Jump to content
Forums forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

4.1k Excellent
  1. Completely agree. I knew decades ago WG was something special, and had he never been in VP I never would have bothered as Danny McBride honestly just doesn't do it for me. It's a very crude show and something I would normally not watch. But it's one of those things that once I did, (because of WG) I was so glad I did. Lee Russell is one of WG's best roles to date. He's worlds apart from Wade ,and yet....both made me laugh AND cry. I wouldn't have given The Unicorn a try if not for WG. I just don't really do network sitcoms, or much network television anymore, if I'm honest. Another instance though, of being so glad I did. I am on episode 12 and I LOVE it. Such a sweet show, and more of a dramedy than a sitcom, which I really appreciate. I love the chemistry with the cast, and the fact that they are fleshed out characters. I will be watching the second season and here's hoping it is as good as the first !
  2. I can remember hearing about Danny McBride years ago and how he's so funny, etc and when I first saw him, he completely turned me off. I still don't think much of him. As a actor and a comedian, he's limited. However, because of Walton Goggins, I watched all of Vice Principals. More than once, actually. And I laughed (and CRIED-the last two episodes of that show are some of the best series TV I have EVER seen) more than I ever thought I would have. Even at things DMc did. Lee Russell and Neal Gamby are anti heroes (at best), outright villains at their worst, and yet I LOVED them and their friendship. Hated that they only did two seasons of the show. So when I heard of TRG, and heard WG was coming along, okay. I gave it a try. And my biggest problem with it, aside from the obvious ? It's BORING. And maybe an UO among the people who enjoy the show, but I think DMc himself looks bored. Or maybe it's just his character in this one. I get that his shows are actually more dramas with comedy moments. But in every scene, I should feel SOMETHING, and I just don't. I hate to say it, but even Walton doesn't make this good-proof that while everything he touches is better because he's there, doesn't make the project itself worth recommending. I did enjoy the one flashback show with the mom being alive. If the show had been set in the past and they went with that, and had Danny McBride playing the father, with Walton as young Billy, for the entirety of the series, I think it would've been better. John Goodman could still have a part, somehow. Maybe JG and another actor could play the characters as older versions ? IDK. But I think what I might be missing is the awesome chemistry with McBride and Goggins that they displayed in VP, that is just lost here. Righteous Gemstones is a show about horrible people, that I don't care about and cannot get invested in. VP was a similar type show, but I loved those two knuckleheads. A big part of it could simply be, that VP was written years beforehand, and there is obviously so much love by the creators in those characters and that story. And I feel like RG in comparison is just so....uninspired and lazy. It's a shame, really. I adore WG, and if I hear of a really good episode he is in for the next season, I might stop and watch it. But otherwise, I think the show's a big "meh". It makes me think VP may have been a fluke LOL. IDK.
  3. Bought an old copy of "Sonnets from the Portuguese" today at a used book sale. I love the way it smells-that slightly musty paper smell that only an old, comfortable book can have. It's one of the reasons why I'll never understand wanting an ebook or audio book over this. I haven't read EBB's poems in years and can't wait to read it this weekend !
  4. I actually didn't say Peter was likeable, I said he was fascinating. Fascinating IMO usually doesn't translate to an easily likeable character. But then I guess I tend to latch onto the complex, damaged characters. "Likeable" doesn't' have to be a criteria for me to LOVE a character. I LOVE all four of the Musketeers, because Alexandre Dumas wrote them with life and color and human traits, up to and including them doing horrible things and making horrible mistakes. And I guess that's what I'm missing here-color and life in the characters. Except for Peter and maybe one or two others, they were all so....BLAND is the word I'm thinking of. Colorless. And for a series that is supposed to best sellers, I expect more. I was bored. I hate being bored reading a book, especially a mystery. I do think most of her characters are either written with a heavy hand, and we're supposed to think they are awful, like Jane's niece, or we're supposed to love them and think they're the greatest thing ever. Bottom line for me, I don't think most of them had much of a personality to speak of. And isn't that the point in any story ? If you don't connect to, and care about, the people in the story, what's the point ? I have read that Peter might treat Clara not so great in the future books, but since I thought Clara was pretty smug and self righteous in her own right, I guess I just don't care ? I don't need my faves to be "likeable," but I do need them to be bearable. Clara wasn't for me, at all. And if she's one of the main characters going forward, no thanks. I'll save my money.
