It's a reality show. If you don't love reality shows, you won't love this. It's not for space nerds, or sci-fi fans. It's for reality show fans who also think space is neat. No, there aren't huge celebrities on this show. How often do you see reality shows with A-list celebrities? But the ones they chose can still be entertaining to watch on a personal level. Lance/Neil/Louie Armstrong is pretty funny, for example, especially his relationship with the other athletes on the show. I don't love reality TV personalities, but many of these people are naturally entertaining.
I don't love reality shows. However this one is more entertaining than usual, can be pretty funny, and made us laugh out loud several times. It's watchable, not bingeable. Still, it doesn't deserve the hate it's getting over dumb reasons.
Interview with the Vampire (2022)
Anne Rice Approved
Before I get into any details, I want to say that I'm annoyed - but not at all surprised - to find that this show is being review-bombed just like a lot of other new shows. Check the demographic breakdown on the ratings to find out what type of person is this incredibly insecure about seeing LGBT and PoC represented on screen.
For all those claiming "This isn't Anne Rice's Interview"... Anne Rice is, in fact, an executive producer on this show. She's able to push the envelope further than they could have when they made the movie in the 90s, and even further than the book written in the 70s. Any fan of vampire (and other fantasy monster) fiction could tell you that she began the trend of somewhat homoerotic, sexy vampires. I'm betting that it was her decision to make the homoerotic undertones between LeStat and Louis a lot more overt. Remember, she famously objected to Tom Cruise, partially because he was a macho action star who she feared wouldn't have "the acting chops" to play LeStat.
The TV series is able to go into details that the movie couldn't. We see a lot more of Louis' relationship with his brother, and how that relationship and his Catholicism influence his later conversion to a vampire. His relationship with LeStat has always been one of resentment and control; the show just makes the sexual aspect of it more prominent. (If you're uncomfortable with queer men, contemporary vampire fiction isn't right for you.) His race has been changed from a white slave owner to a black "businessman", but it seems obvious to me that the show runners wanted to avoid the 21st century minefield of making a hero of a slave owner. Nothing is lost with this change.
LeStat has always been controlling and probably a bit arrogant. He flaunts his wealth and uses it to entice Louis to his side. He uses sexuality as another tool, something that he controls, rather than something that controls him. He's still beautiful, still mesmerizing, still someone that men look up to and women want. He only seems to be interested in Louis, however - partially because of Louis' self-professed lack of faith and his powerful belief that Louis isn't living his true self. It seems like LeStat seems himself in Louis.
The dialogue does get a little florid sometimes (there's a bit of over-the-top lofty speech, same as the movie) but it wasn't enough to make the show unpleasant to watch. The production value is high and the story flowed pretty well. There are a few startling gory scenes as well that came off a little campy, but again, not enough to ruin the show. Since it's already been renewed for a second season, I'm hoping they can go into more detail on future stories. I'm interested to see where this goes.
Under the Banner of Heaven (2022)
Lazy writing depending on "othering" Mormons.
As a former Mormon, now atheist, I came into this show expecting that it would be a fair and honest look at the LDS Church and, of course, the murders. I know a lot of current members are very unhappy with the depiction of sacred rituals for entertainment value, but I'm admittedly a bit curious about that part, as most of those rituals are actually gone now.
I was really disappointed at how the show has gone so far. It's heavily reliant on expositional dialogue that makes absolutely no sense in context, and it relies on stereotypes. A man is detained for the murder of his wife and toddler, and for some reason he takes this as an opportunity to give the history of the church and his family? And the whole time, he looks as evil and weird as possible. He can't remember his family's phone numbers or addresses for some reason, and he never denies killing them even though he's being accused repeatedly. Nothing about it feels real.
Meanwhile the detective is played like a caricature of Mormons. Somehow religious enough to need "evening prayer" every single day (which nobody does, btw), to have his daughters wearing fundamentalist dresses all day, to only being able to say "evil!" at the crime scene... but then by the end of the episode he's questioning his own religion. Oh, please. Doesn't matter if he's Mormon, Catholic, or atheist. Nobody changes their deeply-held religious beliefs on a dime like that. It's just lazy writing.
This show is depending on you thinking of Mormons as weirdos with a strange culture that you can't possibly understand until you hear about Joseph Smith being a conman. These murders were enough of a spectacle without putting the religion on trial. Did they consult any actual Mormons for this show, or did they just rely on rumors? The Book of Mormon Musical was more accurate and had more developed characters.