Reviews

On Cruise ships, available vids are slim pickens if you prefer quality PG-13 films or stuff from the Golden Age 1930-40's. The topics are the same, but the writers now include F-words to make the film 'more real'. On that basis, FREELANCE was one of my few 'borderline' choices as John Cena stars as a lawyer turned Navy Seal turned married lawyer turned body guard to a journalist off to interview a reclusive dictator.

I like the pace of the start-we go through those career flips in a matter of minutes. I must comment on the conduct of Cena's pretty wife: she calls for a marital split after their daughter has a controversial incident at school. Well, he'a been hired out as a bodyguard by an old friend-so, why not? I don't like to see marital ties discarded so easily, even in an action-com, as it makes women look petty & short-sighted, even if it facilitates the plot a bit. Find another way (an ORIGINAL way).

Other than that, good performances by Cena and Alison Brie (the reporter). Pretty cinematography. Fills a couple hours while my girls go to the spa & leave Grandad in peace on this cruise. Ho hum.

All I knew about the series when it appeared on PBS in /95 was that the Bennet girls encounter 2 young men of fortune, one they like & one they don't (D'arcy). Despite that, I was drawn to the D'arcy guy from the beginning, despite his hard edges. He struck me as a straight-forward no nonsense kind of guy and my family is from Yorkshire ('folks speak plainly where I come from')-so, we hit it off!

A couple of scenes strike me: Lizzie Bennet walks to the home where her sister is a guest and gets her boots all muddy. When D'arcy sees her, he is shocked (and aroused, according to the witty screenplay writer). Later in the story, D'arcy looks out his window & sees Lizzie playing with an enormous dog, quite unlike all the proper young ladies of 'society'. Yup.. She's the one for me, he inaudibly says.

Later, after a vigorous fencing lesson, he remarks, I will get over this (Lizzie). No, you won't, says I. And I was right.

Best of all: D'arcy's wealthy aunt comes to scold Lizzie & order her to NOT accept a marriage proposal from D'arcy. That aint happening, old lady, replies Lizzie, who speaks for Jane Austen & thousands of middle-class females who were bullied into withdrawal in that era.

If I ever encounter Jane, I will show her that last scene. You see, Jane, we getcha!

After episodes 1 and 2, I dug for The 'original' with Richard Chamberlain, king of mini-series, and acquired the 6-Dvd set (I just reviewed it at IMDB). So, typically, a remake is usually inferior, eh? Not so this time! ANJIN-san is well-played by a Liam Neeson cutout called COSMO JARVIS (not Kramer). The actor for the Toronaga warlord must be a relative of the original, or maybe a cyber- preserved same guy from 1981?

Since I never read the lengthy book( historical fiction), I cant help you with that comparison, but the screenplay is written with less need for sub- titles or Orson Welles narration. (The old entry had lengthy speeches that were unexplained--unless you spoke Japanese). The Eastern customs and manners are quite ancient and clash with Western. Anjin-san, our fiery protagonist, must sort these out, if he hopes to survive.

Toronaga, his 'sponsor warlord ' has a similar struggle on his hands, and finds Anjin a useful ally. Well, as the Eagles say, You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

10/10 fantastic! Tnx Disney!

I watched this series (based on Clavell's novel-historical fiction) with Richard Chamberlain twice in the 80's, the 2nd time with helpful voiceover from Orson Welles (the first time, my well-read brother provided a similar narrative of the obscure cultural points). Chamberlain did a few great pieces: Thorn Birds, Count of Monte Cristo, Wallenburg, (original) Bourne Identity...

I've only started the new Disney entry, which has the benefits of first-class production values. Nevertheless, this 1981 entry has an early 'sailing vessel in a storm' sequence that was quite lifelike. I find Chamberlain excellent in his role as 'Thorndike' or 'Anjin-san' (the pilot), who thinks he is guiding his own destiny on Japanese soil in 1600, but in reality, his boss Toranaga (who wants to be the SHOGUN, or supreme military commander) is pulling all the strings. A funny scene has a tipsy Anjin-san singing a sea ditty in sing-speak, but Chamberlain actually had a great singing voice.