  5. A co worker has read most of, if not all, of the Inspector Gamache Series books. She said she really liked them, so I picked up the first one, Still Life, and read it. I will say Ms. Penny can create some interesting characters, but that's the most positive thing I can say about the experience of just reading the first book. I thought Peter Morrow was fascinating, so much so that after I finished the book, I had to find out what became of him, because I knew I wouldn't be reading any more of these. And then I found out, and well. Now I know for sure I won't be reading any more. I just found her to not be that great of a writer. She tells far more than she shows, in fact, it was mostly telling. And a lot of the passages, it was like she was trying to be deep and introspective, but it made no sense. I think pretentious would be a good description. Most of the characters, ,while some are interesting, are truly unlikeable people, including Peter's wife Clara (and I doubt getting the reader to dislike Clara was the author's intention). Just an overall big fat no for me. I understand these are best sellers. I just don't get WHY. Suffice it to say, if my co worker asks, I'll do the generic "eh, it was alright" and hope she doesn't ask again LOL.
  6. I'm okay with the family being a source of discussion. But that's just it-those conversations are never shown. IDK. I guess if I feel a random person like Nelle knows stuff like that about Alan, for instance, there should be a brief explanation as to how she knows. I felt the moment was more the writers going "hey look at us, we know history" . The moment didn't feel organic. I get what you are saying. I just think having Nelle also add "yeah, that Carly has a BIG mouth" or some other brief comment to explain how she knows stuff she really shouldn't know, would have been better.
  7. Even the barware ! That's why he flings it, out of jealousy ! J/K. Sort of. I don't dislike Mo as much as most here I don't think, but I cannot really abide Sonny, so I rarely watch his stuff when I check in to GH. I do think he's done some good stuff with Mike/MG, from what I've seen.
  8. IKR ?? Gaza did it years ago with Sam knowing about the heart pills. And this was early days JaSam. No reason Jason Morgan would have any knowledge of that. Just careless writing.
  9. Not really. People still bring up Tracy Q and the heart pills, and that was forty years ago. And by people, I mean viewers, when they want to wave away some stank their fave has done, by comparing that stank to Tracy's. Obviously they do it to make their fave look less revolting. Oddly enough, I think bringing up one person's sins to defend another's almost always backfires. But I also know characters have done it as well. It always strikes me as odd that characters randomly know stuff about others that they really shouldn't know. Like Nelle knowing Alan dropped a roof on Monica also about forty years ago. How would Michael know, it's hardly something Monica would tell. And it's not pillow talk stuff, so why would Michael tell Nelle ? It is not like it was general public knowledge that Alan caused the "accident" that hurt his hand. I like Finn, but I never have and never will see chemistry between Michael and Kelly. Two low energy actors equals boredom for me. And I think Finn's words were wasted on Sam. If she hasn't cut Jason off for good by now, she never will.
  10. Eric honestly needs a total revamp because his flaws far outweigh whatever good qualities he has. I don't know if it's too late or not. He's been whiney and self righteous his whole adult life. Maybe his sole purpose should just be to stand there and look pretty.
  11. I've always felt Eric and Nicole thrive on the drama and only truly want each other when there's someone or something else in the way. If they both wanted to be together and have their HEA, they could have had it years ago and no one would have cared as long as they weren't sneaking around to do it. I think they both buy into this tragic lovers kept apart vision of themselves, when in truth, the two biggest people who have kept them apart, IS themselves. I'm well and truly over them as characters and as a couple. I just don't care. I can tolerate each of them only in scenes with others.
  12. So is Jane gone now, and if so, what was the point of THAT ? If you have a legend for a few weeks, USE them. Dumb show. Wow. I'm just.....underwhelmed. No truly meaty scenes at all. Just....nothing, and then done. Okay. I don't know if we're supposed to take the whole "Jason is like Anna" stuff seriously. I mean, I know Sam is dumb and delusional and always has been. But even I don't think she's THAT dumb. Because if she IS, she kinda deserves any and all nasty things that have happened and WILL happen to her or her family. Because there comes a point with a character where you just have to say "whelp. what goes around".
  13. I think there's also the fact that Ben has actual victims that are, as far as we know, "dead', dead, and Xander doesn't. Or does he ? I honestly don't know, but I don't think he does ? And, he doesn't have the convenient excuse of mental disease. I think there is a lot more hand waving going on with Ben. He was abused/disturbed or whatever, so we are supposed to accept it. I think if you like the character, you can accept it. I think the actor who plays Ben still plays him as if that darkness is still there, just waiting to come out. Which is fine if you're treated by everyone as if you are still that person. You know, kind of like how most of the town treats Xander ? (some of them with good reason, but still). But they crossed the line with the Ben propping for me. No one is allowed to hate him, and if they do, we are supposed to see them as wrong or bad or unfair. It's ridiculous.
  • Create New...

Customize font-size