ldbear-31508

Hubby and I watched "Eric" over yesterday and today and really enjoyed it. Benedict Cumberbatch shows his great acting talent here for sure, playing this damaged guy looking for his son with an escapee from "Where the Wild Things Are" in puppet form. His mission was also to drink every, single bottle of vodka in NYC. It was hard to tell if he was mentally ill or a tortured, damaged artist who grew up with such dysfunction that his parents put him on medication when he was a kid just because he wanted attention. But mentally ill or otherwise, the endless substance abuse didn't help.

The show takes place in the mid-1980s and really benefited plot-wise from the technology and forensic science that was normal for that time, such as blood typing over DNA and also VCRs, answering machines and people having to leave people messages to get calls returned.

There are a lot of stories on this show. It's not just a missing/dead child mystery or the story of a man who's seemingly out of control. It's also a story of police and political corruption, racism and homophobia. In this case, McKinley Belcher III did great work as Detective Ledroit who has lots of pain as an African-American who can't be himself.

Cumberbatch's voice and work with Eric is fabulous and Eric itself is well used. Gaby Hoffmann is all about the desperation as Cumberbatch's wife, playing the one character who's most focused directly on her son's return. It's actually a pretty understated performance, considering what's going on in her scenes. And there's great chemistry between Dan Fogler and Cumberbatch, playing the long-time friends and colleagues who run the "Good Day Sunshine" kids' show together. One of the most memorable scenes for me is one between Fogler and Cumberbatch, where the looks on Fogler's face are absolutely heartbreaking.

The other most memorable scene for me is one at a nightclub with Cumberbatch, Eric and "Gloria" from Laura Branigan playing. Lots of great and well-used 1980s tracks in this, with my favourite probably being the use of "A Forest" from the Cure.

At some point, I wondered how they could possibly bring all these storylines together, but they did and it was very successful IMO. And there's one particularly outstanding set that appears as the show continues. I don't want to say what it is other than to say it's a place of misery and wretchedness and quite important to the plot.

It reminded me a lot of that Jim Carrey show "Kidding" from a few seasons ago, which also involved a kids' show, puppets and a very damaged guy. Lots of similarities, many differences, but if you liked "Kidding," you'll likely enjoy this too.

This show takes place between 1921 and 1953, with no fixed number of years between each episode. In 1921 after the Russian Revolution, the aristocrat Count Rostov isn't sentenced to death, but rather he's sentenced to live his life inside the swankiest of prisons, the chic Metropol Hotel. The first two episodes had a whimsical quality and I figured that would be the tone throughout. I was wrong. It becomes something dramatic, heart-wretching at times, even tense and exciting and rarely overly sentimental despite all the human drama. Things happen that you won't see coming.

With 99.9% of the show taking place at the hotel, it's a small story of one man's life, yet it's a sweeping, epic story of Russian history. Even the soundtrack is epic, as though the composer channeled Jarre's soundtrack from "Doctor Zhivago." Rostov experiences Russian events through hotel visitors and staff and by what he reads. The writing for these actors is excellent, allowing characters to develop, grow and change over 30+ years in some cases. It's through them all that we see the consequences of the outside goings on and, by extension, the consequences to Rostov. This is what drives the plot.

McGregor depicts Rostov as positive, incredibly charming, respectful to everyone, adaptable, intelligent and ethical. The workers at the Metropol, among others, become his family.

There's a sweeping love story, a family saga, spycraft, classical music and outstanding art direction. If you like McGregor, it's hard to imagine you won't like this. He has plenty of chemistry with Winstead, not really surprising considering they're married.

I don't know about you, but I don't have much experience watching South-African TV series. This is a great introduction. It's light-hearted, but heartfelt. If you overthink the plot, you'll be in trouble. There are holes for sure. But what makes it work is the chemistry between Lloyd, Marcus and Dineo as they face challenges to fix a problem created by performing a ritual.

There is family drama and enough backstory and fleshing-out of these characters that you really care about them. Add to all that the sometimes incredible exteriors of South Africa.

A very entertaining watch after the first three episodes.

This is yet another U. S. network show that feeds the narrative that the U. S. is in charge of the world. In this case, in Australia the local authorities (in other words, the Australians) are relegated to the position of sidekick because the Americans have a right to be in charge anywhere in the world if they want to be.

