Back in the ’90s, a sitcom called That ’70s Show appeared on TV screens worldwide. At that time, I didn’t watch the show regularly, but rather sporadically. I found it amusing, yet not entirely convincing. It wasn’t until the 2000s that I eventually started watching the show in English, and it was so much better than in German. Don’t get me wrong—the German voice actors usually do an outstanding job, but when it comes to sitcoms, where there are plenty of puns and wordplay, it’s difficult to find suitable translations. I loved the first few seasons, but I’m not sure if I even finished the last one. The quality dropped over time. However, a funny constant throughout the seasons was Red and Kitty. Also, the ’90s were the golden age of sitcoms, and over time, I grew to become a fan of the show.

I was really skeptical when Netflix announced a sequel set in the ’90s, logically named That ’90s Show. Of course, the first episode brought back the familiar faces from the original show to get it off to a good start. That helped a lot in warming up to the new characters. However, there was no long transition from old to new, and the new cast had to prove they could carry the legacy on their own and evolve into something fresh. After watching the 10 episodes of the first season, I wasn’t entirely convinced, but I was curious to see how the story would continue.

So, I was happy when the second and third seasons were announced, with 8 episodes each. Although That ’90s Show will never reach the quality of That ’70s Show, it manages to create its own world, which I can relate to as a ’90s kid. I wonder if ’70s kids felt the same way about That ’70s Show in the ’90s?

Red and Kitty still have their spirit, but of course, the actors have aged—going from old to even older. It’s been almost 20 years between the last episode of the original and the first episode of the sequel. As a fan of the original show, I struggle with the new cast, but I think that’s for two reasons:

1. The new cast is young, as all the characters are meant to be teenagers. Maybe I’m just too old to relate to the “dumbasses,” as Red would say.
2. The new cast isn’t just targeting people like me; it also has to reach a younger audience, which I’m no longer part of.

Nevertheless, That ’90s Show isn’t a must-watch, but rather a nice-to-watch. The 20-minute episodes are easy-to-digest, entertaining snacks. If you liked That ’70s Show and are a ’90s kid like me, you might enjoy this one too.

Mrs. Davis was an Amazon suggestion for me. Usually, I ignore these, but the synopsis intrigued me: a nun fighting an AI. Having grown up in a Christian household—and as a fan of Warrior Nun (and still active church member)—I like those fantasy stories derived from the stories told in the Bible. I wouldn’t say I am deeply religious, but rather a hopeless romantic who believes there must be something like karma (I know, not a Christian concept, so let’s call it God…) or life after death. Yet, the science enthusiast in me knows there’s no evidence for such things.

However, I decided to give the show a try, and after the first 20 minutes, I was left wondering, “Watzefack am I watching?” Even after the first episode, I still had no clue where it was going. But the ending compelled me to watch the next episode. It wasn’t until at least episode 4 that the storylines began to untangle, and the bigger picture became more and more visible.

Ben Travers of IndieWire wrote, “Mrs. Davis is made to entertain, first and foremost, and it’s a highly enjoyable experience whether you engage with its deeper issues or not. Betty Gilpin is delightful. The larger ensemble matches her irresistible energy. The visuals are colorful and vast. The scripts are tight, the momentum unwavering, and the sheer joy palpable.”

Rolling Stone‘s Alan Sepinwall said, “Mrs. Davis featured some of the crazier plot twists you will ever see, yet managed to be genuinely moving and thoughtful even in the middle of all its ridiculousness.”

I couldn’t agree more with these reviews. The way Mrs. Davis is told proves that creative storytelling can elevate a story, and the idea behind Mrs. Davis isn’t bad at all.

I had never heard of the show before Amazon suggested it, but it truly surprised me. I would recommend it any time, even if you’re not particularly interested in Christian history.

My Rating: 4.5 out of 5

The eagerly awaited third installment of the Deadpool movies kicks off in full throttle right from the opening sequence, staying true to the Merc with a Mouth. I’d say this is Ryan Reynolds’ masterpiece (so far). However, you may wonder why I give “only” 4.5 out of 5 stars: because the movie is only half as funny if you don’t know Deadpool or the Marvel universe. Movies like Iron Man or Captain America served as gateways into the Marvel world for those unfamiliar with the comics. Deadpool & Wolverine is not quite like that. Of course, it won’t appeal to those who haven’t seen the first two movies, but even then, that’s not enough. The movie is a 2-hour Easter egg collection for nerds. Moreover, it’s a buddy movie – a film where two buddies play two guys who become buddies.

The movie boasts a nearly perfect cast with plenty of surprises, keeping interest high throughout. The chemistry between the actors is palpable, particularly between Reynolds and Jackman, breaking through the fourth wall.

Reviewing a movie like this without spoilers is challenging, but I can confidently say my rating is from a fan’s perspective. If you’re not into this world, it’s a violent action movie with explicit language and some good (dad) jokes – something that might rate as a 1.5 out of 5 stars for some.

I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and I watched it with my best buddy – my wife, who enjoyed it too. So, I can’t even think of rating this movie poorly. Grab your buddy, wife, husband, girlfriend, boyfriend, or whatever buddy, and go see Deadpool & Wolverine. It’s a blast, that makes your inner teenager giggle.

When “Obliterated” showed up in my Netflix recommended content, I was highly skeptical. The cover shot gave me Adam Sandler vibes: it looked so incredibly stupid, it’s something I didn’t want to watch. Now, it’s been a few weeks since I finished watching the show, and I still feel well-entertained when I look back. And yes, if you like Adam Sandler movies, you’re most likely to like this series, too. For me, as I really hate Adam Sandler movies, this was a huge hurdle I had to overcome. But after watching the trailer, I was like, yeah, let’s give it a try. And I wasn’t disappointed.

The first episode sets the frame for the plot, which is as generic as it could be – Russians bad, Americans good, a hidden bomb, and a limited amount of time to save millions of people. This could be straight from any 1980s action movie, but with a funny little twist: the squad is absolutely hungover. Unfortunately, the show can’t maintain that condition throughout, but that was to be expected. When comparing the 1980s to the 2020s in a sociocultural and geopolitical context, some parallels come to mind:

• The world is fucked.
• It’s a gun-rattling standoff between the USA and Russia.
• The world of mass media is expanding.
• New technologies, such as home computers, have entered people’s lives.
• Life seems more complicated and complex than ever, and people crave simple solutions (that don’t exist).
• The necessity of environmental protection measures is significant.
• Sexuality is breaking free – it’s the age of coming out and recognizing transsexuality.

But what does all this have to do with an entertaining TV show? A lot. These factors shaped the art, culture, and society of the 1980s and early 1990s. And it’s happening again. As mentioned above, the plot is not new. Also, the characters are nothing more than a bunch of stereotypical clichés. But there are some things that were changed to meet a contemporary audience:

• Diversity is real.
• The leader of the pack is female.
• Nerds can be naughty and badass too.
• Homosexuality (and LGBTQ+ in general) is normal.
• The super-soldiers are people like you and me, with strengths, weaknesses, and families.
• Pretty women can make good villains.

And as much as I appreciate these contemporary additions, there’s a downside to almost each one of them:

• Although the team is diverse, in the end, they are still just a bunch of stereotypes. Diversity feels like a must-have.
• The leader is always questioned or even attacked by men who seem to have a problem with a female boss. This reflects reality, yes, but I think filmmakers should rather show the way it should be, depicting a reality where men don’t behave like assholes and accept stepping back behind a woman.
• The Nerd is an Asian girl. Well, at least it’s a female. Of course, someone has to take that role, but a less stereotypical approach would be nice. Why not the black or white full-body muscle?
• LGBTQ+ is normal. So why still make a fuss about it when one friend finds out about another? Even worse, when a man finds out about his best friend, there needs to be a talk. But it’s totally normal when a woman “accidentally” turns a bride on her bachelorette party.

Yet, I found the series highly entertaining. It has all the stuff I liked in the movies I grew up with in the 80s/90s. I know I might be way too critical for such a no-brainer entertaining show, but the subtext defines a frame. However, I really enjoyed watching it. If you don’t overthink it, it’s fun. The world’s not only black and white, right or wrong. There are a lot of assholes in the USA, and not only assholes in Russia. And so this series is neither good nor bad but very entertaining.

And yet, I found the series highly entertaining. It has all of the stuff I liked in the movies I grew up with in the 80s/90s. I know, I am maybe way too critical for such an no-brainer entertaining show, but the subtext defines a frame. However, I really enjoyed watching it. If you don‘t overthink it, it‘s fun. The World‘s not only black and white, right or wrong. There are a lot of assholes in the USA, and not only assholes in Russia. And so this series is neither good nor bad, but very entertaining.

To be honest, I never read the books, but it’s impossible to have never heard of them if you read (crime) books. I always wanted to read them, but there are so many books and so little time. I even bought the books, but they’re still unread on my e-reader. However, I think we can all agree that reading books and buying books are two different hobbies. Ideally, you have both of these hobbies. However, I think Simon Beckett’s books about Dr. David Hunter, a forensic anthropologist with a tragic past, wouldn’t be such worldwide bestsellers if they were as boring as the TV series. So yeah, spoilers ahead. Here’s the first one: read the book, don’t waste your time watching this pathetic attempt of a film adaption.

After I started watching the epilogue of episode 1 and the intro, I stopped watching because I wanted to watch it with my wife. It gave me some True Detective vibes, and we both loved the first season of that show. With that, my expectations grew, but it only got worse from there. The entire series (6 episodes) is the definition of a mediocre TV production. It’s like an early 90s TV production in the glossy (or in this case gloomy) HD look of today’s zeitgeist. I really hoped to eventually learn some interesting chemistry things, but no, all I got were lousy flashbacks of a family tragedy.

But where to start? Well, maybe with the misleading name of the series “Chemistry of Death,” which is the name of the first book. To my surprise, that was settled in the first two episodes. The following four episodes are an adaptation of the second book, “Written in Bone.”

I could go on about the acting, the special effects, the storyboard, the annoying flashbacks, the pacing, the direction—you name it, everything is just meh. And as this show wasted 6 hours of my time, I won’t waste any more of your time reading about (another) film adaptation gone terribly wrong. Go read the books!

But to finish with a highlight: the title track Aftermath by Mogli is really sweet.

While I was watching the movie, I was already thinking about what I could write here because it’s kind of sensational to witness a bad Guy Ritchie film and an outstanding Hugh Grant performance at the same time. But sometimes, somebody else already has the words you’re not finding. In this case, I stumbled upon an IMDb review by user arabnikita that perfectly nailed it. Thus, I will borrow arabnikita’s words:

“This is how I imagine the pitch for this film went.

Producer: ‘Hey Guy, we got a bunch of money from some brands and countries and they want us to make a commercial… I mean a movie.’

Guy: ‘Can we travel around the world, drink nonstop, and pretend to care about the whole thing?’

Producer: ‘Say no more!’

I love Guy Ritchie’s films and will watch anything this man makes, but Operation Fortune didn’t even feel like it was made by Guy Ritchie. Frankly speaking, as I watched the first half, I was getting the impression that many of the scenes were filmed on a phone and then were stapled into the film. The second half does change for the better, but it can’t shake the sensation left by the half-baked scenes in terms of visuals, audio, and production.

The story is about a mercenary team that is hired to get a briefcase with some stolen weapon. To be honest, the plot felt like listening to a drunk guy telling a story as some scenes got a lot of attention, some didn’t make any logical sense, and everything was flashy and colorful. The worst part of it all was that there were no trademarks which Guy Ritchie is known for, such as snappy dialogue, sharp humor, and interesting storytelling. The actors were likable and had some level of charisma, but most of the time it felt like watching a few buddies having fun instead of a dedicated cast making a film.

The film that kept coming to my mind the entire time was Grown Ups 2, where Adam Sandler took his friends for a nice vacation and accidentally made a movie at the same time. I wouldn’t say I was infuriated by any element of Operation Fortune, but after enjoying The Gentlemen and Wrath of Man, I expected Guy Ritchie to put in more effort. The action was decent and the second half was kind of exciting, but that’s about it. Whether you like his work or not, I would recommend avoiding this film as there is no logic, no humor, and most importantly, no Guy Ritchiness whatsoever.”

Source: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw8822761/?ref_=tt_urv

Jerry Seinfeld is a comedian I deeply respect, though I’ve never been a fan of him or his self-titled sitcom. Despite this, I recognize that Seinfeld has touched many people worldwide with his work, which is an outstanding achievement.

Now, Seinfeld returns on Netflix with “Unfrosted,” a 90-minute comedy that is just the right length for a movie like that. This presumably Kellogg’s co-financed story about Pop-Tarts is colorful and a bit over the top, reminiscent of “Who Framed Roger Rabbit“, “Lemony Snicket,” or “Barbie.”

While the story is fairly predictable and unsurprising, the jokes and puns span from 1980s and early 1990s knee-slappers (Level: Dad Joke) to moments of absolute genius. This blend is what I’d expect from Jerry Seinfeld, and perhaps also the reason why I never became a fan him. Yet, Seinfeld delivers his signature style, and that’s noteworthy.

The movie’s best feature, without a doubt, is the cast. When a Jerry Seinfeld calls for a casting, it seems everyone in Hollywood wants to be involved, no matter how small the role. I won’t list everyone here because the list is far too long, but Hugh Grant, and the Mad Men Jon Hammand John Slattery stood out, making me laugh the hardest. Their performances, coupled with the jokes around their roles, highlight Seinfeld’s brilliance.

