Thinker365 Reviews

The Newsroom (2012–2014)

Watchable, sincere but very often clichéd, cringeworthy and poorly written!

[6/10 · 31 March 2024]

The Newsroom is easily the worst of Sorkin's offerings. It is a muddle of contrivances and contradictions and by its end, I not only despised most of its characters, its aftertaste impacted my enjoyment of its actors in other projects. The only actor that comes through it unscathed is Sam Waterston who is terrific throughout, he being its saving grace.

The conceit of using real life events possibly could have worked but it ends up being odd and oddly sensationalist. The sense of self-importance of the Newsnight staff, Sorkin's proxy, is both stultifying and absurd and the 'relationship dramas' are endless and endlessly embarrassing. Nearly everything feels contrived. Purporting McAvoy to be a Republican, to the viewer, reads as the height of disingenuousness.

The moments of 'goodness' are lost in all the muddle.

The story arcs of each season are poor and poorly resolved, particularly the 2nd season, and arguably leave the viewer questioning the worth of Newsnight and its staff and the rest of the plotting is bogged down by the nonsensical relationship drama. David Harbour and Marcia Gay Harden do admirably jobs with thankless roles but other secondary characters are largely worthless and underdeveloped.

The main cast of characters are universally awful, though Dev Patel infuses the dud character of Neal with a hint of his charm, and Jeff Daniels has the odd good moment with his psychiatrist played by David Krumholtz. The female characters as a rule are awfully written.

As a non-American the jingoistic patter can at times be stomach-churning. I consider the Bin Laden episode in the 1st season likely the worst episode of TV I have ever watched - an abomination to sit through - but lesser flaws are in abundance from start to finish.

I'm sure many may be able to overlook its many flaws but for me, it is a case of endless missed opportunities and squandered potential and in its execution, can be found a total absence of self-awareness. At best, its rating should be struggling to break a 7.

Bad Sisters (2022– )

Good but could have been great!

[7/10 · 24 July 2023]

Enjoyable dark comedy that drags its way through to its inevitable end. This is a well-made series with a good cast that has a number of moments highlighting how suspenseful and sharply funny it might have been.

I'd happily have rated it higher if the number of episodes were reduced to 8 with few changes. As it is, and as the story proceeds, the suspense fades and impatience begins to set in, and at times, the humour while probably never trying isn't particularly sharp.

It is still better than plenty of TV being made at the moment though, but it is hard not to watch it in its entirety and not think that there was a great high quality 6 episode series that has been extended to the detriment of the suspense, humour and storytelling. (I also probably could have done with one less sister as I never fully warmed to the two younger sisters).

I think the creators should have considered it job well done and moved on as I don't think it warrants a second series. Perhaps a brand new story centring around the insurance agent(s) could be fun but the sisters are best off left swimming in the sea. Don't flog a rightfully dead JP.

The Diplomat (II) (2023– )

High-end soap opera with an addition of weakly conceived satire!

[6/10 · 25 April 2023]

This is a tonal mess which may likely find an audience. Russell and Sewell seem to have been transported from a better action drama or political thriller to a series devoid of thrills and weak on humour.

Given it plays like a soap and not a drama, the plot, characters, and dialogue feel ill-conceived. The attempt at a humorous through line given the seriousness of the plot's events wears thin and at points becomes unpleasant.

The weak satire, the president and prime minister, and the direct references to Ukraine, doesn't seem pointed, is never sharp or biting, but silly, and therefore exploitative. Both tonally odd and tone-deaf.

The cast is good, but plot elements often present them as ridiculous. The dialogue only makes this worse. Frequently everything feels exaggerated veering past silly toward stupid. Nothing feels smart and even if the cast of characters or caricatures were to be considered intentional in design, their conception only reflects back on the writer given the world of fiction, fantasy and reality the series has created.

One of the first series I have ever found the use of bad language both inconsistent and distracting. If a writer has something political to say, their work needs to be better conceived, better written, and absent this, much more entertaining. This is mediocre at best, and likely worse given all its wasted potential.

Five Days at Memorial (2022)

Murder at Memorial!

