Change Your Image
billtkd
Reviews
NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service: Collective Memory (2021)
Ludicrous
This has to be one of the most fatuous episodes of the entire series, even by the increasing degree of silliness and unlikely coincidences in the preceding few episodes. The whole story displays extensive ignorance of simple scientific principles and technology and is an insult to the intelligence of the viewers. The recreated 'hologram' was merely a two-dimensional reflection of an image on a computer monitor. Moreover, it was completely unnecessary for the investigation. They could have interviewed the AI version of Sandra Holdren on audio only. Using the hologram was a dramatic gimmick and very silly one at that.
S.W.A.T.: Checkmate (2022)
Not believable
In shows like this, exaggerations of the capabilities of the cops or their technology are expected. However, stupid behaviour, just there to pad out the story, is not OK. The main offender is Hondo's pointless tirade at Saint, in front of many witnesses. Saint was never going to confess anything, just because he was being badgered. Hondo confronting Marcus, with an employee he doesn't know in earshot, was uncharacteristically careless. The main flaw in this story is Saint getting hands-on, in public, in dealing with Rios. He spent years keeping a safe gap between himself and the dirty work, so this feels like the writers had tired of this character and were just getting rid of him as quickly as possible. Worst of all (and like many previous epsiodes), there is the increasing amount of soap opera material, in this case, Luka and Tan fretting over Hicks' health or love-life.
NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service (2003)
Lost opportunity
A nice idea spoiled by descent into formula, very repetitive catchphrases ("I can tell more when I get him/her back to the lab...") and endlessly repeated tropes ("I can give you an answer to that..." when they entered but couldn't have heard the preceding conversation). Equally tedious is the all too common trope of the scientist knows pretty much everything about every scientific or medical discipline, as well as engineering and computer technology. Given that, the huge number of scientific errors (usually more than one per episode) is is unforgivable. For example, in one episode, Ducky said that the bone of a burnt corpse were "calcified". Of course they were: that's what makes them bones. He meant "calcined". I know that a lot of the routines are meant to be light-hearted but the endless physical abuse (Gibbs smacking people) or sexual harassment (DiNozzo) would never be tolerated in the workplace.
Lost in Space (2018)
Good idea, spoiled
This started well but descended into cliché and soap opera. A half-decent science fantasy idea was ruined by marital bickering, teen opera angst and the usual Wesley Crusher type.
The worst aspects are the serious goofs that no-one seems to have noticed. Chips of titanium refined into spacecraft parts in a few hours. A very sophisticated robot that can't string a decent, meaningful sentence together. (I know: its cryptic comments are merely a plot device but they could have contrived a decent reason for its inarticulacy.)
Most annoying of all were the repeated references and scenes "on Alpha Centauri", shown as an Earth-like environment. Alpha Centauri is a star. The planets that orbit that star would be numbered - Alpha Centauri 1, 2, 3 etc.
The Beatles: Get Back (2021)
Mostly tedious
'Don't Let Me Down'. Indeed. A huge drag until about 1 hour into the second episode. The pre-release hype was misleading. Jackson claimed that it was cgoing to correct the false impressions from 'Let It Be' and show them enjoying working together. Tell that to George's bored and dismal face. However, many of the negative comments in other reviews are ill-informed. One praised the upscaling of the video, clearly not realising that this was shot on 16 mm photographic film and therefore high-resolution.
IO (2019)
Tediously inaccurate
I gave up early on. I could have tolerated the dreary pace mood and but for the numerous errors of science. A bacterium that can use 'ammonium' (sic) as an oxygen source? (Some anaerobic bacteria can use nitrate instead of oxygen but that's not the same thing.) Anaerobic insects? Elon talks about 'a whole new galaxy' when they only have sub-light engines. To view Io and Jupiter, Sam moves the big telescope roughly by hand and bang, she's on target.
Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
Powerful
It is worth noting that the criticisms of the plots and scripting are mostly those with poor spelling and punctuation, possibly geek fans who want to sound like serious, mature critics by not automatically fawning over it just because it's Star Trek.
This drama is hard-going, a bit too unremitting at times, with few of the lighter moments of the original series. (Admittedly, that got a bit farcical, even cringeworthy at times.)
