Tom Ripley is meant to be young and ambitious. He leaves his dark and dreary life to drink in the colourful world of the wealthy. But in this sorrowful reimagining, he is a middle-aged man who looks like a serial killer and shows an utter lack of normal human emotion. He leaves a crummy life in NYC to go to an equally colourless version of Italy (which is usually a rich tapestry of colour). No one would be taken in by this version of Tom who reads as immediately creepy. And unlike the Hollywood movie with Matt Damon and Jude Law, there is no chemistry between the two male leads. So, the motive of Tom feeling misled by Dickie about the nature of their relationship is nonexistent. It just comes off as guy randomly offing another guy who barely tolerates him: a dispassionate crime. And dispassionate is how I would describe the whole show. But somehow for others, the bland acting and backdrops seem to pop. Maybe they think people like me are missing the point. That's all right because I'd counter the emperor has no clothes!
Reviews
5 Reviews
I'm Dying Up Here
(2017–2018)
Every cliché imaginable
8 June 2017
I agree with the other reviewer who suggested that they're overdoing it with the 70s kitsch. It's not really the decor or the clothing that's a problem, though, not even that proverbial plate of coke. It's the bad wigs and the dirty filter every scene is filmed with. The comedy club was probably in fact quite a dark smoky haze, but their is no reason that every scene, including outdoor shots, has to look like archive footage from the 70s. Just like you can shoot a movie set in the 20s or 30s without resorting to filming in black and white - it's too camp. And if you have to use wigs, they have to look like actual hair, not part of a "Real Groovy Hippie" Halloween costume.
Of course, there are the bad jokes, but one can imagine that people who are desperate to come across as funny do in fact tell an endless stream of one liners - clever or stupid - all in the hopes that one will eventually land. We all know folks in everyday life who are like that who are just born clowns - not comedians. But then there's the entire recycled BS that to be funny a comedian has to reveal his or her innermost pain. Comedy tends to be a defence mechanism so it doesn't reveal pain, it hides it. It's actually a shell game, because it often involves telling something that seems deeply personal to distract from the fact that the whole story isn't being told.
And so comedians don't really reveal their deepest darkest secrets, they admit to the surface lies that everyone tells, add a few "shockingly personal" details and then keep the truly damaged parts locked away. But that's the problem with such navel-gazing writing like this show seems to have so far. People slap themselves on the back for making the same tired old observations about human behaviour that have been made thousands of times before as if they've made some incredible breakthrough in self-awareness. Let's hope the writers on this show eventually dig a little deeper and move beyond the plot line of "Punchline" or what Barbara Walters could easily pull out of a comedian in a 10-minute interview.
Now, I'll be honest, there were some lines that were so bad that I threw up in my mouth a little. It's not even because they were so overly sentimental or cliché - it's that I actually feel embarrassed for the actors having to deliver such dialogue. It's a no-win situation for them, because if they treat them like throwaway lines, it only emphasizes the fact that no one would seriously say them in real life. But on the other hand, if they try to be really sincere in their delivery, they'll come across as scenery chewers acting their little hearts out to earnestly spew out dribble. Lose the righteous anger about life being nothing but a serious of hard knocks. Honestly, they should have prefaced many of the lines by stating "I know that everyone says this..." or "You've probably heard this a thousand times before..." Even a sarcastic, "Well, here's a newsflash..." Keep in mind, I've only watched one episode and I'll still probably watch another one just to see if they pull their heads out of their butts or if they keep going with the whole "a comedian's comedramedy" shtick. Because if the show can make itself seem relevant to today rather than like it is someone's hazy walk down memory lane where he or she remembers the drugs getting you so much higher and the love being so much freer than it actually was, there may be some hope. I think that it can only get better - well, really it has to!
Of course, there are the bad jokes, but one can imagine that people who are desperate to come across as funny do in fact tell an endless stream of one liners - clever or stupid - all in the hopes that one will eventually land. We all know folks in everyday life who are like that who are just born clowns - not comedians. But then there's the entire recycled BS that to be funny a comedian has to reveal his or her innermost pain. Comedy tends to be a defence mechanism so it doesn't reveal pain, it hides it. It's actually a shell game, because it often involves telling something that seems deeply personal to distract from the fact that the whole story isn't being told.