[6/10 · 13 April 2023]

The story is broken into two unequal parts giving shorter shrift to the aftermath, with the investigation conflating the failures in disaster management with the reality of medical malpractice.

While the series definitely takes a position, the decision to frame the story in the way it does, in unequal parts, with the ethics in question presented as 'gray', makes it incredibly disturbing and a damning indictment for all involved.

The series has essentially legitimised a false narrative in which health professionals can get away with murder, claiming compassion regardless of consent. It is made all the worse by the invocation of god and religion by so many of its characters; who knew American healthcare staff were godly in so many ways?

Pou should definitely be in prison but there are likely many others who could have been highlighted and should have been struck off for their actions or inaction, having abjectly failed in their duty of care if not also failing to meet the base threshold of common decency.

The deference on display by reviewers to outright negligence and criminality is frightening. Intentional harm is not mitigated by lazy bureaucracy or feelings of abandonment.

The fact the screenwriters believed this level of ambiguity or shading was in any way justified says all that needs to be said about American values and the dire state of American healthcare.

The absence of accountability shown at all levels and the fact that far too few seem to care has led to an overarching sense of resignation whereby even outside observers, the reviewers, often seem to believe no individual should be deemed culpable, leaving the guilty to feel righteous.

Incredibly bleak! America, that there city upon a hill, where zebras are now gray. In God they trust, as law enforcement and health professionals have license to kill, with scope to feel good about it afterwards.

The Banshees of Inisherin (2022)

Thankfully there are more Siobhans than shopkeepers now!

[9/10 · 20 February 2023]

The confusion, the cruelty, the stubbornness, the intractability, and the futility are a large part of the point, not a flaw but the feature.

A conflict between friends: Gleeson (pro-Treaty) and Farrell (anti-Treaty). Gleeson cuts off his fingers (what may THEY be I wonder) and Keoghan (the 'casuality') abused by his father (I have to wonder again) and then disillusioned by Farrell meets an untimely demise. Farrell's donkey, a love, is dead, Gleeson's house, a possession, is burnt down, the two men are left standing, but the conflict is unending.

Is it not apt, if not a little disappointing, that Keoghan and Condon (the voice of reason) have won BAFTAs for their roles in this film if nothing else.

I don't understand (in particular) the Irish reviewers who have deemed it pointless, boring or having nothing to say (even if they were not to agree with it).

Regardless of this specificity, for its applicability to conflict in general, for its musings on the human condition (stubbornness and niceness), and for the performances and cinematography perhaps above all else, I think it would be well worthy of winning the Oscar for Best Film. And who knows, the voting body may be more amenable to Farrell winning Best Oscar.

The recognition of Condon has occurred long after it should have been, and pleased for Keoghan and McDonagh too. Great filmmaking and at such a timely moment in history!

The Mosquito Coast (2021–2023)

Fairly enjoyable but meandering and messy!

[7/10 · 20 November 2022]

Only 1 in 10 people have rated The Mosquito Coast a 4 or lower but proportionately, nearly 40 percent of reviews express this sentiment. A bit of balance is likely necessary given 7 out of ten have rated it a 7 or higher.

The story has plenty of flaws and the family, our protagonists, can be hard to root for. The story is far-fetched and at times unbelievable and most problematically, it never really feels like there is an end in sight so the viewer has to watch as the family stumble from one crisis to the next.

The acting and cinematography is great, but the story already feels overstretched. Hopefully it concludes in its second season and not only in the scope of its final episode. If not and it goes to a third season, please let it be abbreviated.

I think a lot of the criticism lies in the fact that the writers haven't really properly teased any forms of possible resolution creating a dynamic where even entertaining episodes feel like wheel-spinning.

This should be an 'extended' mini-series with a beginning, middle and end. Know when to let it end!

Quantum Leap (2022–2024)

Adults behaving like teenagers if not children!

[5/10 · 5 November 2022]

The original is a classic with a great premise; this has a good premise and a likeable lead but not much else. The acting across the board and the script leave a lot to be desired. I wasn't sold on the 'wife' as Al's replacement but she improves over time and could perhaps be a strength going forward.

