6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Typical "chick flick" film with a healthy dose of stupidity
13 July 2019
I saw this film on TV about a year ago... actually my wife was watching it and I saw some snippets of this waste of time. After watching the scene of all those people acting like dogs and hearing the dialogue, I knew it was time to do something more constructive like watch grass grow.

I saw the first movie and thought it was pretty good for a "chick flick". The girls featured in the first movie were the typical Long Island bubble heads who live for fashion and cosmetics (good grief). However, the plot had substance and was watchable. Not the sequel. This sequel is terrible, makes no sense and is a total waste of time. Believe me, there are better things to do like watching reality TV or hiding in a large cardboard box than to watch this stinker.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
19-2 (2014–2017)
5/10
A carefully crafted program, but with a ton of exaggeration
24 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I subscribe to Acorn TV and saw that this program was featured. "Why not watch it?", I said to myself. So I watched the first season and was initially enraptured with the characters and the demons that they struggled with as they did their daily work as cops.

There is absolutely no way a bunch of people that have these problems can function adequately as a police force. We have a wife beater (JM), an alcoholic (Tyler), a lesbian (Beatrice or "Bear"), a totally incorruptible cop (Ben), a sleaze bag commander (Gendron) and a loose cannon (Nick) who is probably the worst of the bunch not only because he gets himself involved with so many undesirables, but manages to screw a bunch of women in the process (I counted six sexual encounters with this character who screwed a fellow cop - Audrey-, his ex-wife - Isabelle- his son's girlfriend's mother(!), a visiting police detective - Elise, and a couple of other women).

This guy alone made my head spin and the story unraveled just because this kind of stuff never happens in real life. Not only is Nick sexually charged (according to what TV wants you to believe), but he also has bouts of aggression and depression which almost drives him to suicide in one episode. Totally unrealistic and most improbable in ordinary, mundane life.

Then there's the political side of the show which is more realistic and believable when it comes to corruption. Commander Gendron is a sleaze bag, a back stabber, a snitch. He's the kind of guy who, as a kid, was probably beaten up a lot of times because he was a tattle tale and goody two shoes in grammar school.

This guy is so sleazy and untrustworthy, that his own daughter (a heroin addict) hates his guts and even said "I could never trust you." Nice family relationship! Acorn has all four seasons and I managed to wade through the first two and a half. In all honesty, I like the show, but the characters and their antics just aren't realistic in real life.

I visited Montreal a couple of times in my lifetime and from what I saw in this program isn't what Montreal is about. 19-2 makes Montreal a bad place to live in, like one of our cities stateside. Nothing could be further from the truth. And also, the antics that go on in this precinct are, in a word, exaggerated.
7 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Medical Center (1969–1976)
7/10
Dr. Joseph Gannon was the best looking doctor on television
26 April 2015
Back in the mid to late 60's, the major networks were getting "hip" about current events which were affecting the attitudes of younger people. There was Vietnam, a growing concern for the environment, drug use, the Generation Gap and even, believe it or not, a focus on race relations.

Amidst all of these issues, the networks created a plethora of TV programs such as The Mod Squad, Ironside, The New People, Adam 12,and, of course, Medical Center. All of these programs came about after the death of Martin Luther King, Jr and one has to wonder if this event triggered an interest in both the networks and their sponsors. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it was all about ratings and not about addressing and correcting the social issues of the times.

As a member of the baby boomer generation, I, too, was a naive teenager who experienced all of these turbulent issues, believing that my generation could change the world for the better. It didn't have to be me that changed the world; only someone else of my generation who could do it. The sad part was that everyone was like me and there really weren't any leaders, so to say, who would be able to change things for the better. Our expectations, although buoyed by such television programs, turned out to be one of disappointment; the world hasn't changed primarily because of obstinacy and compromise; the former being the way the world has always been and the latter being a trap the world had laid for us as we got older.

These television programs were made in order for the networks to cash in. Medical Center was no different from the other "cookie cutter" plots of The Mod Squad, Ironside or The New People. Medical Center focused on current issues affecting the mindset of my generation: the proverbial "generation gap" sticks out like a sore thumb in the episodes "The Deceived" and "Thousands and Thousands of Miles". The drug problem raises it's ugly head in the episode "The Crooked Circle". The naiveté of young people hoping to change the world simply oozes in the "A Duel With Doom" and, again, in "The Deceived" and of course the program has to touch on race relations with "The Last Ten Yards", but what television program back then would avoid that issue?

