....and hence this show. But I absolutely adore Jane Fonda and that's the only reason I can tolerate it. And thanks to Comcast X1 platform, I can look at cast & crew to see whether or not she's in an episode. I usually hope she isn't so I can skip to the next. But in her brief occasional appearances she always rises above the material and somehow makes it her own; I don't see any other cast member able to do this, least of all veterans like Waterston & Daniels. If the show was still in current production, even for the love of Jane, I wouldn't be able to continue watching. But knowing there is an end in sight makes it somewhat more tolerable. I find the dialogue, if you can even call it that, pretentious and overbearingly self-conscious. My first exposure to Sorkin was Sports Night many years ago. I enjoyed the show at the time because I was actually charmed by the snappy, witty banter, and being younger, didn't know any better. Now i find it really tiresome. I remember when everyone was raving about The West Wing, so I tried watching an episode. I hated it immediately without even realizing it was Sorkin. So glad this show went off.
Reviews
9 Reviews
Only watching for Jane
25 November 2018
I admire Jane Fonda's work so much that I am willing to endure watching Aaron Sorkin's double-speak drivelfest to see her. I've tried to watch all the episodes she's in however this one pushed me to the limit of my patience. As a result I had to mute the sound in order to keep my sanity. Almost every character on this show is repulsive but that's entirely Sorkin's fault. Somehow Jane is able to rise above it.
Hollywood Canteen
(1944)
Such a cornfest!
7 June 2018
Not sure what's worse, the corny, adolescent dialogue or the horribly bad grammar. Were servicemen really that illiterate back then? I watched this after seeing Stage Door Canteen, and although this had more star power, I think the "story" (and I use that term very loosely) was much worse. This cornfest is only redeemed by Bette Davis, John Garfield and the subtly hilarious Jack Benny. To be watched only as a timepiece of a bygone era; don't expect to be entertained.
The Wolf of Wall Street
(2013)
A well done film about extremely degenerate people
14 March 2018
While I admire Leo's ability to become a character completely different from the ones he usually plays, I found his and all the others completely abhorrent. And I'm sure that's how they were intended, however I reached the point where I almost couldn't watch anymore. I only continued because I knew they would eventually be caught. The whole movie reminded me too much of Goodfellas, especially Leo in the Ray Liotta role. I saw that performance once; I'd rather not see it again. The only characters I liked were Kyle Chandler's & Rob Reiner's. I usually like Jonah Hill but here his voice sounded just like Adam Sandler's and that's never a good thing. And while my language can be "colorful," the constant use of the F-word really offended me.
Forrest Gump
(1994)
Oscar Sweeps? You gotta be kidding!
27 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Despite never having an urge to see this film, I decided to because I wanted to complete the AFI's Top 100 List of Films. It's film that you almost can't ignore; from the media saturation of the "Life is like a box of chocolates" analogy to the endless proliferation of Bubba Gump chain restaurants.
The story itself is not really that bad, but the way it plays out is just a pile-up of clichés. From the initial story framing flashback told to a procession of people waiting at the same bus stop as this self-absorbed bumpkin to the endless barrage of pop tunes of the day. The constant music was more excessive than a Scorsese film, a different song every 30 seconds. However, unlike Scorsese, the songs jumped around time periods despite the chronological order of events. One minute it's a song from '69, the next it's from '65.
Then there were the Presidents: They expect us to believe that this man could actually meet three successive presidents. They did a great job with inserting Forrest into the scenes with them, but WHY did they do such a crummy job with the voice-overs? For most, these are iconic voices and for a film with this kind of budget, it's inexcusable that they couldn't do a better job. Let's not even get into what he says and does to these presidents!
The ping-pong marathon and the endless running scenes were really hard to stomach. I get that they were elements of the story but again, they were taken to a ridiculous level. With all that running, I thought he should have been in better shape. Maybe Hanks learned a lesson from this for Cast Away, (a MUCH better film, btw) when he took a break in filming in order to lose all that weight to reflect his time on the island. The Midnight Cowboy routine in the streets of NYC was truly cringe-worthy. And even the stupidest person in the world would not jump off an unmanned boat, or would he? Later, when it crashes into the dock, it was not funny, just pathetic. Then there was his clueless and endless devotion to Jenny. When she wanted to jump to her death, I was cheering for her just so she could get out of this God awful movie.