Someone else might have made more out of the story, but I had fun watching the movie. It’s not a piece of art or an innovative flick; it’s just perfect entertainment for a Sunday evening.

After watching Season 1, I was really enthusiastic about Resident Alien. But now, after having watched Season 2, it’s time for disenchantment. I still find this show highly entertaining, but it seems to have lost its ease.

Season 1 consists of ten episodes, which seems to be a perfect length for shows with an average episode duration of about 45 minutes. However, Season 2 comes with 16 episodes, requiring more dramatic composition. It feels like the writers couldn’t decide on one direction. Instead of building up to a tense climax, the show creates numerous loose ends which, fortunately, are eventually resolved. Most of them. There’s still room for a cliffhanger. There are many events happening in Patience, Colorado, but only a few of them significantly drive the plot. I am both glad and sad that Season 3 will only consist of 8 episodes.

But the humor remains on point and serves as good compensation for the tedious, lengthy parts. Once again, there are plenty of Easter eggs that make me smile, many of which others may not understand. I’m pretty sure I didn’t catch every reference.

Resident Alien Season 2 is fun to watch, but if it had been the first season, it wouldn’t have made me a fan.

Update: When I wrote that post, I had only seen the first season. Meanwhile, I finished season 2, and now I’m waiting for season 3 to come to Germany. So the following review only applies to season 1.

I hadn’t heard of the series before Netflix recommended it to me. With the familiar face of Alan Tudyk, it caught my attention. I know him from “A Knight’s Tale,” “Firefly”, and “Tucker and Dale vs. Evil.” He’s one of the less commonly known actors, I guess, but I really like the roles he chooses, and I love how he brings life to his characters with little funny or absurd details that make the usual unusual.

The same goes for Resident Alien. The plot is pretty trivial: an alien crashes in the boring city of Patience (the name…) in Colorado (why do aliens always land in the USA?), disguises himself as a local outsider, lives undercover in a small-town community, and gets unwillingly to know the people. The alien replaces Dr. Harry Vanderspeigle, who happens to have the bad luck to meet the alien after the crash, and moves into his lonely cabin at a lake. Coincidentally, the local town doctor dies, and Harry gets called to the crime scene. And so the climax begins.

As the higher-developed aliens seem to know everything about the human species, they don’t understand why humans do human things. Again, this is not new: the super-intelligent, highly logical, and non-emotional alien 🖖🏻, but Tudyk just fills the role in his very own manner.

Also, not new: the aliens want to eradicate mankind from the surface of the Earth because humans behave like assholes and destroy their own home planet. Again. They’ve done that already multiple times, e.g., with the Mayas. As I mentioned previously: humans doing human things.

But then again, there is this thing with the feelings and emotions that are unknown to the alien species, but through Harry’s body copy, the alien suddenly is confronted with being human not only from the outside but also from the inside. That leads to questioning his mission.

Besides Alan Tudyk, the other members of the cast also form a great ensemble: Sara Tomko, Corey Reynolds, Alice Wetterlund, Levi Fiehler, Judah Prehn, Elizabeth Bowen, and many more.

And it’s the subtle details that make me smile, like the names “Patience” or “Mayor Hawthorne”, and that make Resident Alien a lovable show.

Just when I hear the name Dick Turpin, a rush of memories hit me. Remembering all the fun I had as a kid watching Sidney James and the “Carry on…” movies.

The historic person of Richard Turpin (1705–1739) was an English highwayman, son of a butcher, whose exploits were romanticized following his execution in York for horse theft. In the early 1730s, Turpin became involved with the Essex gang of deer thieves. The Essex Gang is also part of the new show available on Apple TV.

He is also known for a fictional 200-mile (320 km) overnight ride from London to York on his horse Black Bess, a story that was made famous by the Victorian novelist William Harrison Ainsworth almost 100 years after Turpin’s death. Ainsworth’s legend of Black Bess was repeated in works such as Black Bess or the Knight of the Road, a 254-part penny dreadful published in 1867–68. In these tales, Turpin was the hero, accompanied by his trusty colleagues Claude Duval, Tom King, and Jack Rann. These narratives, which transformed Turpin from a pockmarked thug and murderer into “a gentleman of the road [and] a protector of the weak”, followed a popular cultural tradition of romanticizing English criminals.

Apple takes the historic facts and turns it into a 6 part comedy show (so far), with a 30 minutes runtime per episode. Noel Fiedlung portrays the highway man, and I think his kind of humor is polarizing, and thus, I think there will be many people not liking the series at all. I know Fielding from his appearance in the IT Crowd. I like his sense of humor, but it took me one episode to get into it.

Dick Turpin is not a must-see, but a fun-to-watch.