The greatest issues lie at Quantum Leap HQ in the present. As much as I like Ernie Hudson, he can't save the mess which takes place week after week and it is only made worse as this aspect of the show monopolises so much of each episode's runtime. The acting and attitude here is poor and may in large part be down to the script but it falls into the American TV show trap where adults speak, act and behave like children. (This also on occasion filters across into Ben's timeline as well - all text, no subtext.)

Injecting humour into a TV show doesn't require the lazy nonsense at play here and for now, what could be the best part of the show (snippets of goings-on in the present) is by far, the worst part of it. Perhaps, they could take a big swing, let Ben change the past to significantly alter the present.

I hope it improves and is given time to improve, but if it doesn't, it deserves cancellation.

The Suspect (2022)

Unnecessarily disappointing!

[6/10 · 23 October 2022]

A far-fetched whodunnit which could have been really enjoyable had it not been for the gross incompetence of the detectives on the case.

The far-fetched nature of the plot is standard fare so should be expected and can easily be ignored but as many reviewers have already said the characterisation and decision making of the detectives is awful. This can be forgiven early on but in the latter episodes, it starts to make the story unwatchable.

I found the final episode a chore to watch and this had little to do with the resolution of the mystery. Given this is likely meant to be the first in a series of stories, I wince at the idea of having to see either of these two detectives again (and that's not down to the actors).

Good performances by the lead and some of the supporting cast. If deciding to watch, lower your expectations as the story progresses, in that way, you may find it worthwhile.

They/Them (2022)

Thoughtful, amusing, deceptively horrific and genuinely clever!

[8/10 · 11 September 2022]

I must have watched a different film to the one many others have reviewed. Caught this by accident as I watched and enjoyed the opening scene and then Kevin Bacon arrives, so I had to continue.

Scanning some of the reviews, there are many complaints about 'exploitation' and offensively stereotyping. ??? It seems fairly obvious the film is playing into tropes and adapting to stereotypes which have existed in the 'summer camp'/teen horror genres for however many decades (but which would have existed without any of these characters).

In part it's a bit of a pastiche of these two genres, rebalancing the scales, but I'd have to assume it's the pointed psychological horror nested inside in a traditional horror/slasher flick which is meant to get the mind moving. If it's a traditional slasher flick that you are looking for, this is not the one for you.

Solid if not great cast and fairly solid acting. Rounding up to an 8 (but a 6 or 7 would be fair). Even though aspects could be viewed quite darkly, it is also hopeful and at times, tends towards the parody in it all.

Slightly less 'nudity', and this should really be a tween/teen Saturday afternoon movie on some Kids TV channel (Oh, the moral panic, won't someone please think of the children).

I think this film did. I'm glad I wasn't stuck watching the film many of other reviews have described, it sounds like they had a terrible time of it all. Plenty to recommend!

The Satanic Verses: 30 Years On (2019 TV Movie)

Enjoyable but not a lot of depth!

[7/10 · 28 August 2022]

"All of us have to be really careful not to try and win position and praise by becoming what we think the white world wants us to be," Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. I wish the presenter (who seems very likeable) had been better able to challenge those he interviewed.

This becomes problematic because he never really gets to the heart of the matter, so the documentary only serves to highlight a strand of anti-intellectualism which shuts down discourse and debate.

Though the radio call-in on blasphemy and vox-pops at the end provide a bit of insight, I think the time would have been better spent hearing informed opinions (Muslims who perhaps had read the book) or moderating viewpoints (I know about it but it is not a book for me) if they exist.

As presented, on this matter, ideology and identity trumps intellect. I would have liked a part two in order to delve into this matter (as well as gauge the opinion of the parents and the public regarding the 'schoolyard game').

Foundation (2021– )

A Very Mixed Bag! Hopefully continues but dramatically improves!

[8/10 · 20 August 2022]

Tempted to give it an 8 given the cinematography and score (which are great) but the screenwriting and much of the dialogue are incredibly poor.

