kevrhon-1 Reviews

Law & Order: Organized Crime (2021– )

Nothing New, But Done So Well

[8/10 · 2 June 2021]

I haven't watched any series in the L&O franchise in years, but wanted to give Law and Order: Organized Crime a try. I'm coming in kind of blind. I have no idea how Stabler's and Benson's relationship evolved, and don't know anything about why Stabler left. I didn't even watch the SVU lead in episode. After two episodes I wasn't hooked, but it showed promise.

Christopher Meloni is an amazing actor, but I've never really cared for the character of Elliot Stabler. Dylan McDermott is very strong cast against type as a bad guy - a mob boss.

I like that this first mini-season is focusing on a single case. But unless they have really pulled the wool over my eyes the outcome is pretty predictable. The show seems to resort to a lot of common archetypes and tropes from other organized crime dramas. The bad guy's updated approach to the family business is a fresh coat of paint, but I'm not seeing enough original ideas so far to get me excited. I kept remembering "Wise Guy", a much stronger series that focused on organized crime.

It was really just the performances that kept me watching. But it turned out that was enough.

Two more episodes in and I found Meloni's performance riveting and compelling. I'm hooked. He convincingly portrays a man who is suffering from PTSD after the death of his wife in a manner that is frustrating and heart-wrenching. It's an admirably nuanced performance. This is not a tough guy that we've seen before. Not a Bruce Willis every man in over his head, not a Clint Eastwood or Stallone superman who is always in control. This is a guy that visibly wears the burden of the trauma that he suffered. It weighs on him but not in some overwrought over the top emotional breakdown. This is a guy who's hurting and who conveys his pain visibly. He knows he's in trouble but he's conflicted. He wants help but he doesn't know how to accept it even when it's offered. It's an Emmy-worthy performance. If he doesn't at least get a nomination it would be a shame.

Motherless Brooklyn (2019)

Ripped-ish from Today's Headlines?

[7/10 · 1 November 2019]

It's a sold movie. Entertaining. A little ham-handed in spots, a little transparent. Norton's tourette's came off too much early on as an affectation and was distracting. A few things were transparently telegraphed and I figured them out early on. Not a lot of twists, but a few surprises. Nothing that threw me out of my seat.

The biggest surprise was how much Alec Baldwin's character reminded me of the character that he's famous for portraying on SNL. I don't know if Edward Norton had those parallels in mind when he wrote the screenplay, or if the source novel was based on current events, but it sure seemed heavily allegorical. (I've learned that he's based on an actual historical figure, just not *that* one. The similarities must have more to do with how business gets done in NY.)

I paid $6 to see it before noon at an AMC theater. I probably wouldn't have been as forgiving if I'd paid full price for an evening show.

Blood & Treasure (2019–2022)

Not Nearly as Good as Its Influences

[5/10 · 17 June 2019]

I just watched the first two episodes of Blood and Treasure. I knew it was going to be the small screen equivalent of a popcorn movie, but got my hopes up with the opening. The leads were both unknown to me, but it features Alicia Coppola, John Larroquette, and Oded Fehr in supporting roles.

Unfortunately, like Whiskey Cavalier it's a little underwhelming. The two leads are basically the same two characters as that other TV series, but with even less personality. (Actually, I'm a bit fond of TV's Scott Foley.) The male lead, Matt Barr, is a little too "Richie Cunningham" to be credible in the role.

I'm really not that enamored of the conceit of the "top agent who's a naive, bumbling, straight-arrow boy scout" paired with the uber-capable woman who constantly shows him up. It's an extension of every married couple on every TV sitcom since Home Improvement.

This isn't intended to be a cerebral workout. But it falls far short of such influences as National Treasure, Sahara, DaVinci Code, and of course Indiana Jones, in part because the miscast Matt Barr is no Harrison Ford or Matthew McConaughey. Not even Nicholas Cage.

I'll continue to watch for a few episodes, but I'm not hopeful.

