TV Reviews:
Off Centre: Dud
Skins: A show about kids—not realistic, in the slightest! **
Showing posts with label TV Reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV Reviews. Show all posts
Friday, 18 February 2011
Saturday, 22 January 2011
TV Reviews:
Ben 10: My girlfriend’s son is hooked on this show—basically, a couple of young children and (for moral grounding) their grandpa are on a never-ending quest to kill every alien (which all seem to be evil) that, coincidently, happens to cross their path. The animation is good enough and is neither too hyperactive nor blasé. If you can get over the irritating constant action-over-semantics you may just appreciate this show for what it does well—holds kids attention! ***
Ben 10: My girlfriend’s son is hooked on this show—basically, a couple of young children and (for moral grounding) their grandpa are on a never-ending quest to kill every alien (which all seem to be evil) that, coincidently, happens to cross their path. The animation is good enough and is neither too hyperactive nor blasé. If you can get over the irritating constant action-over-semantics you may just appreciate this show for what it does well—holds kids attention! ***
Tuesday, 16 November 2010
TV Reviews:
The Royle Family: What makes this so hilarious is the great situation acting. Just now—while watching the show to critique—Ricky Tomlinson, removing wallpaper, wipes the sweat from his armpit, smells it, and then uses it to wipe his face. All seemingly natural. All seamlessly hilarious. How could watching people in a room be so entertaining? A
The Royle Family: What makes this so hilarious is the great situation acting. Just now—while watching the show to critique—Ricky Tomlinson, removing wallpaper, wipes the sweat from his armpit, smells it, and then uses it to wipe his face. All seemingly natural. All seamlessly hilarious. How could watching people in a room be so entertaining? A
Sunday, 24 October 2010
TV Reviews:
The Middle: Malcolm in the Middle, duh. **
Reaper: Some great back-and-forths between the three protagonists—as the character interactions are where the show shines. The plot, on the otherhand, is where the show falls apart. Ray Wise almost makes me want to give this an A−. Worth a good watch if you like sit-on-the-sofa-and-eat-crisps TV shows. B+
Modern Family: New generation of awkward humour—not funny. *
The Middle: Malcolm in the Middle, duh. **
Reaper: Some great back-and-forths between the three protagonists—as the character interactions are where the show shines. The plot, on the otherhand, is where the show falls apart. Ray Wise almost makes me want to give this an A−. Worth a good watch if you like sit-on-the-sofa-and-eat-crisps TV shows. B+
Modern Family: New generation of awkward humour—not funny. *
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Wednesday, 18 August 2010
TV Reviews:
The Dudesons: Dud
Samurai Champloo: Nice animation—that has some great characterizations. If I’m nit-picking, it is plagued by bad timing—I would much prefer the animators to attempt a more mature output rather than trying to stylize cliche anime techniques (though they do the cliches well). A−
The Dudesons: Dud
Samurai Champloo: Nice animation—that has some great characterizations. If I’m nit-picking, it is plagued by bad timing—I would much prefer the animators to attempt a more mature output rather than trying to stylize cliche anime techniques (though they do the cliches well). A−
Friday, 13 August 2010
TV Reviews:
Samurai Jack: Impressive animation that focuses more on style (of which it consumes everything else) than on substance. ***
Mystery Science Theatre 3000: An idea that sounds as if it shouldn’t work—but it does. The simplest of shows—hillarious and true. The guys comedy is not stonerish and doesn’t become monotonous but encapsulates the style of the films they mock. A−
Samurai Jack: Impressive animation that focuses more on style (of which it consumes everything else) than on substance. ***
Mystery Science Theatre 3000: An idea that sounds as if it shouldn’t work—but it does. The simplest of shows—hillarious and true. The guys comedy is not stonerish and doesn’t become monotonous but encapsulates the style of the films they mock. A−
Saturday, 7 August 2010
TV Reviews:
Samantha Who: Who (I had to do that)? Bad acting, in combination with, poor direction and a dreary, uninteresting plot leads to one of the worst popular shows on air. They somehow find an array of stars to perform cameos—do these people really watch this show? I can understand the women—women have a tendency to dismiss poor quality if it focuses on the lives of women. That is sexiest, I know, but it’s true. Hay—I like Sex and the City (not the films). B−
Samantha Who: Who (I had to do that)? Bad acting, in combination with, poor direction and a dreary, uninteresting plot leads to one of the worst popular shows on air. They somehow find an array of stars to perform cameos—do these people really watch this show? I can understand the women—women have a tendency to dismiss poor quality if it focuses on the lives of women. That is sexiest, I know, but it’s true. Hay—I like Sex and the City (not the films). B−
Wednesday, 4 August 2010
Friday, 30 July 2010
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
TV Shows:
The Jeremy Kyle Show: I don’t know how they find so many idiots for this show. Jeremy Kyle holds just the right amount of ‘chav’ about him, and talks in the right way, to harness the grateast cocktail of enterainment and solution. It makes me cringe—but it’s always interesting to see the tension between each relationship. Oh, and I hate that goddamn fox sponser advert. A−
The Jeremy Kyle Show: I don’t know how they find so many idiots for this show. Jeremy Kyle holds just the right amount of ‘chav’ about him, and talks in the right way, to harness the grateast cocktail of enterainment and solution. It makes me cringe—but it’s always interesting to see the tension between each relationship. Oh, and I hate that goddamn fox sponser advert. A−
Sunday, 18 July 2010
TV Reviews:
Monk: Not very interesting at all—but at least it doesn't fall into the trap of over-dramatic acting like so many shows of recent memory. **
Heartbeat: Though the show has changed cast too many times that I care to remember—the basis of the show remains the same. A midly enjoyable post prime-time slot-filler that always make me smile. A−
Ghost Whispserer: Man, she's got big boobs. Dud
Banzai: Hilarious—a great show to watch, late at night, with a beer. It's one of those shows, like Takeshi's Castle (funny how they're both Japanese), that you need to be in the right mood for—but boy, when you are, it's heaven! My favourite game is the hand-shaking guy—or it that too cliche? A−
Monk: Not very interesting at all—but at least it doesn't fall into the trap of over-dramatic acting like so many shows of recent memory. **
Heartbeat: Though the show has changed cast too many times that I care to remember—the basis of the show remains the same. A midly enjoyable post prime-time slot-filler that always make me smile. A−
Ghost Whispserer: Man, she's got big boobs. Dud
Banzai: Hilarious—a great show to watch, late at night, with a beer. It's one of those shows, like Takeshi's Castle (funny how they're both Japanese), that you need to be in the right mood for—but boy, when you are, it's heaven! My favourite game is the hand-shaking guy—or it that too cliche? A−
Friday, 9 July 2010
TV Reviews:
Midsomer Murders: A staple of summer broadcasting (how appropriate)—Midsomer Murders is genuinely good at consistently making interesting plots. John Nettles is cast well and so is his side-kick Jason Hughes. The direction could be a little more direct/exciting—but it has created a nice little niche for itself and I think it's quite happy staying there. A−
Dexter's Laboratory: Haha, I watched this with my brother—it's actually quite good (at least, the characterizations). I almost want to call this and A− (or am I drunk? :p) ***
Midsomer Murders: A staple of summer broadcasting (how appropriate)—Midsomer Murders is genuinely good at consistently making interesting plots. John Nettles is cast well and so is his side-kick Jason Hughes. The direction could be a little more direct/exciting—but it has created a nice little niche for itself and I think it's quite happy staying there. A−
Dexter's Laboratory: Haha, I watched this with my brother—it's actually quite good (at least, the characterizations). I almost want to call this and A− (or am I drunk? :p) ***
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
Tuesday, 29 June 2010
Saturday, 26 June 2010
Monday, 21 June 2010
Thursday, 17 June 2010
TV Reviews:
Everybody Loves Raymond: An impressive cast—each member of the family has a strong role in the show. What lacks here are the jokes—they're usually pretty immature and short—leaving me feeling like this isn't very good as a comedy. What I do like is the interaction between the characters—this is where the show shines. A−
Everybody Loves Raymond: An impressive cast—each member of the family has a strong role in the show. What lacks here are the jokes—they're usually pretty immature and short—leaving me feeling like this isn't very good as a comedy. What I do like is the interaction between the characters—this is where the show shines. A−
Thursday, 10 June 2010
TV Reviews:
Everwood: Based on some common mining-town cliches, Everwood is not a bad show. It's not a great show either. While having a good cast they never seem to act anything more than appropriately. The plot seems good on paper but lack of intelligent direction renders the show a little futile. ***
Everwood: Based on some common mining-town cliches, Everwood is not a bad show. It's not a great show either. While having a good cast they never seem to act anything more than appropriately. The plot seems good on paper but lack of intelligent direction renders the show a little futile. ***
Monday, 7 June 2010
TV Reviews:
Gilmore Girls: The characters always seem to talk as if they are in a novel—unnaturally. There is a nice connection between the characters but the plot never really goes anywhere beyond their basic day-to-day lives and it's boring. Probably a show women would prefer over men. B+
Fraiser: Clever and funny at the same time? Seinfeld springs to mind and then there's Frasier. There seems to be a love hate relationship from the general public—some people call it dull. I think they're out of their minds. Sometimes the cast focus too much on character development rather than the individual scenes or jokes. A+
Bones: I hate to say it (well, no, he was underrated in Buffy) but David Boreanaz is quite the lead. Emily Deschanel, on the other-hand, is a bad actress. Just another high contrast, flashing images, slow-mo CSI rip-off. *
Gilmore Girls: The characters always seem to talk as if they are in a novel—unnaturally. There is a nice connection between the characters but the plot never really goes anywhere beyond their basic day-to-day lives and it's boring. Probably a show women would prefer over men. B+
Fraiser: Clever and funny at the same time? Seinfeld springs to mind and then there's Frasier. There seems to be a love hate relationship from the general public—some people call it dull. I think they're out of their minds. Sometimes the cast focus too much on character development rather than the individual scenes or jokes. A+
Bones: I hate to say it (well, no, he was underrated in Buffy) but David Boreanaz is quite the lead. Emily Deschanel, on the other-hand, is a bad actress. Just another high contrast, flashing images, slow-mo CSI rip-off. *
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)