Case in point, take a easily likeable actor, arguably the lead (who plays Gaal Dornick), and give her an awful, heavy-handed 'origin' story while also getting her to narrate nonsense. And incredibly, her dialogue is worse than the narration.

There seems to be a lot of criticism directed at the actor playing Salvor Hardin. Personally, I thought she fared better than most. She does her best when saddled with a terrible plot and dud antagonists.

The final aspect (worth mentioning) which is irritating from start to finish are the really poor American accents. As a non-American, they are notable and seem totally unnecessary. They are pervasive and present in every storyline and makes some dodgy acting (and awful dialogue) even ropier.

Regardless, there is enough to like (if you like the genre and aren't a purist). I hope it improves.

Baptiste (2019–2021)

Solid series, definitely worth a watch!

[8/10 · 22 July 2021]

The writing isn't as strong as that in The Missing (in which Baptiste was first introduced) but it is still very enjoyable. I can't really remember much of the plot of the 1st series of Baptiste but given what I remember, I definitely think in its 2nd run, there has been some improvement with regard to watch-ability. I was entertained from start to finish.

The number of low star reviews currently here provides a skewed perspective given its current rating. Some (of the) criticism is fair (but less significant on-location inaccuracies aren't going to bother much of its audience). It is definitely not perfect, but I'd still consider it better than most TV series made at the moment and I would highly recommend.

The 2nd series is set in Hungary, and likely may not go down too well with many watchers there, but Tchéky Karyo is on top form, and there is a little less family drama on his end, which is to its benefit. This series is helped along by the co-lead of Fiona Shaw, as British ambassador to Hungary.

I enjoyed it, particularly as there are few extraneous side plots, and the plot direction at times felt somewhat unexpected. It is not a bad way for Baptiste's story to end, but I think it would be a pity if there are no plans for a 3rd in the works. Plenty of room for improvement, but in my book, it is still far too good to call it a day, and there are plenty more stories to tell.

Infinite (2021)

A deceptively great first ten minutes...

[6/10 · 11 June 2021]

...but little else on offer. All style and very little substance leaves a whole lot of wasted potential. Carr and Ejiofor are always a pleasure to watch, it is a pity they, and the events and characters in the prologue, can't be transported into a better movie.

The voiceover narration by Wahlberg is painful and cringeworthy but the shallow characters and stupid plot are the most objectionable aspects of the film. An absolute waste of an interesting concept.

Rated 6, because a 5 or lower is for that which is unwatchable.

United States of Al (2021–2022)

Watchable and well-intentioned!

[5/10 · 3 May 2021]

I've scanned through some of the reviews; there is an array of negative ones, saying on the one hand it is boring and lame, and on the other, it is demeaning to or talking down America and Americans (but not for the reasons I would have assumed). And so, while I immediately agreed with the former, I've actually come now to also agree with the latter.

The titular character, Al, is something of a cypher, there is very little there, he is the generic non-threatening somewhat 'backward' foreigner, and therefore, under the pretense of culture shock, his function ends up pretty much to hold up a mirror to the audience, asking the question, do you like what you see?

To be honest, everything is so mild and tame, and generic, that while, of course, without judgment, I'd assume it is typical of America, it would also be applicable to many other places and peoples around the world. Shouldn't we be more polite, more modest, more mannerly, less crass, and so on, and so far, it offers very little else. A desire for greater understanding and tolerance is an admirable aim!

And this mirror gives the latter critique some weight; though, to be honest, most of the one-line reviews seem petty, given the mirror is doing its level best not to cause any real offense, see neutered afghani Al, played by South African of Indian descent.

(I like the actor playing Al, and don't think it should be a requirement that all Afghani characters be played by Afghanis, but I query in this case, whether it would have been feasible or desirable to find one Afghani/Afghani-American actor to take up the role, particularly given the context; I can't imagine that such actors are in huge demand, and if not available, perhaps, move on to an Iraqi/Iraqi-American.)

I've vague recollections of loving Perfect Strangers as a kid, but Balki was from a fictitious country, and from what I remember, he and everyone else in it, were having far more fun. The fun is severely limited here, and sometimes, it really doesn't feel like a comedy at all, but unfortunately neither is it ever taking itself seriously enough to be saying anything meaningful, involving any real depth.