The show starts out with such a theme of entitlement that it's impossible to get past it. There's nothing that even suggests it should be any other way than this. If I were Aussie and watched this, I would be insulted by this depiction showing American authorities being in charge of my country without question.

I would've given this an 8, except the series was uneven. Some of the bad reviews on here are from people who only watched the first episode or the first couple. Those episodes were fair at best, relying too much on gross humour and one level of shrillness from Tate. But within that, two of the characters in particular were very funny - Bernard, played by Robert Coleby, successfully channeling Sir John Gielgud from "Arthur" and Anabel, played by Niky Wardley, the ditzy lady-in-waiting. The writing for them was very clever and I thought "OK, maybe it just needs to find its way" so I kept watching.

What I think this is supposed to be is a satire of what happens to members of the Royal Family who don't conform and Georgiana does not. Despite her obvious privilege, I think Tate very successfully - although not immediately - creates a character who never fit into the "Royal" template and who's very damaged by many things that happened to her in the past. She has a family who doesn't care about her at all as a person and never did.

Tate loses a lot of the shrillness and becomes quite sympathetic as the show continues. She's a good actress and comedienne and I was glad to see that come out. There is a cast of straightmen and women that Tate uses to her advantage to strut her sarcastic humour and they're all game. Besides the two actors I mentioned earlier who were so funny, I'd also add Sylvia, played by Lynette Curran, who shows up a few episodes in with her dog and has a single bit that she does frequently, but it's so well timed and so silly that I laughed each time. It felt like the part was written for Jacki Weaver, but she wasn't available or something.

It's hard to say more without mentioning main plot points. I'm trying to keep the spoilers light so my review isn't hidden due to spoilers. The whole season is a bit over two hours. If you watch the whole thing, I think you'll be glad you did.

A few of the people who gave this bad reviews also stopped watching after the first few episodes. I can understand why, as I almost did too. But don't let those reviews deter you from giving this show a solid chance.

This show starts out as a dramedy about a couple, played by Kaley Cuoco and Chris Messina. They are somewhat directionless and dissatisfied for a number of reasons. Cuoco's a realtor who's obsessed with true-crime podcasts, while Messina was an up-and-coming tennis star in his youth whose career was derailed by injury. He's now working at a posh club where he's been demoted. The two have a number of far-wealthier friends.

They need to hire a plumber, played by Tom Bateman. That fateful leak and friendship that starts with Bateman is what drives this plot and the decisions made by Cuoco and Messina. The problem is, the motivation to do what they do is non-existent at the beginning. I was going to stop watching, but then Bateman took over and it got interesting, becoming a darkly comedic satire that really worked for me.

If you watch any British TV, you'll know Bateman from."Behind Her Eyes" and others. He's also in that terrible "Death on the Nile" remake, but you can't blame him. I'm guessing he was hired due to one role -- that of a hitman on the premiere of the anthology series "Into the Dark" in 2018. And if you like Bateman in this show, you should hunt that one down and you'll see what I mean.

As for Cuoco and Messina, once the plot takes off, the two do what they do well. Cuoco is of course charming and funny and as "The Flight Attendant" shows, she can do dark comedy. Messina is a sadder figure, but also very, very clever and funny in his performance. Plus they have great chemistry.

It almost worked for me until the end until it didn't quite. I won't say why not, I'll only say the lack of motivation returned like a writers' virus, but not as bad as at the beginning.

It's also quite a short binge-watch at under four hours overall. Give it a chance, you really might like it.

Do The Weeknd and Levinson have any respect for women at all? It seems unlikely. The show started out in an interesting way as some sort of satire on social media and celebrity. Showing us a young woman who has very little control over her own life and decisions and clearly wanting to break out.

But it fell apart the moment The Weeknd arrived Dude can sing, but he can't act. He's wooden and awkward as an actor and has zero chemistry with Depp. And yet, she sees him in his club and in five minutes, he's her Svengali taking over her life. Yes, she'll find agency by giving some rando control of her life too LOL.

It's an awful show, plain and simple. I hope Depp makes a better choice the next time, because she has some talent for sure.

Who cares if Sophia's black? Do you think even in the mid-1700s everyone was a racist? Of course not. So why isn't it possible that a grandfather might want the remaining tie to his late son, even if she's black? Yes, I know the grandfather should be Sophia's father, but also, so what?