I decided to re-watch this earlier series first-so, I hunted the DVD Collector Set on Amazon. Love it! (I cannot stomach seeing 1 episode per week on streaming services myself.)

Anyway, even if you like the new version, I recommend you try the 'original'.

10/10 Chamberlain=King of Mini-series!! (And alive, turning 80, in 2024!)

Steve Carey is marvellous here as the egocentric Bobby Riggs, a 55-year old hustle artist, who caught the Western world at the right time in the early 70's. Sadly, he spent too much time before the big match (with Billie Jean King) doing promo work, instead of conditioning.

Speaking of Ms. King, Emma Stone is terrific as the insecure Ms. King, although Emma's great female beauty is ramped down here so that Ms. King resembles a librarian with a good backhand. A lot of the early script is devoted to her attraction to her hairdresser, when, in fact, King was already married to a drop-dead male, her 'high-school sweetheart'. Not shown is the later tragic cost of this dalliance, in marriage AND dollars.

The tennis action is limited but well-done. How Riggs managed earlier with such powder puff groundstrokes to beat Aussie Marg Court is a mystery, but Billie Jean was a girl on a mission and was made of sterner stuff.

Female athletes today are paid much better, even if lower than guys. I note the PWHL has launched this year, with TV coverage and moderate success. At least, the ladies are being paid better --this film explains ( partly anyway) why. No language I recall, but some cuddling twixt Billie and the hairdresser -- pass or FF, whatever suits you. 7/10. 8 if they'd had more tennis!

No spoilers here, because I have no answers for you. I think my opinion is different from most, however: Florence Pugh is fantastic, of course, but I have no idea what she is upset about. The married couples live in some kind of Ariz. Or Nevada 'hot all year' and the husbands work at a top-secret government facility doing who knows what (nuclear weapon development, germ warfare? Haven't found out yet!).

Yes, the team leader is very materialistic and somewhat hedonistic-but his workers enjoy a great lifestyle in this desert community. Pugh and one or two other wives seem to fall out of favour, Pugh herself having weird episodes & fantasies (apparently). Is this re-working of the STEPFORD WIVES? I will finish up and see how this compelling mystery resolves itself. Warning: 2 needlessly explicit early scenes to skip over (Can't anyone just kiss anymore, like they did in the 30's?).

7/10 so far.

We liked FOOL ME ONCE a bit more than the IMDBers who hated it. Here's the thing: I love wings, as in 10. I cant eat 25. FOOL ME is 8 episodes-probably 4 too long. I have watched the occasional 8-part mystery that was so compelling, I would have watched 40! But these Harlan Corbin suspense things? Not so much. You can deal with a bit of 'filler'-episodes that are 70% filler are tedious. Not that the acting, or cinematography are poor--these items are quite decent. Doesn't help, though, if you are filming paint as it dries.

I wanted to compare this series to the excellent BRIT series KAREN PIRIE (3-parter), also a suspense series: in FOOL ME, a military wife investigates 2 suspicious family deaths. PIRIE is about a 25-yr old cold case (Rosie, a 19-yr old barmaid) assigned to a youngish DS. In the first episode, we see several plot developments, including a hit-and-run murder of a key witness, and the fact that Rosie had a child out of wedlock at age 16, subject child still alive, dad unknown. We are rolling! FOOL ME meanders about for 4 episodes, introducing so-called suspects and red herrings. The big hook is that the dead husband is seen by his widow on a nanny-cam. After 4 chapters, I am trying skipping to Ep.7 (I tried this successfully with other 'bulky' shows. Guess what? It works!)

6/10 barely: for some interesting moments, and some cute kids, and a pretty protagonist.

Bit of language, no skin so far! Tnx, Netflix for releasing all episodes for binge viewing!

Update Jan 27/24

Ok.. finished series. I want to downgrade to 4. No spoilers, but I cannot abide the horrendous script defects (see below). Another problem: in the end, NONE of the major characters were likeable! I make reference to THE FUGITIVE below: recall how much we liked the Richard Kimble character? He is brave, resourceful, dutiful (he risks capture by helping a kid in Emerg get into surgery). This series: Fool me Once? 'Hope I never see you again' is better title.

1) Maya determines that her husband (part of the wealthy Burkette family) was involved in some nasty things, possibly murder, and covering up the negative results of drug trials of interest to the Burkettes. Hold on-that ploy was used 3 decades ago in the FUGITIVE remake, with Harrison Ford. In a nutshell: huge drug companies release a new 'miracle drug' that bombs during testing. Company then hides the test results to ensure the drug goes to market. Greed, corruption for sure! Problem is: if the drug is bad, eventually, you get caught, and then sued, and then nailed for bribery, etc. In reality, big companies want to market QUALITY drugs that will earn big profits and NOT kill people. Why? Because they make more millions that way, and no one goes to jail. (Maybe, in other ways, they are cold & ruthless). This plot device is thin-and worn.

MINI-SPOILER 2) In the reveal, Maya (a tough, deadly shot herself) outwits a killer by removing the bullets from THEIR gun-then, returning fire. Another plot hole: experienced gunmen KNOW when a revolver is empty (they know by the weight). There are other ways to construct a scene like this, while crediting the audience with an IQ above the average water temperature.

I haven't read the novel, but, if Harlan is writing flimsy plot devices like these, it's time to re-evaluate his output, and take a night school course on mystery writing at the local community college.

...But we are stuck with her! Reyka is single-mom and profiling detective in racially-divided S. African setting, which was a fresh one for me.

She is stubborn and reckless, but her profiling skills are decent and the force is chasing a serial killer who operates in these colossal cane fields. There is another plot line involving a guy who abducted her as a young teen. She escaped after a few years and the culprit was locked up. Nearing parole, he continues to try to insert himself into her life-and Reyka displays poor character by not rejecting his plots. (This continues into Season 2, after Reyka stumbles into arresting the Season 1 criminal).

Season 2, Reyka does 3 questionable things: 1) she dates a married colleague 2) she chases a dangerous LOVER LANE killer, passes up an easy shot to disable him in flight, and then dives into the seaside at a wharf to arrest him (bad idea-how do arrest a larger man, no cuffs or life preserver? 'Hey you, Under Arrest!! Swim back to shore with me right NOW!!).

3) she relents and allows a small-time hooker to keep her endangered teen daughter

This is evidence of poor or very under-researched scriptwriting. However, I will finish season 2 as Reyka has an 'everyman' appeal: she is TRYING to do the right thing, but she makes dumb choices, (almost) like we do! I hope she catches this miserable killer who preys on couples in Lovers Lane.

Thank goodness Hanks continues to pick juicy, meaningful roles to play after 30 years of memorable film-making (ok: his chubby corrupt ELVIS manager wasn't so great.. but no one bats 1.000 in this game).

Hanks here plays Jim Donavan, the NY insurance lawyer designated to negotiate an exchange of a convicted Russian spy (whom he had defended in court) for Gary Powers, an American pilot shot down in Soviet territory. Not so easy to do walking around a recently-bricked up city of East Berlin. STASI (East-German nasty secret police) and the KGB were ruthless & unpredictable.

Hanks portrays a firm, but fair man in an under-stated but convincing manner. Other actors are at top of their game, as well. Since most 'kids' under 30 are scant in their knowledge of the COLD WAR, I almost think the film should be 'must-view' in High School history classes!

Excellent 10/10.

An Afghani-born police officer (Mardik) in the Dutch police is implicated wrongfully in a terrorist plot, that appears to involve dissident middle-Eastern villains. (Their motives are unclear, but plain revenge against Western powers is alluded to).

The story contains one of my favorite plot devices: the crossover character!! In this case, a sort of Internal Affairs cop (female, bossy, unlikeable) switches from chasing our hero of the story to helping him recover his family from another ruthless investigator. That guy is as bad as the terrorists who shoot up innocent people in a mall.

I agree the acting is suspect in places, as are the long drawn-out attacks, but the Director takes time to 'flesh out' several secondary characters. The kind of attacks we see may, sadly, become more numerous in this violent day and age. A handful of ruthless sociopaths can do major damage.

Might add: the story's attack in a mall reminds me that in Israel, well-armed security forces apparently check you 3 times: exiting the car, entering the Mall, and as you window shop! Holland may not be as vigorous-hence the relative (and tragic) ease of the caper.