Perhaps, Al, could have had his 'brother Sal' come along too, provide another shade of character, any non-generic personality would do. I'm reminded of Matteo in Superstore, a gay, self-interested, acerbic, undocumented Filipino; there was something tangible to either like or dislike, love or hate. Perhaps, both.

When I look at Al, I feel empty. There is very little real character, nothing unique, a clothes horse, to hang a litany of stereotypes upon. I'm sure versions of this character, these stereotypes, exist in Afghanistan, perhaps pervasively, but as a viewer I need something more, anything more, to drive me to want to watch - a more interesting or realised Al, or an opposing Sal may have done this.

I could go on, but his host and estranged wife (though likable actors) don't merit review. I've written watchable and well intentioned, but I believe these intentions are misguided and misplaced, and for the life of me, I've no idea who the audience are that would be watching.

It's a five because I won't be watching, and I wouldn't actually recommend it to anyone either. I have chosen not to view its creation as highly offensive (though I could fully understand it being perceived as such, though for neither of the reasons which predominate these reviews), but essentially, its creation and execution does definitely feel surprisingly thoughtless, and its ultimate crime is due to it not being funny (enough).

Wild Mountain Thyme (2020)

Stereotypical, Anachronistic, but Relatively Harmless Rom-Com

[6/10 · 1 May 2021]

Had to watch it given the kerfuffle!

I think this could do well with a non-Irish audience, particularly an American audience at which it is likely aimed. The reason offence has been taken is not primarily due to the accents, it is because it is a film, claiming to be an Irish story, set in Ireland, with Irish characters, depicting modern Irish life, which has been deemed to be inauthentic (by many), which is problematic given these stories are so few.

The accents are quite poor (arguably Walken's and even Blunt's might not even be deemed to be Irish accents) but I was able to look past this. A significant issue is that the plot and characters are extremely thinly written. There is very little there which makes the story drag on interminably (given its runtime). Accent aside, Blunt puts in a good performance with what she is given, and Dornan does reasonably well with his constipated character, but there is no real conflict, and therefore, little to no plot.

The supporting characters are given less to do, and the deaths pile up high with very little reckoning. Walken and Hamm are totally wasted. One of the film's USPs is its quirkiness but in reality, this is just an afterthought, an incredibly flimsy one, which only feeds further into the overuse of stereotypes; sure, you know the Irish, they love their magic!

A strength of the film is its dialogue and lightness of humour, which though a little off, on occasion, one cliché rubbing up against another, for the most part, is employed correctly. It is not uncommon in similar fare for 'Irish' characters to speak with little or no authenticity (and even Irish writers can fluff the dialogue at times).

The glaring problem is that it isn't good enough to say this is a timeless story, when you are depicting a handful of one-dimensional characters written out of time under the illusion that it could possibly reflect reality or any semblance of modernity. These people live on farms down the country, not some nostalgia infused Americanised view of Ireland which better reflects the 1970s at the latest. If they live in this bubble, give them a reason for doing so. Reason is absent across the board, and so, we are left with one stereotype on top of another, and another, and so on.

In the end, it is perfectly watchable, but offers nothing new. It can be added to the canon of American depictions of the world outside, which though perhaps less offensive than others, aligns with the French being stuck-up, the Russians' villainous communists, the 'Arabs' terrorists, and Africa, as a whole, destitute. And unfortunately, in their pervasiveness, and due to Ireland's size in particular, these are the 'Irish' stories being told (being viewed by the world at large).

If Irish American screenwriters don't have the wherewithal to realise this as a problem, then the onus should be on the Irish filmmaking industry to have the cop-on not to endorse or support such projects. Though, I don't view this as cultural appropriation, just awful and inauthentic storytelling, which doesn't offend but only warrants a score of 6.

Home Economics (2021–2023)

Fair to reasonable with scope to improve!

[7/10 · 9 April 2021]

The best thing going for this is its likeable cast and its interest in topics which rarely get airing, particularly given it's a sitcom.

