There were lots of funny and interesting observations about our industry to be found today nestled in the LA Times reviews of new movies and TV shows. Paul Brownfield, in his review of the new Showtime series WEEDS, laments:
What has writer Alan Ball done to his industry? He’s like President Bush — we just don’t know the damage yet…
…the show feels more like the spawn of Ball’s "American Beauty" and his soon-to-conclude HBO series "Six Feet Under," where the answer to the question "How much more implied and expressed pain and suffering can we be witness to?" is always the same: "More."
Kenneth Turan, in his review of the movie version of THE DUKES OF HAZZARD, observes that "subversive" has taken on new meaning in Hollywood:
"The Dukes of Hazzard" is a film that is not there. It can’t really be reviewed
because it doesn’t really exist. It is not empty calories, which implies
pleasure, but simply empty. It’s a cosmic void where a movie ought to be…
…The only person who thinks "The Dukes of Hazzard" is a substantial piece of work
might be its producer, who told the Los Angeles Times, apparently with a
straight face, that the film is "a tougher, more subversive movie than one might
expect." If you buy that, you probably think Krispy Kreme doughnuts are one
tough, subversive food group.
Rober Lloyd, in his review of the movie SLINGS AND ARROWS, had this observation about Canada, where so many movies and TV shows are filmed:
Canada is all over American television, standing in for New York and Chicago,
for foggy San Francisco and rocky Colorado, but it is only in Canada that Canada
gets to play itself…
When Canada stands for Canada… the country is
revealed not as a fake America but an authentic Canada.
Whatever that is. Lloyd doesn’t say. And although I’ve spent lots of time up there, I’m not sure I could, either.