OK, this should be a quick review. When this show premiered in 1999, I was excited. I loved Amanda, I loved the other cast members, I loved the sketches - I thought the show was great! Again, though, there was a long period when I didn't watch it. It came on TV again during my teenage years, and I sat down to relive old memories. And it did not hold up well. I didn't laugh much, I didn't smile much, and it didn't bring me much.
The show features "All That" star Amanda Bynes, performing on her own sketch comedy show. She performs a character in nearly every sketch with other cast members. Her characters include Judge Trudy, Blini from Blockblister, Amber from "The Girls Room," Cynthia Worthington, and, of course, Penelope Taynt.
What's wrong with the show? Well, there are a couple of things. First of all, there's not set up for half the jokes. They come out of nowhere, and we're just supposed to accept that they happen. At the end of every "Judge Trudy" sketch, Judy Trudy orders to have the dancing lobsters come out...Huh? What? Why are there dancing lobsters? What do they have to do with anything that happened in the sketch? Why are they dancing? Why are they so big? The only thing we get is dancing lobsters, with no reason or explanation. That's not funny. There has to be some understanding as to why something is funny. While "Moody's Point" isn't exceptionally funny, the idea of it is. It mocks a lot of teen drama television shows. People who watch teen dramas will know why the "Moody's Point" sketch is funny. If we're given dancing lobsters with no lead in or build up, the joke falls flat. Second of all, a lot of these bad jokes are repeated. Let's say you laughed at the "Hillbilly Moment" sketch when you first saw it, the sketch where Amanda hits Drake Bell with a random object after a knock-knock joke. It may have been funny the first time you see it because it surreal that Amanda would have this random object in her hand. But after the sketch repeats itself episode after episode, the shtick dies down quickly. It's not funny because we know what's going to happen. Even though she uses a different object each time, we still know what she's going to do with it.
The show's creator, writer, and executive producer is, once again, Dan Schneider. If you read my review for "All That," you know how I feel about some of his work. His sense of comedy, if you want to call it that, lacks intelligence. There's nothing smart about it. Whether we get dancing lobsters or hillbillies slapping each other, there's no thought behind any of this. It really does feel like he's throwing things in front of the camera because he doesn't care about molding the young mind. It's pandering, it's patronizing, it's insulting, and it is stupid!
Is there anything good I can say about the show? Well, again, the performers aren't bad. I don't think they're as good as the original "All That" cast, but they're not bad. They're energized, entertaining, and they do bring some talent; they don't act like they're getting paid to do what they're told like the last "All That" cast. And the jokes can be funny sometime. Not very often, but sometimes you will giggle or chuckle at what the cast members are doing, or even at what the writers wrote. These two elements work just enough to give the show a pass.
I don't like the show, but maybe you will. If you do, just share with me why. I can't condemn you for having an opinion. Just tell me what you think and why you think that way. If the same things that bother me bother you, however, I recommend you skip the show. BOOYIKA!