American sitcoms/scripted TV shows usually ensure all characters (and families) have and maintain aspirational lifestyles (no matter their circumstances, occupation and employment). Even if money is referred to as an issue, everyone is provided with accommodation beyond their means and has the capacity to do anything and buy anything they want. Nice that this attempts to subvert that ridiculous fiction (while still leaving space for the uber-rich). Who knew income inequality was an issue!

The attempt at introducing all the characters feels a little clumsy at times and plays heavy on stereotypes to flesh out its characters which makes lots of the 'jokes' feel a little too forced and contrived. But it doesn't reach the heights of being cringe-worthy in my opinion. With a little care, it could have staying power; I liked all three families and the character dynamics and interactions.

If you view gay people on TV, non-white people on TV, and depictions of interracial or same-sex marriage as 'leftwing propaganda', then this isn't the show for you. And if so, when viewing or reviewing, try to acknowledge the irony of the situation, i.e. The sense of 'moral' outrage you feel (at a TV show) which you believe is depicting the lives of minorities (that critics would say, are) only being given this space because 'the left' are/have been so morally outraged (all that faux outrage, y'know).

Hope 'Home Economics' improves over time, and I hope IMDB reviews its policy on accepting reviews. The toxicity and incoherence of many reviews are now reaching the level of Youtube commentary where veiled bigotry is no longer even veiled. A film and TV review website shouldn't be a public forum without qualification.

The Irregulars (2021)

Average YA fantasy series (not for adults)

[7/10 · 27 March 2021]

Had to give this a watch based on its reviews.

It's a FANTASY series set in Victorian London (a fact which seems to have been missed by many reviewers). It is very reminiscent of family friendly BBC TV series of the nineties and noughties, a bit of a mash-up of everything, so I wouldn't consider this a new phenomenon; it is very much early Saturday evening viewing aimed at the kids, but parents can watch if so inclined.

Unfortunately, I fall outside that category, and even back then, it wouldn't have been what I'd go for. It is a little bit hammy and a little bit cheesy, but it has always been that way - typical family friendly BBC fare but now on Netflix.

The level of vitriol contained in many of the reviews is nonsensical. As I've said, it is a fantasy series, and watchers are requiring it be authentic and historically accurate (as if kids watching this are looking for an object lesson on the etiquette and behaviour of Victorian London, and its absence may leave them confused).

These points would be laughable if not so dangerously stupid. Holmes and Watson are FICTIONAL characters in the public domain (and new writers can do whatever they like with them), and let's be honest, if Robert Downey Jr. Can play Holmes, then anyone can play anything.

Won't be watching past the 2nd episode, but again, this is aimed at kids and likely won't have much crossover appeal for most. Therefore, I am rating it with that in mind (also, I think the lead girl, Bea, and Watson, are two of the better/more interesting characters, particularly Bea. On Watson, Lucy Liu, played Watson, as an Asian-American woman for nearly a decade, pretty well too, notwithstanding the quality of the show - I hope she didn't get this much flack!).

You'll know by the end of the 1st episode whether it is a series to suit your sensibilities (but even if it doesn't, if you are an ADULT, have pause; this wasn't made for you, and even in the past, this still wouldn't have been made for you - It is for kids).

Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)

All things considered, by Part 3, I was firmly team Steppenwolf!

[6/10 · 19 March 2021]

Silly, self-serious, and stupid. Interminably long. Endless slow-motion shots, heavy handed, often with awful music. A film lacking in any compelling characters, all universally unlikable. This could only appeal to forgiving children with endless patience or those with a willingness to view it over multiple sittings.

As said, while not knowing the driving force behind Steppenwolf's actions, he was far more compelling than the dregs that are the Justice League. I wished death upon all of these 'heroes' many times over throughout the course of the 'film'.

Ben Affleck cosplaying Batman is a cringeworthy low point but they are all universally terrible; upon meeting Barry and Victor my allegiance to Steppenwolf was sealed; the endless slow-motion/exposition heavy/score-filled posing/montages were uniquely awful and only reaffirmed this conviction.

