Un improbabile giornalista canadese si ritrova coinvolto in una missione per scoprire la verità e, possibilmente, salvare lui stesso il mondo.Un improbabile giornalista canadese si ritrova coinvolto in una missione per scoprire la verità e, possibilmente, salvare lui stesso il mondo.Un improbabile giornalista canadese si ritrova coinvolto in una missione per scoprire la verità e, possibilmente, salvare lui stesso il mondo.
Sfoglia gli episodi
Recensioni in evidenza
Into the third episode and it's a bit hit and miss if I'm being honest. But, as an Austin Powers fan I'm going to keep watching as when it is funny, it is actually very sharp and clever.
The Netflix censored pool hall scene was sheer genius. I can't even begin to imagine how the dialogue was so cleverly pieced together to make the joke work the way it did.
Also, did anyone else get "The Prisoner" vibes or was it just me?
The Netflix censored pool hall scene was sheer genius. I can't even begin to imagine how the dialogue was so cleverly pieced together to make the joke work the way it did.
Also, did anyone else get "The Prisoner" vibes or was it just me?
A review of the first episode only: Mike Myers is back in an Austin Powers style comedy and so far it's not too bad. If you are a fan of his comedy you won't be disappointed but don't expect any LOL moments at least for the 1st episode.
I rather thought it was fun, Mike Meyers talent is on display. Keele and Ken have some fun too. Its not the funniest thing ever, but its pleasant enough for a diversion. The scene where they replay the scene without the vulgar words which makes it even more vulgar is very clever.
I'm expecting the reviews to be 1-3s or 7-9s. There will be two clear groups: you'll love it if you miss Austin Powers / Wayne's World humour with minimal evolution since that time, you'll hate it if you are expecting something fresh and new. It's as simple as that :).
Cons: it's juvenile, predictable, unchallenging base humour Pros: it's juvenile, predictable, unchallenging base humour !!
Party on Austin!
Cons: it's juvenile, predictable, unchallenging base humour Pros: it's juvenile, predictable, unchallenging base humour !!
Party on Austin!
The concept is interesting. What if there really was an Illuminati type organisation? It's a silly idea with lots of potential. Especially for Mike Myers to play a bunch of quirky characters. And for late night casual entertainment, it's pretty good.
Mike Myers can be hilarious, especially in the Austin Powers movies, but like many comedians he can also stray into very stupid and weird territory. I don't mind stupid or crude jokes per se, for example Monty Python does that all the time and they're usually hilarious. But Myers sometimes will just be weird. The jokes stop to make way for something absurd and off-putting.
This show never quite has a consistent balance. There are funny moments but plenty of lame or boring parts as well. It's frustrating, although never overly annoying. The frustration mainly comes from disappointment that it could've been very funny and insightful rather than mildly funny and very random.
Some of the cameos are fun. Keegan-Michael Key is hilarious, even just with his facial reactions. Ken Jeong is usually hilarious but doesn't get to do that much. His lines don't change anything or bounce of anyone. Lydia West was likeable although her character is less interesting by the end. Saunders was completely unrecognisable to me as the Maester.
Myers himself is also inconsistent. It's ironic, because he's clearly a very good actor. The characters really are quite different from each-other. Their voices, mannerisms, gestures, posture, timing - everything. But some of them are just weird choices. In fact, most of them are. They're all somewhere between realistic impression, over-the-top silliness, Myers being himself and believable made-up characters. A mix of those things.
In fact, in some ways, the dramatic parts of The Pentaverate work the best, at least in terms of acting. I actually cared about the main character, Ken Scarborough. Myers seems to be being sincere. But the plot is so stupid, how can I be expected to take it seriously? It's a mismatch which doesn't quite work. Some of the other characters are also fairly serious, like Lord Lordington. He wasn't funny, but he was pretty believable.
Anyway, this show was enjoyable overall although a bit disappointing by the end. I wish Myers committed more to one thing or another. Either go full retard, so to speak, and be funny. Or offer some interesting insights into modern life and politics. Have a message or a dramatic core - fine. But tone down the gross, random stuff and play up the central themes and comedy. It could've been great. Myers has plenty of talent to make great comedy.
Mike Myers can be hilarious, especially in the Austin Powers movies, but like many comedians he can also stray into very stupid and weird territory. I don't mind stupid or crude jokes per se, for example Monty Python does that all the time and they're usually hilarious. But Myers sometimes will just be weird. The jokes stop to make way for something absurd and off-putting.
This show never quite has a consistent balance. There are funny moments but plenty of lame or boring parts as well. It's frustrating, although never overly annoying. The frustration mainly comes from disappointment that it could've been very funny and insightful rather than mildly funny and very random.
Some of the cameos are fun. Keegan-Michael Key is hilarious, even just with his facial reactions. Ken Jeong is usually hilarious but doesn't get to do that much. His lines don't change anything or bounce of anyone. Lydia West was likeable although her character is less interesting by the end. Saunders was completely unrecognisable to me as the Maester.
Myers himself is also inconsistent. It's ironic, because he's clearly a very good actor. The characters really are quite different from each-other. Their voices, mannerisms, gestures, posture, timing - everything. But some of them are just weird choices. In fact, most of them are. They're all somewhere between realistic impression, over-the-top silliness, Myers being himself and believable made-up characters. A mix of those things.
In fact, in some ways, the dramatic parts of The Pentaverate work the best, at least in terms of acting. I actually cared about the main character, Ken Scarborough. Myers seems to be being sincere. But the plot is so stupid, how can I be expected to take it seriously? It's a mismatch which doesn't quite work. Some of the other characters are also fairly serious, like Lord Lordington. He wasn't funny, but he was pretty believable.
Anyway, this show was enjoyable overall although a bit disappointing by the end. I wish Myers committed more to one thing or another. Either go full retard, so to speak, and be funny. Or offer some interesting insights into modern life and politics. Have a message or a dramatic core - fine. But tone down the gross, random stuff and play up the central themes and comedy. It could've been great. Myers has plenty of talent to make great comedy.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe Pentaverate is first mentioned in Mia moglie è una pazza assassina? (1993) (1993) by Charlie's father. The deep conspiracy claims the group of five run the world meeting triennially at a secret country mansion known as "The Meadows".
- ConnessioniFeatured in Half in the Bag: 2022 Mid-Year Catch-Up Part 1 (TV Shows) (2022)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How many seasons does The Pentaverate have?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione27 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 16:9 HD
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti