This is the awful view from the demented mind of a 40 year old woman of what "disgusting" 14 year old boys think. It's not.
Reviews
10 Reviews
Chad
(2021–2024)
I didn't expect a lot, but I guess I hoped for more...
11 April 2021
So, TBS has been pumping this thing for months. And honestly, my first thoughts were that this kid was going to be a trans-gender character. Welll.. I don't know what the plans are for "Chad", but that would be much more interesting than the attempt by a 30ish actress to enter the world of a nerdy 14 year old boy. It only comes off as mean and angry. I might watch an episode or two, but this is mostly annoying.
Fighting with My Family
(2019)
A "Rocky" for women and wrestling
27 February 2020
I'm not a feminist (but not anti-feminism) nor a wrestling fan (but not entirely anti-wrestling). But this film is everything for both those that Rocky was for masculinity and boxing. And much more. Paige is a heroine for everyone, female or male, who dreams of breaking stereotypes... Or more importantly, simply ignoring stereotypes to pursue their dreams. And while I don't follow wrestling, I do admire the training and skill Paige and her family undergo to peruse their dreams.
Bravo to Stephan Merchant, The Rock, Paige, and the Knight family (apologies if that's not their real name) for a wonderful, honest, inspiring and heartmelting story.
Bravo to Stephan Merchant, The Rock, Paige, and the Knight family (apologies if that's not their real name) for a wonderful, honest, inspiring and heartmelting story.
Perfect Harmony
(2019–2020)
A perfect prelude
29 September 2019
If there were one criticism I might raise against the premier of this show, it might be that it was, wonderfully, too complete. The pilot episode presented a story that could have been stretched into a two hour movie. In most TV treatments, it would have been a full first season. Here, it has been folded into a beautiful opening prelude to what will hopefully unfold into a great take on the traditional (often trite) fish-out-of-water tale. Yes, some of the characters are, initially, a bit shallow and standard. I have hope this will develop with the story. But for a sitcom pilot, I found it amazingly full and complete. It presented the "situation" with not just a simple singular point, but with several layered points of view that lay a very interesting groundwork to build on. (On a side note, the sideways reference to Glee, tastefully done, I found amusing. It's an obvious comparison... but not really.)
Alex, Inc.
(2018)
Cute, but nothing new
20 May 2018
I've given this show half a season, more or less. I like Zach Braff and really hoped for something special. Unfortunately... it's just very "blah". The premise, to me, is extremely dated. I'm sure, obviously, there is still a lot of risk in starting a "vlog" as a sole source of income. But.... this really feels more relevant in 2008 than in 2018. The risks, rewards, perils, etc are pretty well defined at this point. This makes everything about the story feel dated and trite. In the end, it feels like they fight to lay standard sit-com tropes over a "fresh" concept that is anything but fresh. Ten episodes. I can't really see giving it more of a chance. :\
Trial & Error
(2017–2018)
Nothing new to be found in this played out genre
17 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I'll start off by saying, I've liked John Lithgow as an actor in general, but I always hated his acting in 3rd Rock. I've never watch a full episode of that show because the overacting turns me off within a few scenes. I did like his portrayal as Barney's father on How I Met Your Mother, so I watched the first two episodes of this to see how it would be, but with the above "prejudice". So with that said....
Trial & Error, two episodes in, is in all respects, completely unoriginal and derivative. Every aspect I can think of to consider it by, it seems like nothing but poor a poor ripoff of at least two or three other sitcom tropes.
The first, most obvious rehash is the faux-cumentary format, proposing that what you are watching filming of a documentary, filled with fourth-wall breakage as characters directly address the camera as if talking to a reporter or interviewer, with all the used up flubs, misstatements, suddenly being interrupted by another character walking in with embarrassing or incriminating revelations, supposedly unaware of the camera crew standing five feet away. This now-barren ground has already been worn bare, cultivated masterfully by shows like The Office (British and American) and Arrested Development. But there's really no new life to be drawn out here - or if there might be, this show makes no effort to find it. It's all the same faux-cumentary gags that have been played out in many other good shows - and many more bad ones. There's nothing fresh to be found here. Or if there is, there's no talent or attempt to find it.
Another thing that stood out to me was that this feels like a cheep ripoff of Arrested Development, especially in the lead character of Larry Henderson. He just feels like a weak, limp interpretation of Jeffery Tambor's portrayal of George Bluth Sr. While the characters themselves have some differences - the conniving and obviously guilty Bluth vs. the completely bumbling idiot Henderson - it's still the same basic story arc, arrested in the outset, apparently guilty while claiming innocence, sudden revelations about the character's actions or traits. It all just felt like second hand clothes - once fresh and crisp, now just worn and limp.
Josh Segal, played by Nocholas D'Agosto, sits uncomfortably in the Michael Bluth slot, the one "normal", sane character surrounded by absurdity - just more the fish-out-of-water in that he's an outsider to the small southern town where the story is set. Other characters are just absurd caricatures, much as were the surrounding characters in Arrested Development - but still, they all feel uninspired compared to other, better shows.
And, off of that, there's all the southern stereotypes embodied in those characters. And I don't say that out of any offense at the stereotyping itself, there's just nothing new. It's all very stale. Another review mentioned My Cousin Vinny, which I hadn't thought of when watching it, but that is a story that does an infinitely better job of using the the character and idiosyncrasies of southern culture to further the story. Trial & Error just throws in jokes that have been done a thousand times, lazily presuming they're funny when they're just boring.
As for John Lithgow, his portrayal of Larry Henderson, the completely inept, situationally incompetent poetry professor accused of murdering his wife, isn't quite as over-the-top, over done, and buffoonish (from my perspective) as 3rd Rock, but it still has that same feel - just reigned in a little. So if you like Dick Solomon, you should enjoy his performance here. And I would probably give him more time to develop the character - if the rest of the show wasn't so uninspired.
The only other character I enjoyed a bit was the receptionist Anne Flatch, portrayed by the wonderful Sherri Shepherd. She pulls back a little on her exuberance in her performance here - but in a good way. It makes it feel a little fresh. One of the best gags introduces in her character was the various and random disorders she suffers from. She pulls off the various gags well, but... here, with their one fresh idea, the writers even managed to screw it up - they introduced four or five of these disorders over the course of two episode to the point that it took an adorable character with a quirk or two to a total basket case. Shepherd did her part portraying these, the writers kind of blew their load by throwing so many into what should be a brief glimpse into this character, that they just turned her into a nut job. As far as character development it's just lazy.
Which, I guess, leads to a summary: the writers/creators took a good group of actors, a possibly decent premise, but in the end everything else felt lazy, uninspired, and generally ripped off of other, much more creative predecessors. Maybe they will find a way to make this more fresh, but I don't know that I'll stick around to find out.
Trial & Error, two episodes in, is in all respects, completely unoriginal and derivative. Every aspect I can think of to consider it by, it seems like nothing but poor a poor ripoff of at least two or three other sitcom tropes.
The first, most obvious rehash is the faux-cumentary format, proposing that what you are watching filming of a documentary, filled with fourth-wall breakage as characters directly address the camera as if talking to a reporter or interviewer, with all the used up flubs, misstatements, suddenly being interrupted by another character walking in with embarrassing or incriminating revelations, supposedly unaware of the camera crew standing five feet away. This now-barren ground has already been worn bare, cultivated masterfully by shows like The Office (British and American) and Arrested Development. But there's really no new life to be drawn out here - or if there might be, this show makes no effort to find it. It's all the same faux-cumentary gags that have been played out in many other good shows - and many more bad ones. There's nothing fresh to be found here. Or if there is, there's no talent or attempt to find it.
Another thing that stood out to me was that this feels like a cheep ripoff of Arrested Development, especially in the lead character of Larry Henderson. He just feels like a weak, limp interpretation of Jeffery Tambor's portrayal of George Bluth Sr. While the characters themselves have some differences - the conniving and obviously guilty Bluth vs. the completely bumbling idiot Henderson - it's still the same basic story arc, arrested in the outset, apparently guilty while claiming innocence, sudden revelations about the character's actions or traits. It all just felt like second hand clothes - once fresh and crisp, now just worn and limp.
Josh Segal, played by Nocholas D'Agosto, sits uncomfortably in the Michael Bluth slot, the one "normal", sane character surrounded by absurdity - just more the fish-out-of-water in that he's an outsider to the small southern town where the story is set. Other characters are just absurd caricatures, much as were the surrounding characters in Arrested Development - but still, they all feel uninspired compared to other, better shows.
And, off of that, there's all the southern stereotypes embodied in those characters. And I don't say that out of any offense at the stereotyping itself, there's just nothing new. It's all very stale. Another review mentioned My Cousin Vinny, which I hadn't thought of when watching it, but that is a story that does an infinitely better job of using the the character and idiosyncrasies of southern culture to further the story. Trial & Error just throws in jokes that have been done a thousand times, lazily presuming they're funny when they're just boring.
As for John Lithgow, his portrayal of Larry Henderson, the completely inept, situationally incompetent poetry professor accused of murdering his wife, isn't quite as over-the-top, over done, and buffoonish (from my perspective) as 3rd Rock, but it still has that same feel - just reigned in a little. So if you like Dick Solomon, you should enjoy his performance here. And I would probably give him more time to develop the character - if the rest of the show wasn't so uninspired.
The only other character I enjoyed a bit was the receptionist Anne Flatch, portrayed by the wonderful Sherri Shepherd. She pulls back a little on her exuberance in her performance here - but in a good way. It makes it feel a little fresh. One of the best gags introduces in her character was the various and random disorders she suffers from. She pulls off the various gags well, but... here, with their one fresh idea, the writers even managed to screw it up - they introduced four or five of these disorders over the course of two episode to the point that it took an adorable character with a quirk or two to a total basket case. Shepherd did her part portraying these, the writers kind of blew their load by throwing so many into what should be a brief glimpse into this character, that they just turned her into a nut job. As far as character development it's just lazy.
Which, I guess, leads to a summary: the writers/creators took a good group of actors, a possibly decent premise, but in the end everything else felt lazy, uninspired, and generally ripped off of other, much more creative predecessors. Maybe they will find a way to make this more fresh, but I don't know that I'll stick around to find out.
Worst sniper in the history of snipers?
17 February 2017
I used to watch and love this show as a kid, including many memorable episodes such as this one. Now, re-watching 30-40 years later... I can't believe how bad some of these premises are, and worse how badly they're executed. Just generally, for a sniper to have a wide open killing field with dozens of unprotected, unaware targets at the beginning of his siege and not score a single kill is just ludicrous. Yeah, it's prime-time comedy, nobody wants to harsh it down, but really? Then, just endless little things... Radar is in the same shower as Col Blake - hasn't it been established that there are officer's and enlisted facilities? They should not be sharing the same shower. When Hawkeye (and Frank) go out at night... nobody thought to turn the outside lights off? Yet, our sniper pays them no heed. But.... when they're in the mess tent after "ambushing" Radar, a lit match held by Frank draws fire??? I get, in the spirit of the time, this was plain and simply anti-war propaganda, exalting the heroic anti-war Hawkeye over the cowardly chicken-hawk Frank. But even allowing that, some 40+ years later, the writing just feels lazy. It was acceptable simply to drive an agenda home at the expense of telling a coherent narrative.
Uninspired
21 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The only moment that elicited a genuine laugh was the second time the police officer stopped his partner with "It's not worth it", and they showed the license plate: "SHE NUTZ".
The portrayal of Kenneth through the first half was the only highlight at that point. The second half... I expect they've ruined the character by aligning him with the (to be honest) d**k of a character they seem to be creating in JJ.
Is he a d**k because he says the things he does and he's in a wheelchair and he should be sweet and sensitive, and I'm oh, so, prejudiced because I don't think people in wheelchairs can be angry? No. He's just a d**k. I'd be turned off by that in any character who is supposed to be a protagonist. Putting an a**hole in a wheelchair doesn't make him a lovable a**hole. It just makes him an a**hole.
Which is sad. I had decent hopes for this show.
The portrayal of Kenneth through the first half was the only highlight at that point. The second half... I expect they've ruined the character by aligning him with the (to be honest) d**k of a character they seem to be creating in JJ.
Is he a d**k because he says the things he does and he's in a wheelchair and he should be sweet and sensitive, and I'm oh, so, prejudiced because I don't think people in wheelchairs can be angry? No. He's just a d**k. I'd be turned off by that in any character who is supposed to be a protagonist. Putting an a**hole in a wheelchair doesn't make him a lovable a**hole. It just makes him an a**hole.
Which is sad. I had decent hopes for this show.
Speechless
(2016–2019)
So much worse than I hoped
21 September 2016
I really wanted to like this show. It's one episode, so I'll give it a few more watches, but at this point...
Half way through, there were only two moderately engaging characters: Kenneth (Cedric Yarbrough) and the brother Ray (Mason Cook). Then in the second half Kenneth sided with JJ, and, well...
It's all very sad - I went in expecting to feel something for JJ - but really, he's a total d**k. Minnie Driver, who I like, plays a b***h of a mother, the sister is OK but forgettable at this point, and John Bowie... I was so looking forward to something refreshing past his time as Kripke on BBT (which he did great, but still)... I just found his portrayal of the milk-toast husband OK at times but it ultimately fell flat.
None of this is on the actors - I just think the characters were ... well, they sucked. I'll watch another week or two. But if this sets the stage for this show, no longer than that.
Half way through, there were only two moderately engaging characters: Kenneth (Cedric Yarbrough) and the brother Ray (Mason Cook). Then in the second half Kenneth sided with JJ, and, well...
It's all very sad - I went in expecting to feel something for JJ - but really, he's a total d**k. Minnie Driver, who I like, plays a b***h of a mother, the sister is OK but forgettable at this point, and John Bowie... I was so looking forward to something refreshing past his time as Kripke on BBT (which he did great, but still)... I just found his portrayal of the milk-toast husband OK at times but it ultimately fell flat.
None of this is on the actors - I just think the characters were ... well, they sucked. I'll watch another week or two. But if this sets the stage for this show, no longer than that.
An otherwise good episode spoiled by the introduction of Cam's sister
26 August 2016
Of the story lines in this episode, the one with Claire and Phil skipping Luke's soccer game and the one with Jay and Gloria arguing over her needing glasses were good. Certainly relatable topics for families with active kids and couples in general, and good for some funny scenes as the show goes along.
However, this episode introduces Cam's sister Pameron. And I have to say I've never much enjoyed either the character or the portrayal. First there's the over-the-top lampooning of rural stereotypes. It's not that I'm of that culture or remotely offended. It's that the whole shtick has just been played out pretty thoroughly by Cam's more than occasional lapses into and references of his life back home. The presentation of Pameron takes a played out aspect of Cam and turns it up to 11, and for me it just falls flat. Additionally, she brings a certain degree of slapstick physical comedy that, for me, just doesn't fit the feel of the show for me. It's unfortunate, because I think they've done much better with other members of his family - his parents and even his "sweetly" racist grandmother.
Ultimately, I find myself wincing in most of her scenes, and it ultimately brings down what was a good, though not great, episode of Modern Family.
However, this episode introduces Cam's sister Pameron. And I have to say I've never much enjoyed either the character or the portrayal. First there's the over-the-top lampooning of rural stereotypes. It's not that I'm of that culture or remotely offended. It's that the whole shtick has just been played out pretty thoroughly by Cam's more than occasional lapses into and references of his life back home. The presentation of Pameron takes a played out aspect of Cam and turns it up to 11, and for me it just falls flat. Additionally, she brings a certain degree of slapstick physical comedy that, for me, just doesn't fit the feel of the show for me. It's unfortunate, because I think they've done much better with other members of his family - his parents and even his "sweetly" racist grandmother.
Ultimately, I find myself wincing in most of her scenes, and it ultimately brings down what was a good, though not great, episode of Modern Family.
Tell Your Friends