And so comedians don't really reveal their deepest darkest secrets, they admit to the surface lies that everyone tells, add a few "shockingly personal" details and then keep the truly damaged parts locked away. But that's the problem with such navel-gazing writing like this show seems to have so far. People slap themselves on the back for making the same tired old observations about human behaviour that have been made thousands of times before as if they've made some incredible breakthrough in self-awareness. Let's hope the writers on this show eventually dig a little deeper and move beyond the plot line of "Punchline" or what Barbara Walters could easily pull out of a comedian in a 10-minute interview.
Now, I'll be honest, there were some lines that were so bad that I threw up in my mouth a little. It's not even because they were so overly sentimental or cliché - it's that I actually feel embarrassed for the actors having to deliver such dialogue. It's a no-win situation for them, because if they treat them like throwaway lines, it only emphasizes the fact that no one would seriously say them in real life. But on the other hand, if they try to be really sincere in their delivery, they'll come across as scenery chewers acting their little hearts out to earnestly spew out dribble. Lose the righteous anger about life being nothing but a serious of hard knocks. Honestly, they should have prefaced many of the lines by stating "I know that everyone says this..." or "You've probably heard this a thousand times before..." Even a sarcastic, "Well, here's a newsflash..." Keep in mind, I've only watched one episode and I'll still probably watch another one just to see if they pull their heads out of their butts or if they keep going with the whole "a comedian's comedramedy" shtick. Because if the show can make itself seem relevant to today rather than like it is someone's hazy walk down memory lane where he or she remembers the drugs getting you so much higher and the love being so much freer than it actually was, there may be some hope. I think that it can only get better - well, really it has to!
Retribution
(2016)
Painfully Overwrought - Difficult To Watch
13 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
It is tempting to suggest that there is a lot of overacting as one character after another steps of to bat and takes his or her best swing at devouring the entire set by chewing up mammoth mouthfuls of scenery. However, it's really an issue created by the writers who seem to have never grown out of that kind of dark teenage angst normally reserved for stories about the dating lives of vampires and werewolves. Almost every single person, whether it be a main character or a minor one, has some deep dark secret struggle. And this allows each one to give some sort of speech filled with clichés and platitudes about how hard life is and expound on whatever existential crisis he or she is faced with. Not one person is "normal" or even remotely likable, but, of course, the solution to the crime is supposed to be so shocking that the writing team probably thought that the audience would at least think the worst of the worst was the guilty party. Unfortunately, the plot device used was so ridiculous that if I had perhaps begun to believe this hot mess would resolve itself in a redeeming manner, I was sorely disappointed. Moreover, they sure dragged things out tying up all the frayed ends that they had created complete with more pontificating about the trials and tribulations of existence. So, if you want melodrama boarding on high camp - lines so predictable you find yourself mouthing them along with the actors - and a story that is as tangled and twisted as it is overworked and overwrought - by all means check this miniseries out.
Maron
(2013–2016)
Decidedly unfunny like Louie, but you'll probably not kill yourself after!
24 June 2014
Get ready not to laugh! Ever wondered how the comedy sausage is made? Here's your chance to see the laughter being mechanically separated from the sad lonely misunderstood life of a comedian! I'll say this much in his defence, Maron is slightly less grating than Louie C.K. when he acts his little heart out. He comes from a place of rage on a consistent basis, so his more than abundant whining tends to lean towards angry old man rant whereas Louie C.K. sounds like a depressed Deputy Dawg crossed with a suicidal Eeyore when he tries to do serious acting. Nevertheless, if Marc would only realize that the 60s ended long ago so he can stop saying "man" every two minutes than that would be totally far out and groovy. Also, could he please never have sex on screen ever again. I know that it's all the rage lately thanks to people, like cutting-edge feminist savant Lena Dunham, for unattractive people to get laid on camera. However, when a dude pulls that BS, it just seems self-indulgent unless the actress involved is equally unappealing and let's face it, working actresses, even if they're "character" actresses, don't tend to look like a constipated old shoe. Anyway, just like Louie, I will continue to watch this show, because I hate myself and I don't deserve even a few minutes of pleasure, let alone a lifetime of happiness. It's truly part of my penance for being such a bad person over what I can only assume are multiple evil incarnations. Besides others keep calling it "art" given that American culture is so devoid of any mastery of dark comedy so many of us North Americans don't know for that genre (hint - people tend to still laugh at it - awkwardly, but still there's humour of the funny variety involved). Still it could be worse... After all, in France, they still think Jerry Lewis is funny when he does his "Ching-Chong Chinaman" impressions and I don't think that it's even in an ironic sense.
