like a lot of mid- to high-concept TV comedies, How To Live With Your Parents (For The Rest Of Your Life) just might place too much faith in its out-of-the-ordinary premise. There are only so many ways in which Sarah Chalke can wince her way through Elaines attempts to set her daughter up with friends who look like various stages of Kenny Rogers. (Points for specificity; points off for that being the shows second variation on the gag.) Lonow has lived a unique life, and its a story that ought to be toldits just that this version is too insistent on pointing out how unique Lonows life is. And that existence comes at the expense of jokes worth laughing at and characters worth warming up to.
It is the sort of neither-here-nor-there sitcom that can make me feel faintly sad for the form, and by extension for the health of the nation, and yet it is no worse than so many others that come and go and sometimes, to my surprise, come and stay. If it can only stop pawing at your leg and licking your face for a moment, it may settle down into something you would allow in the house.
Nobody has the necessary magnetism to force a rooting interest. Its not like Thandie Newton is a badass detective. Shes more runway model than "Oaklandish," as they say in Oaktown. Less provincially, shes just not like Raylan in Justified or any of the supporting players in Game of Thrones, nor even the central character in Orphan Black. Meaning theres not a strong enough main character to lure you in while Rogue finds its way and better develops the ancillary characters.
Viewers probably will overlook Rogue for a drama on another channel much the same way people in the Bay Area tend to overlook Oakland for San Francisco.
The recent explosion of scripted dramas from outlets as disparate as History and Netflix has created such a surfeit of fine television that it's become increasingly difficult for even the most dedicated viewer to keep up. For those who already feel overwhelmed, a bit of good news: DirecTV first foray, the mob-cop thriller "Rogue," is pretty terrible, a moody, broody jumble of clichéd characters, pregnant pauses and sex scenes that border on the pornographic.
"Rogue," is pretty terrible, a moody, broody jumble of clichéd characters, pregnant pauses
sex scenes that border on the pornographic.
I'm debating whether or not to watch 'Rogue'.
My head tells me no.
But my other head tells me yes.
Have there been any early reviews of Goyer's - Da Vinci's Demons?
Is it going to be hyped enough on here to get it's own thread also?
Budget Halle Berry got her own show. LOL.
What?
I think the only brief comments I've heard about it are along the lines of "better than I expected, but still pretty bad". Should be more reviews coming out next week.Have there been any early reviews of Goyer's - Da Vinci's Demons?
Is it going to be hyped enough on here to get it's own thread also?
I think the only brief comments I've heard about it are along the lines of "better than I expected, but still pretty bad". Should be more reviews coming out next week.
Are there full reviews out or just some Twitter jibber jabber? I haven't looked. I'm curious to check it out, but I have a full plate at the moment and don't have high hopes for the series.Variety and Tim Goodman seemed to like it well enough!
Oh cool. Seems to fall in the "goofy fun w/ nudity" genre. I'll check out a few when I have time. By the way, Laura Haddock was the daughter who got kidnapped in Africa on Strike Back.
Did you end up watching it? Did anyone check it out?I'm debating whether or not to watch 'Rogue'.
Did you end up watching it? Did anyone check it out?
Cool. I haven't heard anyone talking about it so far. DirecTV can't be happy with the buzz and reviews for it.Not yet. I'll try to check it out in a few days.
I've been meaning to watch it, but I haven't had time just yet.Does anybody watch Top Of The Lake? Really slow series, but still really interesting.
I can't recommend it over any of the shows running right now. It's a show you have to see when all the episodes are released.I've been meaning to watch it, but I haven't had time just yet.
FYI Rogue is as terrible as they say. Really low budget and Thandie Newton is horrible in it.
How was the sex?
At least I though so :\Wait, are you saying the graphic sex scene(s) were unpleasant and/or gross?
At least I though so :\
Everything was just bad, just cringe worthy everything :\
Have not watched Spartacus after the initial pilot so I can't say. It's in the ballpark of GoT though.How so? Were the people ugly or something? How graphic was it compared to Spartacus or GoT?
Have not watched Spartacus after the initial pilot so I can't say. It's in the ballpark of GoT though.
NSFW:A detective's dick is flashed for a couple of seconds in one scene, but that scene has a pretty hot asian chick (kinda makes up for it :lol).
As for the sex scenes. They were Fucking, not making love. The scenes were a little generic if anything but it was nice to see a scrotum freely swinging around in a tv sex scene. I can't remember that last time I saw that in a tv drama but I like that tv/films are heading back in that direction.
I can't recommend it over any of the shows running right now. It's a show you have to see when all the episodes are released.
FYI Rogue is as terrible as they say. Really low budget and Thandie Newton is horrible in it.
Ultimately, I found "Da Vinci's Demons" ridiculous but fairly amiable. (I could imagine 14-year-old Alan really enjoying it, and not just because of the topless women.)
I had a good enough time watching the three review episodes, but Ill probably never watch another. It could have been a fun, no-budget syndication-style drama; or a lighter-hearted costume lark like the British Merlin. For once, I have the opposite of the complaint Ive had about so many shows: Da Vincis Demons might have been really good, if only it hadnt had the freedom and budget of cable.
Some no doubt will say Da Vincis Demons is too slight or glossy. And while it might not be as serious-minded as Game of Thrones, its also not too distant a cousin. Theres a lot of material to mine here, and Goyer, Starz and Da Vincis Demons are off to an entertaining start.
I am personally loving it. Think it is amazing. I do agree with you that that could all change if the ending doesn't tie it up nicely.
Seems very similar to Twin Peaks to me.
t's a supernatural thriller larded with teen angst, which has value in the age of "Twilight" and "The Vampire Diaries." And it has a movie pedigree as well: Eli Roth is an executive producer and directed the pilot, and the cast includes Famke Janssen and Dougray Scott.
But it's also a mess: a horror series with a weirdly slow build (you don't even see the lead werewolf character transform until the end of the second episode), a mix of campy performances and competent ones, and just enough intriguing ideas to make me wish the entire thing was a lot better than it is.
Outside of Liboiron and probably young Skarsgard, this is an effort that likely wont pop up on a lot of résumés. Hemlock isnt scary. It isnt creepy. It barely makes sense, much less sense you want to decode. The mutant giant does a voiceover that sounds like its from an elementary school play. Theres a girl who maybe got pregnant by a spooky angel. Roman asks whether it was a real angel. The girl says, How do you explain dancing to a person who has no legs? And Roman says, I have legs that wont quit.
Is there a bong big enough for this show?
The discovery of everyone's true nature is what propels "Hemlock Grove," which vacillates between being a monster mash version of "Glee" and a hard-R rip-off of "Grimm." The scenery is evocative enough, and every once in a while, a truly chilling moment will unfold. It may turn out to be campy enough to catch on, but mostly, "Hemlock Grove" has a straight-to-Netflix feel that diminishes rather than promotes its "original series" aspirations.
For some, the six hours of "Rectify" will feel like a very slow sentence indeed. For others, the performances, the very clear sense of time and place, the beautiful images and the thoughtful things the series has to say about life, death and spirituality will feel like no time at all.
Its pace is deliberate, and sometimes that leads to hauntingly evocative moments of tenderness and regret, and sometimes that prevents the drama from accruing even a modicum of suspense from one event to the next. It's admirable that the production wanted to be so truthful to the experiences of the damaged men who emerge from long prison stints, but there are a few too many languid shots of Daniel staring at things that mystify him.
But it's worth sticking with "Rectify," which often achieves a tone of conflicted, bittersweet sincerity.
The greatest thing about Sundances haunting, transporting Rectify is that its willing to be timeless, and to take its time. Its pokey, atmospheric, and the opposite of plot-driven. And its one of the best things I expect to see on TV all year.
With the aid of a well-cast lead in Aden Young, Rectify avoids predictability -- not just in its bold choice of immersive pacing, but its complicated characters -- and makes a familiar story seem new.
Sounds good to me, though that'll probably end up on the list of shows that I intend to watch but don't get around to for a while (see: Top of the Lake.)