Television successfully capitalized on these issues, totally deceiving us that they were on our side and would do anything to correct the wrongs of the older generation. Unfortunately, the networks were only interested in profit, and not at all concerned for a cure of the problems we faced 45 to 50 years ago.

These issues have been quickly forgotten, replaced by a world that has worsened and unable to climb out of it's morbid and immoral abyss, let alone trying to address the issues of today which have totally dwarfed the problems we had as teenagers.

However, there is good news: Dr. Joseph Gannon was and is still the best looking doctor of any medical show.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
William and Mary (2003–2005)
3/10
Too much drama
26 February 2013
Don't get me wrong; I love Martin Clunes! He is a phenomenal actor and I wouldn't pass up watching anything he has done. However, this program drips with too much grief. I was spoiled on the Doc Martin series and was hoping that this one would be just as good; it isn't. For one thing, William seems to always be a victim of circumstances. The supporting characters seem to "attack" him in an indirect way; there's Kate, his daughter, who appears to buck him at every turn. Her tryst with a married man and her fear of being pregnant is just one example of the ever-increasing weight of worry that piles up on William. The ever ubiquitous Ruben who increasingly becomes a bigger pest (and an irritant) every time he turns up, Mary's two sons, one of which gets knifed and sent to the hospital, Mary's mother, who has cancer. These incidents and more are just too much drama for one man to withstand.

At least Doc Martin has a great blend of good humor with some drama and I'll admit that I expected about the same with this series. Such is not the case. William and Mary has very little humor and too much drama. It, at times, is too overwhelming.
19 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bogus
21 May 2012
Growing up in the 1960's I was a huge Beatles fan and remember vividly the "Paul is dead" hoax back in the fall of 1969. Naturally, out of curiosity, I also looked at the clues that I heard about on the radio and, like an immature 15 year old, I played my Beatles records backwards. The only thing I really got out of it all was that I ruined some of my records in the process.

When I saw this "mockumentary" on Amazon I bought it, again out of curiosity. Unfortunately, my curiosity got the best of my wallet and nothing else. The "voice" was not George Harrison's, but a cheap imitation. Also, what was really insulting to the intelligence of core Beatles fans was the film's awful chronological inaccuracies. For example, "George" talks about the album "Rubber Soul" and it's song contents that offered clues to Paul's demise. Unfortunately, this album was recorded in the Fall of 1965 and released by Capital/EMI for Christmas of that year; a FULL year BEFORE Paul's fatal accident in November, 1966.

"George" states that "Yesterday and Today" (which was only released by Capital in the US and not in the UK) was made AFTER "Revolver". Again, bull twinkies. Revolver was released by EMI on August 5, 1966, almost a full THREE months before Paul's "accident"; "Yesterday and Today" was released in the late Spring of 1966, again a terrible inaccuracy in the timeline. In short: a lot of goofs, but possibly unnoticed by those who know nothing about Beatles music.

This film is an insult to George Harrison. George was a remarkably brilliant musician and couldn't possibly be inaccurate about these accounts.

If Paul's death was an MI5 cover up, then why didn't the CIA cover up Elvis' death in 1977? I'm sure that hundreds of Elvis fans would have jumped out of windows upon hearing about his death! Is MI5 more competent than the CIA? Never mind, you don't have to answer that question!

All in all, this film is awful. Don't waste your money on it.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Junk
6 June 2010
I saw this film as a freshman at the University of Hartford way back in 1972. I remember that it was highly touted by the Campus Center as being a spicy, x-rated film. Needless to say, because of this, the lines were extremely long to the auditorium; people were anxious to see nudity and were practically clawing their way in to grab a seat. What a disappointment! This pseudo-musical, with a slight touch of nudity and simulated sex acts, was a bomb and too long to bear. Thinking of it now, I can't believe that I sat through this stinker. The film was so bad that, in one scene, the "hero" (if you want to call him that) was standing on the edge of a cliff singing and the entire audience was yelling "Jump! Jump!!". In a way, I hoped that he would so he could put this awful train wreck out of it's misery!
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed