Just watched four episodes in a row. I guess you can make yourself not like Mary and Jane, or it just might not be the type of humor you appreciate. Both of the main actors have comedic talent, and the writing is good. It's fast paced and some of the humor is subtle. I like Broad City, Inside Amy Schumer, Key and Peele. Actually. Mary and Jane is a better two girl buddy show than Broad City, but not as bitingly funny as Inside Amy Schumer. Hope you give it a chance and don't be put off by people who like to feel "superior" by dissing shows they don't really understand, or those who have not watched enough to know why Mary and Jane is a half hour program instead of a five minutes one.
Reviews
4 Reviews
Better Call Saul
(2015–2022)
does help to have watched Breaking Bad
10 February 2015
If you have a short attention span that doesn't allow you to watch carefully constructed character development, then Better Call Saul might not be for you. The first two episodes of Better Call Saul were perfect for letting Saul's character develop into what he'll eventually become. Breaking Bad also had carefully constructed character development.
When reviewing the couple of negative reviews of Better Call Saul I couldn't help but chuckle: One reviewer had never watched Breaking Bad; another thinks a movie must have dialog every time he sees a face before it can be interesting. I thought the first episode opening was great: it showed Saul despair and boredom and loneliness and paranoia without one word. But if you didn't watch the ending of Breaking Bad you wouldn't know why Saul was in Omaha selling junk food. As for the dialog less opening, if you can't appreciate a character or understand his problems or motivation without having any dialog, then you're lucky you weren't born before talking movies, or lucky you've never watched the opening (what was it, 10 or 15 minutes?) of Saving Private Ryan, or The Artist, or many other great films with long stretches without any dialog, or any sound period.
One person even said that the characters were "jerks." I guess he or she has film appreciation that's limited to Disney or Harry Potter movies. Not that there's anything wrong with Disney or Harry Potter movies. But crime dramas need people who are nice all the time, or nice at any time. No better place for jerks than a crime drama. Jerks get into conflict, and conflict creates drama.
Better Call Saul carefully sets up Saul Goodman's back story—before he became Saul. But it does help to have watched BB if you want to fully understand Saul as a character. I see a great series coming and those who don't like it—well, that's your problem. Looking forward to the next episode.
When reviewing the couple of negative reviews of Better Call Saul I couldn't help but chuckle: One reviewer had never watched Breaking Bad; another thinks a movie must have dialog every time he sees a face before it can be interesting. I thought the first episode opening was great: it showed Saul despair and boredom and loneliness and paranoia without one word. But if you didn't watch the ending of Breaking Bad you wouldn't know why Saul was in Omaha selling junk food. As for the dialog less opening, if you can't appreciate a character or understand his problems or motivation without having any dialog, then you're lucky you weren't born before talking movies, or lucky you've never watched the opening (what was it, 10 or 15 minutes?) of Saving Private Ryan, or The Artist, or many other great films with long stretches without any dialog, or any sound period.
One person even said that the characters were "jerks." I guess he or she has film appreciation that's limited to Disney or Harry Potter movies. Not that there's anything wrong with Disney or Harry Potter movies. But crime dramas need people who are nice all the time, or nice at any time. No better place for jerks than a crime drama. Jerks get into conflict, and conflict creates drama.
Better Call Saul carefully sets up Saul Goodman's back story—before he became Saul. But it does help to have watched BB if you want to fully understand Saul as a character. I see a great series coming and those who don't like it—well, that's your problem. Looking forward to the next episode.
Gracepoint
(2014)
Is it possible to be fair with this series?
16 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
With all the negative stuff I have to say, I have to admit that I'm hooked on Gracepoint. And that's for one reason: I want to find out who killed the kid, and find out why everybody in that town is so stupid. Seriously. Maybe I should apply for a job as a detective there; I would've solved this mystery in one day.
I gave Gracepoint a 6 because I'll feel stupid giving it a 1 or 2 after admitting I've watch every episode so far.
I'm including a "spoiler" if you have not seen any episodes of Gracepoint, but I seriously doubt that it will spoil anything. The script and acting has already spoined Gracepoint more than I or anyone else possible could. Good actors, but they have to work with the script and the director. So, on to my comments.
OK, here comes the so-called spoiler: In the first episode, a kid gets killed and the search begins for the killer. One detective's son, Tom, is a good friend of the dead kid. When Tom learns about his friend's death, he immediately cleans the hard drive on his computer and erases information from his cell phone. The female detective's son, Tom, tells her that he and the dead kid talked on the phone and texted each other. More than once Tom's mom mentions this fact to the other detective and he does not see that as being important. Duh!
Cell phone text messages are stored and can be retrieved. Wonder how Tom could scrub only certain files and still have all the programs and applications still operate. Yep, the kid uses the computer the next day as if he's done nothing to it. Anyway, if it is possible to scrub only certain files, computer geeks can be retrieve those files. At least in three episodes, Tom mentions having texted the dead kid, but nobody is interested to see what the texts were about. I'm on episode 7 or 8, and still nobody has looked at Tom's computer fro email messages or examined his cell phone. But that's not my big problem with Gracepoint.