Designated Survivor: #makehistory (2019) Season 3, Episode 4

Different, Better in Some Ways, Not in Others

[7/10 · 15 June 2019]

I'm four episodes into the new, third season of Designated Survivor running on Netflix. They've taken advantage of the fact that they're on a streaming service instead of a broadcast network to pepper the dialogue with the occasional "naughty" word as though the show runners are snickering 12-year-old boys. It only stands out because of two seasons on ABC that didn't rely on such adult affectations to tell compelling stories.

Beyond that, they don't seem to know what to do with Maggie Q's character now that the original conceit of the show has played out. They solved the mystery and caught the bad guy. She really doesn't have a purpose anymore, so they've manufactured one. It too seems forced. It's like they've smashed together two separate, different, series with little in common. It's disconcerting.

The political intrigue falls short of the gold standard set by Aaron Sorkin In The West Wing. Like that earlier series DS is very idealistic and shows us an administration that's too much rooted in fantasy. It's a sharp contrast to our current reality. Maybe that's the point.

But it does seem to be finding its footing. It's getting stronger. Kirkman is struggling with political expedience versus adhering to his principles. That moral ambiguity is giving it a little bit more of a West Wing flavor but also setting it apart. It's becoming a little less idealistic and a little less ham-handed, a little less preachy, while still delivering some strong messages and commentary on current issues. As another reviewer pointed out the 10-episode limit is also making for a tighter season.

I'm going to watch and probably enjoy all 10 episodes. But at this point I think I'll be okay if it reaches a reasonable conclusion by the end of this season and doesn't find a reason to continue.

Proven Innocent (2019)

This Got My Attention

[7/10 · 27 February 2019]

Of the 3 new series I've watched in the last few days, this got my attention. Solid cast, tight script with a lot of moving parts, and a wealth of material to explore in future installments. I'm anxious to check out the next few episodes to see if they can sustain the same level of interest.

Whiskey Cavalier: Pilot (2019) Season 1, Episode 1

Just Okay

[4/10 · 27 February 2019]

Eh. The premiere episode of Whiskey Cavalier was just okay. The concept isn't that interesting and the two leads have no real chemistry. The characters, including the supporting cast, don't really shine or aren't particularly memorable. There's nothing compelling about this. I wouldn't even call it good popcorn fare. It's little more than a time filler. It's something you watch if there's nothing else on. I like Scott Foley, and I see that he's a producer. He just needs to find a better project or better script or something. I can't quite put my finger on it but there's just nothing that about Whiskey Cavalier that makes me want to watch a second episode. I didn't hate it, but there's so many other things I'd rather watch.

Lost in Space: Impact (2018) Season 1, Episode 1

Well, I Don't Hate It

[5/10 · 27 May 2018]

There's a lot wrong with the first episode. Things that are off-putting. It's hokey in the same way the original series in the 60s was compared to Star Trek. The science is sketchy, the family dynamic is melodramatic, the story is okay but not well told. But I'll give it another episode and we'll see.

Hot Tub Time Machine 2 (2015)

Seriously, literally, the worst major release I've ever seen

[2/10 · 21 February 2015]

Seriously, literally, the worst major release I've ever seen. I almost walked out. I never walk out.

I saw the first one on cable and thought it was entertaining enough. It was simple, but funny and with heart. I can't even describe the sequel. If you've seen the trailer, you've seen most of the funniest bits. And much of what you see is tacked on at the end during the credits.

You'd think it's about a series of adventures where they hop back and forth through time trying to fix things or improve their lot in life or something. It's nothing like that. It's all about trying to solve a mystery that threatens the life of one of the main characters. But, you know, "funny." The plot is mostly stitched together with juvenile off-color jokes. And not the good kind. Mostly references to male anatomy. Reading a page of posts here on the IMDb message boards is funnier than HTTM2.

During the first 10 minutes, about half a dozen people at the screening I attended DID walk out. I stayed only because I'd driven over an hour to see it and paid for a full admission plus concessions. I was by God going to stay to the end. It was a very fidgety 90 minutes. I gave it a "2" here at IMDb, only because there were a couple of pretty good laughs.

Getaway (I) (2013)

I Don't Understand Why this Has Been So Poorly Received

[7/10 · 2 September 2013]

I don't normally take the time to write reviews as I don't feel I have much to add to everyone else's take. But Getaway has been so poorly received, unjustifiably so in my opinion, that I thought I'd weigh in.

This is a popcorn movie. Nothing more. I understood that going in. It's not high art. It doesn't revolutionize movie-making, and is not even the high point of the genre. But it's entertaining, and that's all I ask of a movie. Give me some popcorn and a Coke, and dim the lights, let me forget about the world for a couple hours, and I'm happy.

The two leads are very good in my opinion. Ethan Hawke is a very capable actor, and he brought a depth to his character that I didn't expect. He expressed concern without being overly dramatic or gnashing his teeth or chewing up the scenery, and conveyed his character's limitations without appearing dumb. Selena Gomez was bright, and had the expected attitude of someone her character's age without being precocious or annoying.

Most of the plot was admittedly easy to figure out early on, but the movie still provided plenty of excitement in how it got there. There were some aspects of the story that were dismissed without explaining a lot of detail, but it didn't rely on otherwise smart people doing dumb things to make it all work, and I appreciated that as well.

I've read criticisms by others concerning the "shaky-cam" technique during the chase scenes. I didn't find that to be a problem in the least. It was much less annoying or even apparent than in movies like Transformers. I found everything was easy to follow and served the story well - I didn't think any style choices got in the way. And there was one street-level point of view sequence that I thought was especially well done - presumably a single take - that gave me a real rush.

Overall, I enjoyed Getaway, but that may be in part because I went in with low expectations due to its opening weekend box office and some negative reviews. With stiff competition this summer there are certainly better choices for your entertainment dollar. I don't know if I'd even consider this in the top ten or twenty films this year. But for cheap ticket at a matinée or second-run theater, or later as a rental it's an entertaining diversion.

Premium Rush (2012)

Recommended Only for Joseph Gordon-Levitt's Biggest Fans

[5/10 · 26 August 2012]

Premium Rush is a flawed film made watchable mostly by the performance of Joseph Gordon-Levitt. He's become one of those actors I'd watch in almost anything.

He plays a bicycle messenger called Wilee (as in "Coyote") who's dedicated to the idea that he's a better rider on a fixed-gear bicycle without brakes than everyone else is with multiple gears. "Brakes can get you killed," is his philosophy. He's pursued by the movie's bad guy, as well as an NYPD bike patrolman, when he picks up an envelope for delivery.

The story uses an on-screen clock to depict flashbacks, which seems needless and annoying. It also employs a visualization of "what-if" scenarios to illustrate Gordon-Levitt's choices as he rides through traffic, similar to something artist and writer Francis Manapul used in an early issue of the New 52 relaunch of The Flash comic, and Guy Ritchie used in the boxing scene in Sherlock Holmes. And it interrupts the narrative a number of times to show an animated map of Manhattan with the route Wilee is about to take to his destination, à la Cash Cab. I found all of these conventions distracting in their obtrusiveness.

Where the wheels really came off for me was when the movie relied on one of the lamest and most annoying tropes in film: the "I don't have time to explain, just do it" dodge that is essential for the plot not to grind to a halt. Wilee, at a critical moment, argues with someone about why he can't give them some important information that might save their life and thwart the bad guy. The argument takes far longer than just blurting out the salient fact. It was at that point that I sort of checked out.

It's all a bit predictable, although I will admit that the way the story is constructed, at least initially, provided some engaging mystery and forestalled the answers to some basic questions like, "Who is this guy?" and "What's really going on." About midway through the film those questions are answered, and it becomes just another chase film.

Bike messengers racing their bikes through New York traffic featured prominently in Quicksilver with Kevin Bacon about 25 years ago. It was done better here, especially with some of the stunts Wilee is able to perform using his bike and his almost park our riding style. But neither film provides the sort of adrenaline rush it ought to.

I only paid $4 for a before-noon admission, so I don't feel ripped off. It was a reasonably entertaining ninety minutes, that really felt like a bit more than that. That's part of the reason I gave it a 5 out of 10. I wouldn't really recommend it.