If you get bogged down by this minutae, you'll miss out on a completely entertaining miniseries. Hubby and I laughed and laughed. Sohhie Wilde as Sophia is feisty and smart, naive and gorgeous. Solly McLeod, playing Tom, is totally charming. Charm is a necessity greater than being a great actor -- although he's very good BTW -- as Tom's the dude no lady can resist.

And one lady who can't resist him is Lady Bellaston, played in all her towering magnificence by Hannah Waddingham.

It's a terrific rom-com. The entertainment is in the journey, because you always know how it will end. It's playful, it looks gorgeous. What's not to like? Just enjoy it.

If you like completely gross, cringe-worthy humour, you found your show. I'm no prude and I don't mind some gross humour, but seriously? Pete Davidson's a pretty funny guy. Supporting this show is supporting his laziness as a comic, being satisfied to be cheap rather than clever.

I thought maybe the first five minutes was just something to make the show memorable, because the "climax" (let's call it) of that first five minutes was one of the grossest things I've seen on TV in a while. But no -- that was just the beginning.

Did I mention that this show is gross? It's toilet humour (and various body-part humour for that matter) on steroids. If this is your thing, you'll love it and you'll hope Pete Davidson wins an Emmy for this role. Otherwise, don't say I didn't warn you.

Not every TV series has to be deep and/or re-invent the action/thriller genre. This is neither of those things, but the episodes fly by in a heartbeat with non-stop entertainment. The plot is one of those "Some high-powered Americans in charge are up to no good and will do anything to do what they want and keep it all secret" shows. It requires -- and has -- a person or in this case a pair who stumbles across a conspiracy. At the highest level. Who's involved? Who's not? It keeps you guessing while our intrepid duo earnestly figures it out. Along the way, we're introduced to a number of interesting characters, most any of whom could be up to no good.

Kudos to the writers for creating a number of strong women who aren't stereotypes of anything really, but just people, some in positions of power, some not so much, who happen to be women. The exception to that is one main character who's pretty-much the stereotype of a deranged female assassin. But no writing's perfect.

So put away your logic and disbelief and just enjoy this! It's a good one.

I love "All American" in general, but Olivia must be the most selfish character on TV. That culminated tonight, when she expected her brother and her mom to put their pain aside because she was afraid she'd take a drink. Not to mention her expectation that everyone she knew would drop everything to help her. Which they did. Olivia easily could've called a single person, had them lock the door to her bedroom with her in it, and keep her there until she addressed her grief. As if it was a mystery that she wanted to drink for that reason.

Episodes that are Olivia-centric are always the most annoying, because they support every selfish step she takes rather than do anything in the plot ever suggesting she should take some personal responsibility for her decisions.

I'm reminded of how she stole files off her mom's computer, hurting her mom's career as the DA. And yet she was a hero, mom be damned. Or when she wrote the article, not having the guts to even publish it in her own name, destroying the futures of many young men, and hurting the futures of others including Jordan and Spencer. And she was praised.

It's incredible to me that with all the relatively well-written characters, they insist on continuing this ridiculousness that suggests it's OK for Olivia to be this selfish and self-absorbed.

This might be the singularly best episode on this entire series, and that's saying a lot. The performances -- particularly in the car -- between Kebbell, Ambrose and Grint could not have happened earlier in this series. It required the chemistry between the three and the knowledge each has of their character and the two others to have created that magic in the car. An acting clinic four seasons in the making.

When Grint started crying, it broke my heart. All that pain and trauma from being the one who found Jericho dead and the guilt just poured out. The various looks on Ambrose's face, confused, annoyed and then realizing the truth. And Kebbell, who's growth over the series made it possible for him to sincerely accept his part in the tragedy. Outstanding. And the "will she or won't she?" at the end. So well set up, because we as viewers don't even know if the baby IS Jericho come back to life or not. Can't wait for a finale.

I'm reviewing this after two episodes only - There's a relationship in trouble in "Plan B." To make a long story short, Patrick J. Adams as Philip takes Karine Vanasse as Evelyn for granted in a big way and has done it one too many times. How self-absorbed is he? Let's just say if Adams' Mike took Meghan Markle's Rachel for granted this much on "Suits," Rachel would've slapped him silly. Anyway, Evelyn has enough and leaves Philip. Philip stumbles across a company called "Plan B" that gives do-overs and Phil goes that way.