No sexual activity so far (5.5 episodes in), but several stomach-turning shootings, and a volley of (stupid) F words. Buyer beware. But 9/10 anyway.

Ok. There's a big reveal in the final frame of Ep. 4. (No, I wont tell you). However, the (2) two murders that take place 'at the end of the world' (Iceland, to be exact) are not really explained, either. For that, you will need Season 2, a tactic employed only by the most cynical of Scriptwriters.

We also meet our author/amateur detective/cold case investigator, DARBY as she, and a buddy, in Ep.1, check the basement of an abandoned house for evidence of a serial killer they've been tracking. Somehow, a real killer shows up armed & fires, but the kids escape. We get no explanation for that either.

Anyway, what started as a spectacular trip involving Darby, a noted hacker & other world crisis experts to a luxury resort in the far north, becomes a murder mystery with several detours BACK into DARBY's previous exploits, per se. The scenery is spectacular and the acting is first class. Just dont expect much light on the bizarre events we encounter.

Jeff Bridges is the 'old man', a disenfranchised CIA Operative who (somehow) has been living off-grid for some time. He has 2 loyal, clever dogs who bail him out of a few scrapes.

I am on Episode 5 now, and I honestly dont recall why a conflict develops between Bridges and incumbent CIA bigwig, John Lithgow, but Lithgow dispatches major tough guys to take him out. Bridges is old, but no easy target, as it turns out. Bridges on the run also picks up a female partner, Zoe, who, despite being a beginner, is very helpful in the unfolding espionage game that ensues.

I can see why some viewers complain about muddled developments in the middle episodes, but, if I like the characters, I will overlook some shortfalls in the pacing of the story.

The performances are all good, esp. Bridges. Lithgow is fine as the 'torn' anti-hero, but maybe is just given too much to say. Overall, I rate it 8/10.

This 2016 series popped up on Apple and Disney. Anything with Hugh Laurie will be good and I dug in. He plays a kind of forensic psychiatrist (Eldon Chance) with (naturally) a troubled past. His marriage is ending & his teen daughter is 'acting out'.

Most troubling, however, is his relationship with JACLYN, an alluring blond patient who is married to an allegedly abusive homicide detective. A battle of wits ensues between Laurie & the Cop, who is determined to hang on to his spouse, and sends a few not-so-subtle messages to Laurie, who refuses to back down.

Now, the viewer has a dilemma: who's nuts here?

We see the Cop get medals for bravery and interview witnesses very professionally. Is he really a crooked cop & wife abuser? Is HE the con artist or the WIFE? Why doesn't Chance give it up? Is he hooked like some tragic anti-hero in a Hitchcock plot?

This is Season 1 and I hope to get answers before it ends. Cant help you on Season 2 yet, but I will warn you: be prepared to BINGE-big time. Like the character CHANCE, we are IN & refuse to let go.

Terrific performances all around! Why did HULU let this franchise go?

Update Nov/23: just finished Season 2, which IMHO matches or exceeds Season 1 in quality. No skin to speak of, the 4-letter words appear periodically, but the plot twists are uncanny. I liked it a bit more than Season 1, and a smart Producer would resurrect the series, if Laurie was willing (ahhhh, but many also wait for the FIREFLY series to re-appear-sadly, Nathan Filion has shown no ambition to front the 10 mill$ production costs!) and possibly inclined to fund the project? 9/10

9/10.

I had the MGM boxset of BROADWAY MELODY 1936 & 1938 sitting here collecting dust til I realized.. yup: haven't watched them yet. The 2nd entry includes Sophie Tucker (whom I saw on talk shows in the 60's) and a young Judy Garland (prior to WIZARD OF OZ) who famously sings YOU MADE ME LOVE YOU to a portrait of Clark Gable.

Other contributors: Buddy Ebsen, as a hayseed hoofer; Robert Taylor, as a (of course) HANDSOME Producer, and the nominal star, Eleanor Powell, again as a talented but unknown Class A dancer. This flick had more plot than the other musicals AND more humorous elements, all wrapping up with the BIG SHOW finale. What's interesting?

MGM had glitzier costumes & sets, but I'd still rank them only a close 2nd to RKO & Busby Berkely & Astaire. Why? Ginger Rogers was prettier than Powell, more fun to watch. Not that she danced better than Powell-she just LOOKS more girlfriend than dance instructor. You watch FLYING DOWN TO RIO-Rogers is sassy & yummy. Powell is kind of a pretty aunt.

Astaires dance choreography & sets were simple, compared to MGMs, but somehow, more intimate. Powell is a virtuoso and a delight-but her stuff is more 'formal'. When Astaire joined her in /40, his tap was terrific, but it wasnt as much fun as ISNT IT A LOVELY DAY.

I really liked /38-but it's different creature than Astaire & Rogers. 8/10.

This popped up on PRIME and what a surprise! A terrific cast and a great real-life story about a civil case involving the sale of a portion of a funeral home chain, in the deep South.

Do yourself a favor & do not look up the case and let the excellent screenplay unfold. At first, it looks like Willie Gary (Foxx) will steamroll over the Defendant, called Loewen, but there are a few stumbling blocks. The other side has their own hotshot coloured lawyer, Ms. M Downes (played brilliantly by young Jurnee Smollett).

However, some excellent digging by the Plaintiff team and a courtroom scene reminiscent of RUNAWAY JURY leads to a shocking conclusion.

Well done, guys .. 9/10!

(Note: no skin, but a bit of old boy cussin').

"What have these South Americans girls got below the Equator that we haven't got?" Just one of the snappy lines in this pre-code gem, delivered by a classic ditzy blonde. Speaking of which, Ginger Rogers is transcendent herself as a wise-cracking blond band singer. Check out the impressive negligee over sleepwear she sports for her first musical number, MUSIC MAKES DO (THE THINGS I NEVER SHOULD DO). Yes, there are several pretty sights in this flick, including the enchanting Delores Del Rio, but Ginger takes a back seat to none of them.

This film would launch the dance team of Astaire & Rogers, even though they were just secondary players, to everyone's surprise. But, apparently, for all the (sensual) dance routines in FLYING..., including the extended CARIOCA, once the film audiences saw Fred & Ginger, they wanted more, more, more! (I read once that patrons in U. S. theatres stood up, cheered and applauded during their 2 dance 'bits').

I like their stuff, the sassy dialogue, and the pretty girls.. we saw a bit of this in the pair's next project THE GAY DIVORCÉE, made just around the time of the rigid Code onset. Later, Ginger progressed to sophisticated semi-tepid womanhood and the jokes became drier and not as funny, even if the dance routines (and her wardrobe) soared to new heights.

Oops! Almost forgot: The postcard 'wipe transitions' of Rio pics were leading-edge for the day and the combo of band playing/girls-strapped-to-wings was WAY ahead of the times. The film also benefits from early talkie 'quick cuts' to get to the next scene, a ploy imitated by Seinfeld writers/editors decades later. This tactic saves the Production staff a lot of grief when they can't come up with 4 or 5 more lines to wrap up a scene. Here, we see a quick fade-out after Gene Raymond gently paddles Del Rio as recompense for slapping his cheeky face. Enough said. Move on.

Yes, I am glad the CODE kept softcore porn & bad language OUT of Hollywood movies for about 30 years (1934-1964 approx), but fun, sassy stuff like FLYING.. reminds us that Victorian values mixed with a bit of fun and wisecracks had their place, too.

1. The CIA Higher-ups decide to reactivate Gray (Patricia Clarkson), middle-aged, slightly-built lady to find a sleeper agent. Gray has been in hiding for 20 years, but they finally found her running a quiet flower shop. Sure.

2. The CIA (actually a Special sub-branch) lost 4 'secret agents' in a month. Crisis! Someone is leaking identities! Oh, no? Sorry: the Cold War is over. In these kinds of battles, most 'blown' agents are held & exchanged for other captured agents. That includes Jewish and Muslim agents in Israel, btw. Dead bodies are NOT currency.

3.. And who'd be stupid enough to eliminate 4 in a month? Talk about advertising you have a 'mole'.

4. Gray claims she has CONTACTS. Really? I thought she was in hiding for 20 years.

5. Ms. CLARKSON, fine actor, is built like an old maid Library Teacher at an Elementary school. We keep hearing talk about how lethal she is-the most dangerous thing she could do would be taking too many blood-thinner pills. Did I mention she also has a thug agent trying to follow her around (because they don't trust her?).

I am afraid this show is another in a long line of poorly-written American 'spy/suspense/thriller' series, with no bearing in reality whatsoever. Writers are not basing their storylines on real cases, or actual systems/structures, but on plots contrived previously BY OTHER WRITERS. OR maybe Screenplay software? Makes sense. None of these guys seems to know more about real Intelligence Agents or Agencies than I do, and all I did was read a few books by Le Carré or Forsythe! Apple needs to hire those Scandi or Euro-Noir writers, who seem to know what a real thriller or espionage story looks like.

Wanted to start by saying, from some angles, Emily Blunt looks like Cilian Murphy! Same eyes, same smile, even her hair looks like Jack Rippner's, from Red Eye.

She is a tough, independent SWAT team member (kidnapping) who is recruited to a Special squad that tackles CARTEL issues. She joins a laconic Josh Brolin and a very quiet Benicio Del Toro on this team. She hopes it will be more fun than her outfit in Phoenix-she just raided a Cartel safehouse with 30+ dead bodies stashed in the walls. (No surprise to me-I know what these guys are like).

She soon moves out to Juarez, where her group forms up in a heavily-armed convoy of 20 to take a Cartel kingpin to trial. Yeah, we saw that scene in CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER! When it comes to Cartels, 'aint no mountain high enough.' There will be more 'encounters'.

Great suspense. Some language. Gory in places. Not for the faint-hearted. 8/10.

I stumbled onto this film looking up films of the early 60's. PRIME offered this one for a 5$ rental-so, based on the fair to middlin reviews here, I jumped in. Yes, the blurbs say Chance (Newman) is a Gigolo, but that is not apparent til quite some distance into the film. He breezes into a swanky FLA resort town with a Cadillac convertible and an aging (but NOT aged) former Hollywood starlet, ALEXANDRA Geraldine Page-Oscar nominee here), and checks into a classy hotel.

Now we find out that this is Newman's home town, and he once aspired to marry the pretty daughter (Heavenly Finlay-Shirley knight) of the state's "BOSS MAN" (Oscar Winner Ed Begley). As you might expect in a Tennessee Williams story, BOSS wants NOTHING to happen between his daughter and this worthless Drifter.

It becomes clearer that Chance, a would-be actor, is an indentured slave to Alexandra, whose own movie career is fading. Or is it? Flashbacks tell us SOME of the picture-but not everything. Chance, meantime, must keep the booze, hashish, and 'uppers' flowing to his 'sponsor' -plus sexual favors (tough, since Newman is still desperately chasing his old girlfriend).

So, why do I classify this as pre-code? Well, in 1962, it was rated R-many elements deemed unsuitable for teens, even if not explicit. However, a 1933 audience might not have blinked at this stuff, when you compare it to the 'shocking' features in the films of the day. Surprisingly, married women under 40 were the majority audience of pre-code offerings.

It was typical of pre-code films to throw you a sudden curve at the closing curtain that patched everything up miraculously. SWEET BIRD follows suit! I wonder if Williams penned the play with pre-code values in mind, rather than the ham-handed shackles that followed later? Myself, I liked to know that bad guys might escape successfully, or a cad might get away with it somehow. Shakespeare did it!

The finale of SWEET BIRD echoes that. Watch it and see. Newman (and Page)? -Gorgeous!!

8/10.

Watching this today, I am reminded of a Far Side cartoon. Picture this: 2 buildings side by side, one labelled INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY of MIGRAINE HEADACHES, the other CHARLIE'S SCHOOL FOR MARCHING BANDS. People armed with clubs and knives are exiting the former and heading to the latter building, with very angry looks about them. The caption reads:

ONE DAY, THE DAM JUST BROKE. (--:

That's the story of this film. An ordinary family guy with perhaps a cloudy military past takes just a little too much abuse & provocation from punks, and strikes back. Gets nasty. Not for the faint-hearted. 7/10.

And not very bright 12-year olds at that! I will venture that the performances by the acting ensemble were quite credible, but the story was a disaster from start to finish.

