jonathansanders

I stumbled upon this short film from indie Rainmaker Films, and was moderately impressed. The story was smart, though the writing was littered with clichés ... I think the film works well visually, and I was interested enough to watch it several times, so there's clearly something here that with work could have become a marketable modern noir film. However, as it stands, it is too short, the script is forced to tell a fairly complicated story in sixteen minutes, and that forces the viewer to come along for a ride they may not fully have followed. And the twist seems tacked on, almost an afterthought (or perhaps too well thought out for it to really work ... I had a hard time suspending my disbelief, despite noticing the setups throughout). I liked the indie actor who played Jimmy Ritz, though, and would like to see more of this Todd Licea (he seems like a combination of Edward Norton's compelling voice, with a screen presence like John Cusack). In the end, I gave this film a six for its potential. I'd like to see more of what Rainmaker Films has to offer, that's for damned sure.

As flawed as the acting is in this film version of Stephen King's "Firestarter", if you take it for what it was (a low budget horror flick) it serves the intended purpose. Upon competing viewing this film, I was impressed that, for the most part, the screenwriter followed the book quite closely. I was also impressed by the cast that the filmmakers put together. Who would have expected to see Martin Sheen, Louise Fletcher, Heather Locklear and a talented young Drew Barrymore in this kind of film? I will admit that in most cases, the acting was TERRIBLE. But I think that was mostly the fault of the dialogue. And the special effects were rather cheesy, though I think they were much better than most I've seen in movies of this style and from this period. Overall, I found the movie to be a good popcorn flick, and I certainly didn't feel cheated out of the two hours I spent watching it. My score: 8/10.

I have noticed that some people hate this show becuase of the flashbacks, some people hate the show because of the "bratty" kids, and others hate the show because they say it is overly derivative. But the fact is, there's nothing new under the sun, and in the end, EVERYTHING is derivative of something done before! If you're waiting for a new show to come along that is totally original, you're in for a long wait, because it isn't going to happen. Sure, the Simpsons broke new ground in the late 80s, but even that show is beginning to become derivative of itself . . .

Now on to "Grounded . . ."

I love this show. I'm a college student, and I don't have a ton of time to sit around and watch TV. But "Grounded For Life" is one show I make time to see, along with such prime shows as "24" (maybe the first real ground breaker in a while) and "Futurama". The writing isn't always the best on the planet, but I love all the characters. People say the parents are bad parents, but really they're like everyone else on this planet. They f*** something up, and they do their best to fix it. As for annoying kids, these kids aren't that bad, they're just playing the parts that were written for them. Lilly, the daughter, plays her part perfectly, accenting the trouble kids can get into and the way parents can overreact (though she thinks she knows everything, she isn't always right). The oldest son is obsessive, always worried about hygiene, while the other younger son is just plain goofy. The parents are aptly played by Donal Logue and Megyn Price, and they do a decent job of going through these hilarious episodes. We also have the brother Eddie, who is my favorite character, always in some kind of trouble, but we never do get a full idea of what all he's involved in. And then there's the grandfather, who finds himself always hanging out at the house of his son, essentially involving himself in every story, reminding me somewhat of the way the parents of Ray Romano act on "Everybody Loves Raymond", minus the utter insanity.

There's also a solid cast of regular side characters, including Brad, the ineptly goofy neighbor boy who's obsessed with Lilly, and his father, who hates the Finnertys worse than any people on earth (just watch the episode about the charity boxing match, you'll see EXACTLY what I mean!) These characters give the show a flavor lacking in all but the best shows (i.e. "Malcolm")

The best thing about this show is the flashback motif, because they're not the kind of flashbacks as used by Titus, where they're mostly (annoyingly) for the benefit of a quick laugh. These propel the story, because they ARE the story. Each episode starts after the fact, and each character tries to explain what has happened. Like one other reviewer here said, often the stories overlap, and it isn't until the end, when we find out what really happened.

Give this show a chance! It's a hilarious riot whenever I sit down to watch it, I only wish I had caught this series during its first season! Give this underrated show a chance to show you what good television is!