Loved Anna Gunn in Breaking Bad, and she's an excellent actor. Too bad she didn't make enough money from BB to hold out for a better part. I'm sure it was her agent who committed this crime against good parts. In Gracepoint, Anna Gunn plays the stupidest detective ever. But when the cops can't find the dead kid's cell phone, nobody thinks about asking Tom to see his cell phone to see what the dead kid's last text message said, or see who their friends are. The way this investigation is going, I wouldn't be surprised if the killer get tired of not being caught and turned him or herself in.
I gave Gracepoint a 6 because I'll feel stupid giving it a 1 or 2 after admitting I've watch every episode so far.
I'm including a "spoiler" if you have not seen any episodes of Gracepoint, but I seriously doubt that it will spoil anything. The script and acting has already spoined Gracepoint more than I or anyone else possible could. Good actors, but they have to work with the script and the director. So, on to my comments.
OK, here comes the so-called spoiler: In the first episode, a kid gets killed and the search begins for the killer. One detective's son, Tom, is a good friend of the dead kid. When Tom learns about his friend's death, he immediately cleans the hard drive on his computer and erases information from his cell phone. The female detective's son, Tom, tells her that he and the dead kid talked on the phone and texted each other. More than once Tom's mom mentions this fact to the other detective and he does not see that as being important. Duh!
Cell phone text messages are stored and can be retrieved. Wonder how Tom could scrub only certain files and still have all the programs and applications still operate. Yep, the kid uses the computer the next day as if he's done nothing to it. Anyway, if it is possible to scrub only certain files, computer geeks can be retrieve those files. At least in three episodes, Tom mentions having texted the dead kid, but nobody is interested to see what the texts were about. I'm on episode 7 or 8, and still nobody has looked at Tom's computer fro email messages or examined his cell phone. But that's not my big problem with Gracepoint.
Loved Anna Gunn in Breaking Bad, and she's an excellent actor. Too bad she didn't make enough money from BB to hold out for a better part. I'm sure it was her agent who committed this crime against good parts. In Gracepoint, Anna Gunn plays the stupidest detective ever. But when the cops can't find the dead kid's cell phone, nobody thinks about asking Tom to see his cell phone to see what the dead kid's last text message said, or see who their friends are. The way this investigation is going, I wouldn't be surprised if the killer get tired of not being caught and turned him or herself in.
Garfunkel and Oates
(2014)
Entertaining, insightful, and funny
22 August 2014
I'm writing mine, I'm surprised there are only two IMDb reviews of Garfunkel and Oates, and both those reviews are by people who either didn't pay much attention to the single episode they watched or they think "to critique" a show means "to criticize" it. It certainly is OK to criticize a show, if you watched it with an open mind, and actually watched more than one episode.
For one thing, how could anybody have actually watched more than one episode and think, "most of the jokes revolve around them being 'super bad at sex.'" Doesn't matter what a joke is about. What matters is it being funny. Riki and Kate are funny. Even in the pilot episode, there was a lot more going on than a single subject joke. Garfunkel and Oates is humorous fictionalized personal anecdotes and social satire. Those reviewers who didn't understand the pilot episode wouldn't understand any of the others, so it's a good thing for them they've stopped watching.
Riki Lindhome and Kate Micucci are not yet on the level of Marc Maron, Louis CK, or Amy Schumer, but they're getting there. Instead of stand-up before, after, or during their half hour skits, Riki and Kate use song parodies. The songs are short and humorous and always have something to do with the theme of the episode.
"As for the ukulele." OK, where are all those other ukuleles I've read complaints about? I watch a lot of TV and I've never seen any recurring character playing a ukulele except Kate Micucci as Shelley in Raising Hope. Actually, I've never seen many characters in recurring roles play any type of musical instrument.
Garfunkel and Oates is a lot better than the nitpicking contrarians will have you believe. Give it a chance. Entertaining, insightful, and funny. You might even learn to appreciate the ukulele, or maybe even get one of your own. You might not like Garfunkel and Oates, but those negative reviewers are grossly misrepresenting that show.
For one thing, how could anybody have actually watched more than one episode and think, "most of the jokes revolve around them being 'super bad at sex.'" Doesn't matter what a joke is about. What matters is it being funny. Riki and Kate are funny. Even in the pilot episode, there was a lot more going on than a single subject joke. Garfunkel and Oates is humorous fictionalized personal anecdotes and social satire. Those reviewers who didn't understand the pilot episode wouldn't understand any of the others, so it's a good thing for them they've stopped watching.
Riki Lindhome and Kate Micucci are not yet on the level of Marc Maron, Louis CK, or Amy Schumer, but they're getting there. Instead of stand-up before, after, or during their half hour skits, Riki and Kate use song parodies. The songs are short and humorous and always have something to do with the theme of the episode.
"As for the ukulele." OK, where are all those other ukuleles I've read complaints about? I watch a lot of TV and I've never seen any recurring character playing a ukulele except Kate Micucci as Shelley in Raising Hope. Actually, I've never seen many characters in recurring roles play any type of musical instrument.
Garfunkel and Oates is a lot better than the nitpicking contrarians will have you believe. Give it a chance. Entertaining, insightful, and funny. You might even learn to appreciate the ukulele, or maybe even get one of your own. You might not like Garfunkel and Oates, but those negative reviewers are grossly misrepresenting that show.
Tell Your Friends