GrayAreaDVM Reviews

My So-Called Life (1994–1995)

Too Close to Real. So good, uncomfortable to watch...

[10/10 · 26 April 2011]

...but it was too hard to watch the accurate portrayal. This show was on back when we still trusted our Government. I watched this series with my wife. We knew each other very well. We've been around, traveled, are both well read, both of us have advanced degrees. She has a Master's Degree in History and I got a Bachelor's Degree in Economics, a Doctor's Degree in Veterinary Medicine and a Master's Degree in Experimental Psychology (Animal Behavior). We've raised four great kids that married well, exceeding our hopes. We thought we had done well and were very comfortable with our methods and results. We were amazed at how uncomfortable this series made us feel. The others, who watched with us, were of various ages, and also all felt queasy and ill-at-ease within their own spheres, age groups and lifestyles. Why? The entire production was done in a way that would not allow us to lie to ourselves about anything. All the naiveness, selfishness and mistaken approaches that each member of Angela's family either demonstrated or narrated, letting us hear what they were thinking, all of the squirming that was elicited from us by the scenarios presented, all made the show very raw and real. The astonishingly honest interpretations presented of life and its unavoidable [...], required of us all self-revelations that had heretofore been quietly buried. The near-misses and potentially huge mistakes that we didn't do, still, those haunted us, seeing the precarious nature of the many variables existing around us all as we go/went blindly through much of life's dangerous waters. Many proactive opportunities were not taken by all of us due to fear of the unknown. That omission of action, which occurred in many cases, is as gnawing as the chances we did take that were scary. Each age group's nausea, those of every and any stage of development through life, was brought out and presented to us, having all of the subjects covered, in doing so, touched some aspect of what each of us should have, could have and/or would have done, or not. No cell phones... made a difference in many aspects. The first time I remember there being a gay kid as a regular member of the cast of a TV show was portrayed on this show without hesitation, as just another member of the group. I am sure, though have not heard, I just feel it, that the advertisers had a hard time with that and is partly why the plug was pulled. If, in fact, that made a difference, how stupid were those executives! The teenage drinking and the unbridled passion unflinchingly shown when the young people made out for hours at a time was all a bit much for the Execs and the conservative overseers of the production. It made them as uncomfortable as it did us, though all well-presented and was what happened to all of us. What really happened, as Angela pointed out when speaking of the yearbook's idealized portrayals, was the upsetting book of the year's activities chronicled in this show's every episode explored more and newer ways anyone and everyone could have and did screw up. This show was not the idealized version to life, as the yearbook was to the/that particular year, idealized in the book but not in the show. Actual events if put in the yearbook, unvarnished, would portray, would lead to a very upsetting book, as Angela pointed out. The show gave us the real version of the year. This is a true classic show that was w-a-a-a-y ahead of its time and ended up being too much to handle, too hard to watch, too difficult to be starkly realized, all the things that actually happened that way, that knowledge being avoided by, and for, those living in their fake, idealized yearbook-type memory-of-their lives, a condition which took a lot of self-deception to create in their/our minds as if that pleasant history had been the one that happened. For that year, any year, what should go in the yearbook was what was in the show, so, of course, could not actually happen.

Waitress (2007)

Men are not all misogynistic

[1/10 · 15 January 2008]

Have you ever noticed how, if a review praises a movie, any movie, the, "helpful", votes pile up? If a review is critical in any way, forget your percentages. It will be, "3 helpful out of 1209 total", especially if you dare go against a popular trend, one that should have died long ago, that of hating men. This was one of the most enabling movies ever made. Sure, if a wife finds herself married to that brute, she should do whatever it takes to get out of the marriage. The Doctor was, however, just as abusive, dismissive, selfish and manipulative, not helping her, but in a different way, being maybe worse, since appearing to be what she wanted in a man. The harm in this movie rests in the fact that, in general, everyone feels, at one time or another, picked on, under-appreciated and taken advantage of by others. If a woman is sensitized , and looking for sources, other than herself, sensitized to look for it in signs in her husband, then he takes the brunt of the hate which is in most cases conjured up in the minds of everyone, occasionally, man or women. The net result of the mother and daughter walking off alone, being perfectly happy to be without a man, now that, my friends, is misleading and completely detrimental to those women who might otherwise try to work things out with their real-life husbands. Not with husbands like he was in the movie, but with the average husband who only occasionally is a jerk and, I might add, not too many more times than the average wife is to her husband, in real life. Man-hating movies get a pass by the general public. During the feminist movement, men were, "put in their place," regularly and some of that actually needed to occur. It has gone too far, past being equal, rebounding now to hating men and leading many women to trying to live without them, a really, really stupid outcome of the entire feminist movement. You would think there were no worthy men out there, if you listen to these movies, (and another of my favorite worst movies called, "This Boy's Life.") Very few men are misogynists. Most men are well worth living with. Women are NOT better off without them altogether. What The Waitress does is take a case, where dumping the jerk IS more than appropriate, and causes lingering anticipatory angst in a woman's mind, seeing similar things in the men she lives around, stretching now to find them, when, in fact, those things looked for so hard are not even close to really being part of what the men around those women will do or are being, in degree nor goal, even being capable of mimicking. Women and men, both, tend to blame the wrong person, the easy one to blame, the man, in this movie, when it is many times their own sadness they cannot deal with. Are women really this helpless in general? These kinds of victim movies are an indictment of the powerlessness of women, a lack of power that most men do not see or perceive. Most men would never come close to treating their wife in that manner, yet he might just inordinately get his head bit off if he even approaches what might look like the impending doom of emerging expected bad behavior, as was truly seen by the husband in the movie. "Running away." as she said many times, will be too often a result for many women after seeing that movie, when that is the stupidest thing they could do, not warranted and not beneficial, thinking life is better without men altogether. The three girls as waitresses were three of the biggest losers imaginable. You are telling me that fact was entirely the fault of the men around them? The only acceptable boyfriend was the sister-like wimp in which one of them saw little enough of a threat that he was OK! That's the kind of a man women want? The only "acceptable" man, now, can't be one? Some reviewers I read thought this was just a great comedy. Folks, if you have a clue, if you discern anything about anything, you must know there is not a single funny thing in or about this movie.

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

Portrays bad, better. A child-murder with style is "good"?

[1/10 · 17 May 2007]

What a well made horrible little movie. Is everyone zeroing in on the technology, seeing how amazing it is, yet not even considering the content? If one considers content, this is a technically well made movie about an awful nightmare and a set of childhood traumas leading to severe psychological degeneration with only negative effects. We are already aware of the pain and suffering war causes. We are already well-worn out and often reminded about the trauma Europe has suffered, as any country has in any war and also about terrible people doing terrible things to those who cannot defend themselves. Is feeding us this stuff in a different, more visually advanced way doing anything but making us lose respect for those who foist it on us, one more time? It is devolving the subject into a trivialization of the real, historical horrors that DID happen, but doing it better. How is that a good movie? Is all that is required to qualify as a good movie about a child traumatized into psychotic withdrawal, then murdered, that it is done with style? It is a good movie because the visual style of the presentation of the events leading up to a child's psychotic withdrawal from reality and then just plain being murdered in front of our eyes is so well done in an imaginative and new way? NOT! What kind of people would ever like this movie? It worries me.

The Inheritance (1997 TV Movie)

Unforgettable, for those of us who are in love with love itself.

[10/10 · 27 November 2006]

I saw this first in 1997 on the Kraft something-something (CBS). The very first part looked so refreshing that I threw in a tape and have absolutely been gone on it ever since. I had read about the newly discovered manuscript and book publication at an earlier time. I bought several copies of the book and gave them out as gifts to friends and relatives. Everyone who has watched it with me has loved it. My brother, in from Knoxville once, and after watching the usual popular movies at that time, was, up to that point fairly unimpressed. I decided to put it in. He watched and even though he had not even commented on any of the others, he looked at me after the end credits then lights on, and said, "That was a good one." You have to know my understated Economics Professor-of-a brother to know how funny that comment was and how it pleased me. The filmed presentation and its screenplay are more flowing, integrated and related to a self-contained start-to-finish story than is the actual book. The scene where Edith is with her ailing uncle, her innocence, her lack of guile or ability to deceive, contrive or lie, is unbelievably attractive in character and essence. Edith is so transparently good and kind and always helping others without taking credit this story is about the rewards of that goodness and that sweetness. There are hints from the beginning that are noticed after the fact, about where the relationships lie and why certain people do what they do and act the way they do. How could the entire story be so simple and yet enchanting enough to cause me to think of it all the time. When Edith first meets Percy by the horse, spilling her apples and yet touching his scratched face with her handkerchief I loved the way the directors let us know the magic was on. When Percy comes in the house for the first time and meets her Edith cannot hide her bright-eyed, innocent crush and that she has met him already. Her facial expressions are uniquely well done as she hides behind the curtain. You can see that she is jealous already, even though she knows he is not there for her nor could there be a crossing of social barriers, yet he was hers, she thought. How many movies are there where one kiss, just one kiss is so dramatic? With all the thrills, spills and chills in modern movies, needed to even keep an audience awake, is this not a gem for those of us who are just plain in love with love?

Every Time We Say Goodbye (1986)

One of the best movies you've never seen

[10/10 · 27 November 2006]

This is a gem that was obviously made on a low budget, nothing spent on anything, no well-known actors, at the time, yet the story is of such a special nature with a magic of inexplicable charm that I can say it is one of my favorite little movies of all time. You don't know me. My reviews hold no unusual weight. My opinions garner no undue attention, but if you trust anything I ever say then get this one and to any age group, personality type, or of any type of relationship to you, show it to them. They will smile the rest of the day at the thought of the movie and that you were so perceptive in offering it to them. Few people can agree on the type of movie they like. This one is universally accepted as a little known pearl of great value.

Firefly (2002–2003)

Who could be so short sighted as to stop this adventure?

[10/10 · 29 July 2006]

The characters, the actors within those characters and the entire premise was truly unique and entertaining. Did the money-men hear that? Entertaining? Isn't that what you are looking for? All of the primaries were perfect for their place and the place they were was where I wanted to be. I just can't believe it didn't have a ten year run! The movie did finalize a few things but I just wanted more. The adventures could have inspired endless episodes of imaginative mind-benders, even along with the earthiness of the principle actors always bringing things into focus, in tune with some reality that calmed the basic plots into even tempered realistically portrayed probably possible events.

Everwood (2002–2006)

The first year was above the rest

[10/10 · 29 July 2006]

Everwood was a very good series in the first year. Like most series that start out in high school it didn't have a planned attack after the magic years were over. The writers actually thought that the secondary actors and their tertiary stories could carry the show. Never in a million years should they have spent so much time telling those boring, dead air, side issue, space filler stories instead of concentrating on Amy and her one true love. You go back and watch again. During the times when others lives played out all we could do was tap out fingers on the armchair waiting for the real love story to continue. There must have been some serious actor contract problems during the series after the first year. The social issues that were covered became a little too preachy and unrealistically blatant to fit in to what the show was about. The writers had to stretch to get some of their pet subjects "outed ". I am OK with that if that style flows with the stream they started but… The last hour of the first year might just be the most well done, most dramatic hour of TV ever done. I was sad to see it deteriorate into directionless sideshows after that. The second year was a disaster. The rest was soooo boring. The end of the series was long before the last episode.

The final hour of the first season might just be the best episode of TV ever done.

I didn't read all the customer reviews, but none I read refer to the accurate shooting location. None of it has anything to do with Colorado. The Pilot was shot in Calgary, I guess, but everyone knew that humans don't belong there so they were forced to find a new location for the show's sets, atmosphere and surroundings. Those of us who have lived for long periods of time in both Colorado and Utah, where the series is filmed, can very objectively say that Utah ACTUALLY has everything Colorado THINKS it has.