Believe it or not, I am not a hard-hearted person by any means. I love a movie that can choke me up or even give me a good cry, and sometimes it doesn't take much. But I felt nothing like that here. The only part of this film I liked was the ALWAYS wonderful Sally Field. I might have felt sad in her final scene but her brave face and acceptance of her fate transformed the scene into something victorious. And I'm a recent convert to Tom Hanks who has done some incredible work in other films, but IMO, his Oscars for this and Philadelphia were wasted.
The story itself is not really that bad, but the way it plays out is just a pile-up of clichés. From the initial story framing flashback told to a procession of people waiting at the same bus stop as this self-absorbed bumpkin to the endless barrage of pop tunes of the day. The constant music was more excessive than a Scorsese film, a different song every 30 seconds. However, unlike Scorsese, the songs jumped around time periods despite the chronological order of events. One minute it's a song from '69, the next it's from '65.
Then there were the Presidents: They expect us to believe that this man could actually meet three successive presidents. They did a great job with inserting Forrest into the scenes with them, but WHY did they do such a crummy job with the voice-overs? For most, these are iconic voices and for a film with this kind of budget, it's inexcusable that they couldn't do a better job. Let's not even get into what he says and does to these presidents!
The ping-pong marathon and the endless running scenes were really hard to stomach. I get that they were elements of the story but again, they were taken to a ridiculous level. With all that running, I thought he should have been in better shape. Maybe Hanks learned a lesson from this for Cast Away, (a MUCH better film, btw) when he took a break in filming in order to lose all that weight to reflect his time on the island. The Midnight Cowboy routine in the streets of NYC was truly cringe-worthy. And even the stupidest person in the world would not jump off an unmanned boat, or would he? Later, when it crashes into the dock, it was not funny, just pathetic. Then there was his clueless and endless devotion to Jenny. When she wanted to jump to her death, I was cheering for her just so she could get out of this God awful movie.
Believe it or not, I am not a hard-hearted person by any means. I love a movie that can choke me up or even give me a good cry, and sometimes it doesn't take much. But I felt nothing like that here. The only part of this film I liked was the ALWAYS wonderful Sally Field. I might have felt sad in her final scene but her brave face and acceptance of her fate transformed the scene into something victorious. And I'm a recent convert to Tom Hanks who has done some incredible work in other films, but IMO, his Oscars for this and Philadelphia were wasted.
Shooter
(2016–2018)
Goodbye, Shooter!
16 August 2017
Sorry, but I have to bail on this series. I began watching Season 1 on-demand months after its original airing. I was hooked immediately and bummed out that only the first 3 episodes were available to watch for free. The rest required purchase. So I kept checking my local public library and when it was released on DVD, I binge- watched the rest of the season, just prior to the premier of Season 2. Every episode of Season 1 was different, yet totally compelling and building on events of the previous one.
Not so with Season 2! I've been recording it and I notice the episodes accumulating on my DVR without the same eagerness on my part to watch them. I got as far as Ep 3 and just decided to pull the plug. It simply wasn't holding my interest, I was seeing too many plot holes and stupid moves by recurring "good characters" who should know better, and the use of flashbacks was just too excessive. In fact, I think Ep 2 was ENTIRELY flashback. I've even wondered if the flashbacks was material from Season 1 they were using to cut down on production costs. I have no problem with flashbacks if they're well done (i.e., Godfather II) but these are not well placed nor or in any way distinguishable from the action in the present, except for occasional place names and dates. At times it isn't even immediately obvious that IT IS a flashback, especially when a new flashback sequence begins following a commercial break. I find myself rewinding to before the break to remember what happened previously.
This is just my own opinion and I certainly respect the opinion of others who are enjoying the new season.
Not so with Season 2! I've been recording it and I notice the episodes accumulating on my DVR without the same eagerness on my part to watch them. I got as far as Ep 3 and just decided to pull the plug. It simply wasn't holding my interest, I was seeing too many plot holes and stupid moves by recurring "good characters" who should know better, and the use of flashbacks was just too excessive. In fact, I think Ep 2 was ENTIRELY flashback. I've even wondered if the flashbacks was material from Season 1 they were using to cut down on production costs. I have no problem with flashbacks if they're well done (i.e., Godfather II) but these are not well placed nor or in any way distinguishable from the action in the present, except for occasional place names and dates. At times it isn't even immediately obvious that IT IS a flashback, especially when a new flashback sequence begins following a commercial break. I find myself rewinding to before the break to remember what happened previously.
This is just my own opinion and I certainly respect the opinion of others who are enjoying the new season.
Journey Into Fear
(1943)
This may not have been directed by Welles.....
14 December 2015
....but his signature is all over it. Yes, I know he wrote and produced but I've seen enough of his films to know his trademarks, like the unwitting American who has stumbled into international intrigue with bumbling results (Cotten is perfectly cast here), the ridiculous laughter of the captain and his "boom-booms," and the many quirky supporting players. There's much more Welles going on here than simply the writer and supporting role.
Despite the film's short length, it never felt rushed and I was not aware of any missing scenes that many have alluded to. However, we can only hope that one day an expanded edition might be released. This is a very entertaining film even in shortened form.
Despite the film's short length, it never felt rushed and I was not aware of any missing scenes that many have alluded to. However, we can only hope that one day an expanded edition might be released. This is a very entertaining film even in shortened form.
Bent
(1997)
Felt nothing for the main characters
1 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this in two stages: first half, late at night; second half the following evening. I love historical stories set in Europe during WWII. I was intrigued by the first part, even though it was quite disturbing, however, the second part between the two principles, the real heart of the story, just left me completely cold. I cared nothing for either of them. I don't even know what to say about Max, but if I did, there wouldn't be much good in it. Horst was just downright annoying and nag. I found their verbal sexual interaction boring and pretentious; I was sorry it was repeated later in the film. The action was so staid in this ridiculous situation they were in, that I was relieved when one of them was killed. Maybe you're supposed to feel that way. I don't doubt that such situations really happened, senseless as the Nazis were, but I just don't think it made for interesting story telling. Honestly, the only character I felt anything for was Rudy; I was sorry he died so early on. Just my opinion.
Six by Sondheim
(2013 TV Movie)
You might call it "Sondheim by Sondheim"....
19 December 2013
...except that title has already been used. This was an intimate look at Stephen Sondheim's life as told by Stephen Sondheim and told within the context of SIX of his songs, as selected by him: 1 "Something's Coming" (West Side Story) 2 "Opening Doors" (Merrily We Roll Along) 3 "Send in the Clowns" (A Little Night Music) 4 "I'm Still Here" (Follies) 5 "Being Alive" (Company) 6 "Sunday" (Sunday in the Park With George).
There are other songs and shows featured in this film as well, such as "Gypsy" and "Sweeney Todd," but the main focus is the six above. He tells of us that in his early life he was somewhat adopted by the family of Oscar Hammerstein II following the break-up of his parents' marriage. Eventually Hammerstein would become his mentor. Although he began as a lyricist, the genesis of "Something's Coming," clearly show that it is HE who is the driving force behind the song. And there is also quite generous footage of the some of the shows he was a part of either as lyricist or composer. And once you see this show, I guarantee you will not listen to the songs in which he was soley the lyricist the same way again. I really have a much stronger appreciation of just how important his contribution is to the songs in "Gypsy" and "West Side Story." I have been a big fan of his for many years, but this well-crafted film gave me even more credence as to why I love him.
There are other songs and shows featured in this film as well, such as "Gypsy" and "Sweeney Todd," but the main focus is the six above. He tells of us that in his early life he was somewhat adopted by the family of Oscar Hammerstein II following the break-up of his parents' marriage. Eventually Hammerstein would become his mentor. Although he began as a lyricist, the genesis of "Something's Coming," clearly show that it is HE who is the driving force behind the song. And there is also quite generous footage of the some of the shows he was a part of either as lyricist or composer. And once you see this show, I guarantee you will not listen to the songs in which he was soley the lyricist the same way again. I really have a much stronger appreciation of just how important his contribution is to the songs in "Gypsy" and "West Side Story." I have been a big fan of his for many years, but this well-crafted film gave me even more credence as to why I love him.
Tell Your Friends