Siamois
Joined Oct 2007
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews166
Siamois's rating
This poignant yet funny series follows the evolution of three (young?) women of modest background. It features raw acting, sometimes looking almost like an improvised performance that is quite interesting.
While Ada, Caro and Fabiola are front and center, various characters surround them, most of them just as vulnerable as the three best friends.
First the good: As many reviews mention, this series succeeds in presenting a mix of comedic silliness and stunning drama. The second thing that hooked me was their environment. This series is beautifully shot and the poor neighborhood the girls grew up in is a character of its own, in all its beauty and tragedy. This constantly drives the point home: the delicate balance between being the master of your own destiny, but how strongly your origins impact you. I found this beautiful.
For the bad now. The character of Ada is portrayed as what seems like a 20 year old character with the maturity of a teenager. Problem is, Ada is.played by actress Florence Longpré, 33 at the time this was shot. This is... awkward. It gets worse. The character of Caro starts off as what can be best described as a 14 year old tomboy. Problem is... it's played by Eve Landry, a 34 year old woman at the tie of shooting.
The third friend is fortunately a struggling but more mature character, often acting like a stabilizing presence for the two others. Fabiola is portrayed by singer Mélissa Bédard who was in her mid-twenties at the time this was shot and compensates her lack of acting experience with a raw, authentic presence and a lot of natural comedic talent.
It is very unfortunate that two of the three main characters were totally miscast. As the series started, I was extremely confused seeing two mature women in their mid-30s playing what sounded like teenager. I genuinely thought this was about mentally retarded women.
Still, the series has several strong moments and gets slightly better with each season, despite a strong tendency to neglect male characters in the most obvious way.
While Ada, Caro and Fabiola are front and center, various characters surround them, most of them just as vulnerable as the three best friends.
First the good: As many reviews mention, this series succeeds in presenting a mix of comedic silliness and stunning drama. The second thing that hooked me was their environment. This series is beautifully shot and the poor neighborhood the girls grew up in is a character of its own, in all its beauty and tragedy. This constantly drives the point home: the delicate balance between being the master of your own destiny, but how strongly your origins impact you. I found this beautiful.
For the bad now. The character of Ada is portrayed as what seems like a 20 year old character with the maturity of a teenager. Problem is, Ada is.played by actress Florence Longpré, 33 at the time this was shot. This is... awkward. It gets worse. The character of Caro starts off as what can be best described as a 14 year old tomboy. Problem is... it's played by Eve Landry, a 34 year old woman at the tie of shooting.
The third friend is fortunately a struggling but more mature character, often acting like a stabilizing presence for the two others. Fabiola is portrayed by singer Mélissa Bédard who was in her mid-twenties at the time this was shot and compensates her lack of acting experience with a raw, authentic presence and a lot of natural comedic talent.
It is very unfortunate that two of the three main characters were totally miscast. As the series started, I was extremely confused seeing two mature women in their mid-30s playing what sounded like teenager. I genuinely thought this was about mentally retarded women.
Still, the series has several strong moments and gets slightly better with each season, despite a strong tendency to neglect male characters in the most obvious way.
In 1999, M. Night Shyamalan released an amazing movie by the name of "The Sixth Sense". That movie had a captivating plot that it revealed bit by bit. The slow pace of the movie was warranted by the exquisite atmosphere, solid writing and some great performances.
Those qualities that were found a very long time ago in this director's work are now completely missing. "Old" still has a crawling pace but instead of creating tension, its nonsensical story, the awful acting, the poor writing, all contribute to making the viewer cringe.
We learn from the trivia section of imdb that the movie "Old" is the adaptation of a graphic novel that left a great impression on Shyamalan. Here's a quote from the director:
"The book gave me the opportunity to work through a lot of anxieties I had around death and aging, and things like my parents getting older.""
And yet, the handling of the central theme of Old, which is aging, is handled extremely poorly and cheaply throughout the duration of the film. It's almost as if Shyamalayan turned this venture into a "who dies next" type of film and didn't bother to explore the theme of maturation at all.
Another missed opportunity from a director who unfortunately, never quite recaptured the magic found in that 1999 movie that made him a household name, a long time ago now.
Those qualities that were found a very long time ago in this director's work are now completely missing. "Old" still has a crawling pace but instead of creating tension, its nonsensical story, the awful acting, the poor writing, all contribute to making the viewer cringe.
We learn from the trivia section of imdb that the movie "Old" is the adaptation of a graphic novel that left a great impression on Shyamalan. Here's a quote from the director:
"The book gave me the opportunity to work through a lot of anxieties I had around death and aging, and things like my parents getting older.""
And yet, the handling of the central theme of Old, which is aging, is handled extremely poorly and cheaply throughout the duration of the film. It's almost as if Shyamalayan turned this venture into a "who dies next" type of film and didn't bother to explore the theme of maturation at all.
Another missed opportunity from a director who unfortunately, never quite recaptured the magic found in that 1999 movie that made him a household name, a long time ago now.
The scenes involving "old school" drug lord Pablo Acosta are very tedious and hurting the show. For one thing, the character is poorly developed while the scenes are drawn out. The intrigue concerning an old feud comes out of nowhere and lacks any emotional punch because we never knew those characters. It doesn't help that the tone is all over the place from melodramatic to comical with the awkward relationship and comedy betweenPablo and Amado.
With four previous seasons of compelling characters plotting against each other and hurting one and another, you would think they would have all the base material for a compelling vengeance scenario with characters and events we have an emotional investment in. Instead, we have long scenes about a guy we barely know, and his old feud with a guy we don't even know.
Gerardo Taracena's portrayal of Acosta is lackluster, which also doesn't help. The rest of episode is also vanilla and continues the drop in quality compared to Narcos: Mexico season 1.
I'm starting to understand why season 3 is on hold.
With four previous seasons of compelling characters plotting against each other and hurting one and another, you would think they would have all the base material for a compelling vengeance scenario with characters and events we have an emotional investment in. Instead, we have long scenes about a guy we barely know, and his old feud with a guy we don't even know.
Gerardo Taracena's portrayal of Acosta is lackluster, which also doesn't help. The rest of episode is also vanilla and continues the drop in quality compared to Narcos: Mexico season 1.
I'm starting to understand why season 3 is on hold.