A sniper begins shooting multiple targets in the Baltimore area, and an ordinary beat cop distinguishes herself during the investigation by snapping photos of citizens escaping a building on fire (the sniper was probably among those fleeing the property), and the FBI invite her to join them in hunting the killer. Really, the only way to process a story like this is with a lean, mean screenplay shot as a PROCEDURAL INVESTIGATION. This story is full of long chats, recriminations, second-guessing plus stupid decisions (like NOT wearing body armour). Naturally, the youngish female beat cop has the best ideas in solving the case, once again playing the anthem that a female can outthink veteran male FBI investigators, especially her superior officer who fares poorly in the story, despite being married to another guy.

You would never see a Euro-produced flick (or series) this distant from reality. My only other commendation would be: at least it was just a 2-hour film-NOT a stretched-out mini-series. I didn't detect more than 15 minutes of actual story in this concoction-so, a series would have been insufferable.

If you want great procedural crime drama, watch either of the Martin Clunes short mini-series about the investigations of real-life Brit detective, Colin Sutton (Manhunt).

To Catch: Includes: bad language, but no sexual scenes. 3/10.

Season 1 was passable stuff, with some decent action and nice Nordic scenery. The plot involves a female profiler (with 2 girls,1 female autistic) who's divorced, as she deals with a series of murders and the popular plot device, a serial killer of notable gay people. Highly-unlikely and could have been done in 6 (instead of 8) episodes.

Season 2 takes a nosedive in terms of reality & plot: the U. S. President visits and disappears (kidnapping) on Swedish soil. Our Profiler, Inger (now very pregnant via her not-so-swift cop boyfriend) stumbles onto an obscure clue & finally locates the Lady (president), played by the eminent Kim Cattrall. Apparently, a rogue element in the FBI has conspired to eliminate this ' POTUS'. With me so far? You probably know that the VP becomes POTUS by decree within a few hours of such an event, allowing for no gap in rulership. Anyway, a landing by Martians is more likely than any of this. I could write a better story for 4 episodes, instead of 8. However, I am watching both seasons in full, despite the unlikelihoods. So, its kind of fun, if not stalwart story-telling. 7/10.

Clint Eastwood entry - semi-biographical flick on the life of the troubled alto sax player, from the early Bop era of jazz. Eastwood found some 'rogue' copies of Parker jam sessions and Forest Whitaker does a great job syncing the playing.

Parker struggled with his health, adversely affected by heroin use, not uncommon in the Bohemian, late-night & travel world of pro musicians. When he dies, the Coroner over-estimates 'the age of the deceased' by about 3 decades!

My fav incident from the film involves a senior jazz player who mocks Parker's pedestrian playing, during a jam, early in the film. Charlie, (I heard from a historical narrative), resorted to woodshedding, meaning you find a quiet spot and play/practise for days on end. When the Senior guy NEXT encounters Parker, Charlie is playing these amazing non-stop scales & blowing everyone away. The Senior guy takes his own horn & case and tosses it off a bridge! I guess you call that payback. 8/10.

After you read this, read the review here by 'rooprecht' (Steve Martin's name in DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS), which was brilliant.

I can offer you a little insight: 2 attractive people who meet & would probably make a happy married couple are (probably) destined to never see each other--the girl is going on a scientific journey & will make a risky deep-sea dive; the guy is a military agent, going to Somalia to dig up insurgents.

An interesting tidbit: I spent time wondering how our fella will 'take out' the bad guys when he finds them. It's covered-you'll see!

Music & cinematography are first class. You may not get the clear or happy ending you want, but this film is about the PROCESS-not the conclusion.

Average dude turns out to have more muscle than we expected as he faces off against an underworld kingpin who has abducted 'average dude's pretty wife. The thug has had success paying off 'grieving' husbands in the past while he sells the women for enormous profits (that schtick is similar to what we saw in TAKEN).

Dude recruits a buddy and a streetwise private detective to track the gang down. Film has funny moments, despite the dark theme and includes some comic man-vs-gang moments, but little bad language or skin (PG). You have to hunt ROkU channels ruthlessly to find such offerings. Cant anybody just ACT anymore?

Great flick!