The bright spots were well hidden amongst the muck, so much muck. This is not storytelling. This should be viewed as the abomination it is, epitomising the worst of Hollywood's excesses and the vapid shallowness that is modern life. The rarest of occasions where the 1 stars are fully understandable and likely warranted (its redeeming features being far too few).

Let this be the final nail in this iteration of said universe and/or join me in imagining a better world where Steppenwolf won the day..

For Love or Money (2019)

A one-time watch! Enjoyable enough!

[7/10 · 21 February 2021]

I've rounded up to a 7 because I think the one star reviews are a joke. In my book, this is significantly better than plenty of the generic Hollywood romcoms produced, and far better than 90% of the stuff produced by Hallmark or Lifetime, and it has clearly been done on a relatively low budget.

Having said that, if you generally enjoy those types of movies and look forward to that stereotypical formula, then this will likely not be for you. If you are bothered by a little bad language and offended by a priest professing to be an atheist, then this is not for you. If you have a problem with absurdity, then this is not for you.

The best things it has going for it are its short runtime, its plot which moves along quickly, and its decision not to conform to type. There are a couple of funny moments and a couple of heartfelt moments, though its quality varies when it leans into the absurd. It likely won't appeal to an American audience because its scenes aren't written to build to a laugh.

There is likely a much better film in there somewhere but it would require a serious rewrite. Almost all of the scenes would need to be funnier and the character relationships and interactions put on more solid footing. Having said this, I liked most of the characters, the acting was solid enough, and I didn't mind the ending.

It is worth a one-time watch but I'd be unlikely to make any effort to watch it again. Could have much been better, could have been far worse! 6/10

The Equalizer (2021– )

Silly and unbelievable, none of it in a good way!

[5/10 · 9 February 2021]

I like Queen Latifah, and some of the cast, but the script is a dog. If it were led by Angela Bassett in her prime, even then, it couldn't be saved and would still be a dog.

On the acting front, the lead detective leaves a lot to be desired, and the characters of the hacker and his sniper wife are a pure mess.

Perhaps, if they leaned into the comedy, it wouldn't feel as abysmal as it does, but as it is, the self-seriousness of some of the characters and the absence of any semblance with reality, make this one to avoid at all costs. Or if you erased 'the hacker' from the cast, you could require the scriptwriters to construct believable stories and step away from the use of science fiction to move the plot forward.

In any event, hopefully this ends soon, and Queen Latifah finds something else more worthy of her time.

Utopia (2020)

Watchable but fairly humourless!

[7/10 · 26 September 2020]

Imagine the British version scrubbed of 90% of its humour, perhaps more. This may have been done to suit American viewers' tastes but it makes for a poor dark comedy.

Unsure if it is solely down to poor screenwriting but the violence isn't particularly comic and the characters largely unlikable. To the outsider observer, it just looks like another day in America. Random torture and senselessness!

As said, it's watchable, but highly recommend watching the original first as this will only taint that experience.

The South Westerlies (2020)

Shockingly poor! Rating it a five is an act of charity.

[5/10 · 18 September 2020]

Another reviewer hit the nail on the head - a total shambles. There's some beautiful scenery but the script is appalling, much of the acting is amateurish, and the characters charmless.

It is poorly made daytime TV; its entertainment value is on par with watching paint dry (though, watching the paint would likely be of greater therapeutic value and more stimulating).

The 5 is for Orla Brady alone. Sad to see her acting in something so dismal. The non-existent story and dodgy acting are made only worse by a number of the Irish cast putting on dodgy Irish accents which they don't even commit to.

No redeeming value, requires scrubbing from the mind and any digital archives. Wasteful and purposeless for all involved, for the cast, the crew and the viewer alike.

Young Wallander (2020–2022)

Worth a watch!

[7/10 · 7 September 2020]

While I agree with a lot of the criticism, I really enjoyed the plotting and overall story; the six episodes flew by and were engaging from start to finish.

Unlike some, I thought Adam Pålsson and his 'breathy' English gave an air of credibility to the use of the Wallander name and Sweden in general. That alone makes it an improvement on any of Kenneth Branagh's outings, in my opinion. It is a pity they didn't film in Sweden or make an effort to use more Swedish or even Scandinavian actors.