What ensues is a "Groundhog Day"-style plot as Phil gets a second chance to do better. The challenge with this style of plot is that it's repetitive, literally. What makes it interesting as a viewer is having the fore knowledge of what already happened and seeing the consequence of something changing. And even a small change can create a big consequence. There needs to be substantial alteration from the original outcome or else the continued repetition will make the plot dull.

"Plan B" is having difficulty so far keeping the dullness out of its main plot. I think the problem lies in the plot itself, which involves this couple at odds and they argue a lot. Many of the changes that occur with the do-over still bring on arguments between Evelyn and Philip. For example, they argue first about a dinner party. After Philip gets his do-over, they argue instead about the price of a cello. Same argument, different theme. Rinse and repeat.

I did give the show a 7 rating though, and that's for a few reasons. Thankfully, there are sub-plots that are far more successful within this "Groundhog Day" structure. The most interesting one involves Evelyn's brother, Patrick, played by François Arnaud. Philip and Patrick are partners in a boutique law firm and they're trying to land a whale of a client. Evelyn is working as their paralegal and as, apparently, the only person of the three who can get coffee and answer the phone. Patrick's taking one for the team - so to speak -- to satisfy this perspective client's needs. The things Philip does in his do-over has great influence over Patrick's life and their law firm in general and I found all of that very entertaining. The other thing I loved was how you book your do-over with "Plan B." That alone was worth the 7 rating.

Even though the show has the weakness I mentioned, it's only been two episodes. I'm relatively confident that it's growing pains and the relationship between the main couple will get more interesting. The opportunity is definitely there, due to a very capable cast.

I love Tom Cruise and Miles Teller and Jon Hamm. "Top Gun: Maverick" is watchable because they're in it. Otherwise, it's U. S. Armed Forces porn and propaganda. The Oscar nominations are likely deserved for sound, editing, and visual effects. But best screenplay? Yes, there likely was one, I'll give them that. But surely there was at least one that was better than this. And then there's best picture. I think the word "best" must mean something different to me.

Watching Maverick riding super-fast on his motorcycle, too macho to wear a helmet, is exciting when he's in his 20s, but when he's over 60-years-old? Kind of sad.

Why mess with the plot and ending of the source material, the novel "The Cabin at the End of the World," unless you can do better? In this film adaptation, it needs to make sense that at the end, either Eric or Andrew will agree to be sacrificed at the hand of the other. This ending is a big change from the novel.

The problem is, it makes no sense at all. There was no reason to believe the intruders' story. There was ample evidence that the intruders were delusional. Eric and Andrew could easily conclude that the horrors seen on the big-screen TV were pre-recorded and the broadcasts were a trick of technology. Not to mention the fact that Rupert Grint's character was - apparently - the perpetrator of a hate-crime against Andrew some time before.

So let's see - the choices are: the intruders are delusional or they're carrying an Apocalyptic message. The TV broadcast is simply a tech trick by delusional people or the TV's broadcasting Apocalyptic events. Grint's character is an angry homophobe carrying a grudge or he's there by coincidence. There was no reasonable character motivation to explain the film's inevitable conclusion. It's poor writing indeed when the only reasonable explanation for what happened involves Stockholm Syndrome and a bad concussion.

I gave it a three instead of a one for these three reasons -- I appreciated the risk of casting Dave Bautista in a role that required actual acting, Kristen Wen was awesome as the young daughter and all the actors in the film did their best with very, very little.

The future is 1950s Americana. It's visually stunning, no doubt. But I won't continue, as I felt almost guilty watching it -- promoting ideals of the 1950s that are very backward. Dollying along a street for instance where all women seen were dressed to the nines 1950s-style to make breakfast and say "Bye" to hubby as he goes to work. At least robots did the vacuuming.

In production design, it was creative enough to integrate touchstone visuals, like having gorgeous 1950s cars, but they futuristically hover. Yet contradicted that with poorly thought out visuals -- people still use B&W photography from an old Kodak, the music is something from that high-school dance in "Back to the Future," and women stay at home. And having two people of colour as leads doesn't change what's evident, that this promotes an ideal that's saying the 1950s was a better time. I think many would disagree that it was better. It Felt Wrong Just to Watch It.

This episode continues the theme of showing the ramifications of Watergate on those who were powerless, not just on those in power. The strongest episode so far IMO, focusing in part on Frank Wills, that average guy who essentially foiled the break in.

With a wall of commendations and an article in "Jet," he was nonetheless too "controversial" to get an average job. If he hadn't found Tuffy, I would've cried like a baby.