New Girl
(2011–2018)
Too Character Driven - No One Is Normal
29 November 2013
First of all, I've never understood the appeal of Zoey beyond the obvious fact that she is quite a beautiful woman. Unfortunately, while that characteristic serves her well in a shampoo commercial in a sitcom she has to speak. I just find that she has this sort of anxious earnest affectation all the time that makes her sound like a female Kermit The Frog. Also, singing is awkward and uncomfortable when a show isn't a musical - I get that she's a "singer" of some sort, but yuck!
So we've got quirky girl covered and it seems that we've also got an irresponsible slacker, a very vain man and a third guy who started out as sort of the straight man to the hilarious hijinks of the others who has now morphed into a clumsy walking disaster. So that's three of the dwarfs to Zoey's Snow White, each one more two dimensional than the next.
Not to worry, because so many episodes are filled with wild over-the-top plots that cannot fail in causing some hilarity to ensue. Also the characters constantly make reference to one another's quirks just in case the rather broad acting of the cast (resulting from some very weak writing replete with loads of predictable gags and dialogue) hasn't hit you over the head enough with their quirkiness.
At least in the latest season they've brought back a character who partially makes up for the decided lack of testosterone in this male-heavy cast. With these two dimensional characters there are not enough moments when the men are strong decisive males to balance out all the times they're snivelling, needy and scared but won't admit it (even the unrepentant manchild occasionally has moments of more adult male behaviour). Granted this new character is an obnoxious caricature of the classic over confident ladies' man and yes, he's secretly insecure and oh so, vulnerable. A lesson we won't be spared from having shoved down our throats over and over again I'm sure.
I guess for me I find that comedies these days lack balance and often come across as clearly written by women for women or by men for men. There's no balance. New Girl seems like yet another offering from the new generation of feminists who want us to have strong female leads (which I can totally dig by the way) who don't necessarily have their lives that well planned out (Apparently women being smart and responsible that's a negative stereotype now?).
I just wish that it didn't require the male roles to be so non-stop goofy or in the case of one guy frankly too flamboyant. I'm a gay man and quite honestly straights doing gay face is so last century. The metrosexual trend ended quite some time ago and although a lot of folks found it quite funny and entertaining, it's 2013 so lets come up with some fresh ideas.
So we've got quirky girl covered and it seems that we've also got an irresponsible slacker, a very vain man and a third guy who started out as sort of the straight man to the hilarious hijinks of the others who has now morphed into a clumsy walking disaster. So that's three of the dwarfs to Zoey's Snow White, each one more two dimensional than the next.
Not to worry, because so many episodes are filled with wild over-the-top plots that cannot fail in causing some hilarity to ensue. Also the characters constantly make reference to one another's quirks just in case the rather broad acting of the cast (resulting from some very weak writing replete with loads of predictable gags and dialogue) hasn't hit you over the head enough with their quirkiness.
At least in the latest season they've brought back a character who partially makes up for the decided lack of testosterone in this male-heavy cast. With these two dimensional characters there are not enough moments when the men are strong decisive males to balance out all the times they're snivelling, needy and scared but won't admit it (even the unrepentant manchild occasionally has moments of more adult male behaviour). Granted this new character is an obnoxious caricature of the classic over confident ladies' man and yes, he's secretly insecure and oh so, vulnerable. A lesson we won't be spared from having shoved down our throats over and over again I'm sure.
I guess for me I find that comedies these days lack balance and often come across as clearly written by women for women or by men for men. There's no balance. New Girl seems like yet another offering from the new generation of feminists who want us to have strong female leads (which I can totally dig by the way) who don't necessarily have their lives that well planned out (Apparently women being smart and responsible that's a negative stereotype now?).
I just wish that it didn't require the male roles to be so non-stop goofy or in the case of one guy frankly too flamboyant. I'm a gay man and quite honestly straights doing gay face is so last century. The metrosexual trend ended quite some time ago and although a lot of folks found it quite funny and entertaining, it's 2013 so lets come up with some fresh ideas.
Tell Your Friends