I've no issue with a Wallander 'out of time', even Endeavour is really just an interpretation on a younger Morse; the character Shaun Evans plays will never be the character John Thaw played. It's a liberty.

Most of the secondary characters grew on me over time, though a couple didn't. The array of accents on show can be disconcerting but I got over it, and could only laugh when an 'Irish accented' Swede shows up in a later episode; it's a feat Young Wallander was able to keep a straight face throughout.

The main issue I have, is that not only is it in English, but it ultimately felt culturally English. Malmö in effect became another midsized English city, with the mannerisms and behaviour of most of the characters out of step with Swedish mannerisms. Malmö therefore, is only believable if it is viewed as the Swedish Marbella where the British expats in an effort to integrate have taken on Swedish surnames.

In the end, even though Wallander, the Swedish, and Malmö, have been exploited, I still enjoyed the story and I would look forward to another outing.

Only a 7, because I'd ultimately prefer it set/filmed in Sweden, with (more) Swedish actors (either speaking English or preferably Swedish). It's on par or surpasses many ITV dramas.

Away (2020)

Not a sci-fi, nor is it a particularly good drama.

[5/10 · 5 September 2020]

Josh Charles is great and Hilary Swank does well at times, but the script and much of the dialogue are terribly written. The amount of time the story spends on the daughter is awful, does anyone watching care?

The crew of five have no chemistry, and in no way behave like adults, let alone educated adults, let alone astronauts who have trained TOGETHER for the preceding two years.

The backstories are poor, and much of the overall story feels contrived. There is little real drama and there is no suspense. Using tropes and cliches can be fine, good even, if written, plotted and executed well. Here they are not. It is a weaker version of Sean Penn's 'The First' which itself, was pretty boring.

This shouldn't have been made.

The Vow (2020–2022)

Won't be for everyone!

[5/10 · 4 September 2020]

'Well-made, interesting, clever storytelling' (in its first few episodes only) but it ultimately glosses over or ignores innumerable questions in order to entertain (instead of inform). The three central protagonists of this documentary (so far) are three people who were ultimately seeking 'success' in 'Hollywood', we have a singer, an aspiring filmmaker and an actress. (Bonnie is the more sympathetic character.)

In order to attain a sense of fulfilment, they participated in this scheme and now they are having their story publicized in long-form narrative on HBO, they being its central characters.

It may be the cynic in me, but to me, it seems very astute of Mark to not only record all his phone conversations with the group, his conversations questioning the group, but then also with his wife (audio and video) even after she has 'left him', even while he is still relatively committed to the cause.

To the reviewer commenting on other reviewers, perhaps it would be worthwhile to allow others have their opinions, and perhaps, it would be a worthy endeavour to question or query how or why this documentary was made in this way.

This won't be for everybody and nor should it be. Unlike the growing absence of critical thought in the wider world, here we have an example of how the desire for attention and perceived success/fulfilment leads many to willing do anything. Sure if nothing else, there's a HBO documentary in the end. --- Having stuck with it to the ninth episode, I am now reducing my rating as many of the later episodes are akin to mediocre reality TV. The mother of the young woman is a sympathetic character, even more so when placed anywhere near Mark, but following her cause, only goes to highlight the documentary's lack or absence of any real direction.

Characters, women who have been ostracized by the cult for decades, are paid lip-service, while we remain with Mark (and friends) whose entire aim/agenda lies with controlling the story. Moments are created to allow the Mark et al. to self-reflect, show remorse, some do better than others, but Mark, in particular, presents as insincere and self-pitying. e.g. Mark and Nippy go for walk-and-talk. Nippy shows and expresses his sense of humiliation and deep remorse at the damage he has done to himself, his wife and countless others. Mark looks on. (Oh! This is how an average human being would react. Make a mental note to consider in future.) Mark tears up about not having gotten to go on honeymoon. Enough said.

Very little objectivity, very little desire to uncover the truth. This is a documentary in a very loose sense of the word, and whatever it really is, it is a shocker.