The production values and special effects are impressive (notwithstanding the amateur critics who somehow thought them mediocre). The acting is generally very good and believable. The plot lines and dialogue are worthy of what Roddenberry would have liked to do in the early days. Possibly the silliest thing about it all is the mycelial drive. Warp drive is currently a fantasy but at least seems credible. The mycelial drive isn't.
The choice of end theme for the last episode of season 1 was a nice touch.
Doctor Who: Rosa (2018)
Well done
The episode handled an important social topic well, even if some aspects were curtailed to fit the time slot. However, many reviewers missed the point or misused 'PC' as an insult. Idiotic excesses in terminology aside (e.g., 'vertically challenged' for 'short'), the alternative to being PC is to be incorrect. Should science fiction or children's shows avoid highlighting immorality? It is 'politically correct' and humane to oppose apartheid and racial oppression. Or is that what the negative reviews really object to? What does that tell us about the reviewers? Having a woman Doctor in charge, assisted by a Pakistani and a black guy, must blow some reactionary nasty minds.
None of this is new to Doctor Who. The Doctor (like MacGyver or Columbo) has always had a vocal distaste for guns. Is that a bad thing? In 'The Aztecs', Barbara was being PC in objecting to human sacrifice. Was it wrong of the show to highlight the issue? Most good science fiction will deal with things like that. Star Trek's 'Let That Be Your Last Battlefield' satirised the foolishness of prejudice on the basis of skin colour: those whose skin was dark on the left hated those who were dark on the right.
Too much of this would spoil the show but that is what science fiction should be about.
Whisky Galore! (2016)
Better than I expected
I started watching with the thought that a remake was pointless but soon got won over. If there's a negative it's that it seemed too short, as if some scenes were cut. What made the film was the performances, mostly understated, except where a bit of OTT was called for. Gregor Fisher was, as always, excellent. James Cosmo, Brian Pettifer and the other usual suspects also did well and looked like they were having fun. Some odd (Odd!) casting (a Scot playing an Englishman and an Englishwoman playing a Scot). (Odd's accent was a bit posh for a sergeant.) The most inspired bit of casting was Eddie Izzard as a pompous Englishman who came North to try to tell the Scots how to conduct their affairs. Art imitating life? (Remember the independence referendum campaign.)
The props and costumes all looked authentic (apart, maybe, from the shot glasses.)
A pity the great soundtrack album is only available as MP3 downloads and not on CD.
Stasis (2017)
Appallingly bad
Contrived and unconvincing plot, unrealistic 'technology', *very* bad acting, cliché dialogue and behaviour, few sympathetic characters... I lasted about 15 minutes. I have never given 1* before.
Approaching the Unknown (2016)
Tedious, error-strewn and cheap
As others have said, very little happens in this. Even if you accept this as a psychological drama (with little that is dramatic), the audience's faith is destroyed early on by the many mistakes. At launch, Stanaforth is sitting upright, instead of reclining. The g-force would not be tolerable in that position. He is shown sharpening a pencil. Even with artificial gravity, the shavings would play havoc with the ventilation system. (The old story about NASA spending millions developing a pen for weightless conditions, while the Russians used a pencil, is a myth.) The lack of delay in the communications is perhaps the most obvious goof although the makers will probably claim that it was merely a dramatic device (again, with no drama). The EVA suit, with the big welder's gauntlets, looked like a cross between kid's fancy dress outfit and a shell suit.
Star Trek: The Next Generation: Time's Arrow, Part II (1992)
Fun but flawed
Apart from the poor sit-com with the landlady, this was good, if contrived, fun. Those who complained about Samuel Clemens voice/accent have clearly not done their homework. He did make audio recordings (on wax cylinders) but none are known to have survived.) However, the actor William Gillette (best know as the first to play Sherlock Holmes) knew Clemens and used to impersonations of him on stage. He recorded at least one and it sounds like what we hear here.
The Mind of Mr. J.G. Reeder (1969)
Now available
All episodes of this series are now available on DVD from Network (www.networkdvd.net). (Region 2/PAL only.) Some are even in colour.
This seems to be definitely worth buying. However, I don't have a copy yet so I can't comment on the quality. This is the first time it has been released on any home video format so I hope it hasn't been rushed out from duff masters.
The role of Reeder's boss (Sir Jason Toovey, played by the wonderfully named Willoughby Goddard) is a bit of cliché these day because, as I recall, he was always raising objections to Reeder theories or methods Strangely, IMDb states that the series is in colour but Vaughan Birbeck's comment suggests B&W.