Reviews

In any television season, there are usually two or three new cop shows that crop up. In the last several years, these usually fell into one of two categories: the procedural that follows criminal from crime to prison - a la Law & Order and the far more common (over the last few years) forensic detail – CSI and its offspring and ilk.

In this light, Southland is a bit of a throwback. The show follows uniforms and detectives working in L.A. and, as you would expect, encountering gritty and disheartening situations. It seems to focus on two groups: a uniformed crew (people by some older, jaded cops and their younger idealistic partners), and a group of detectives (who lack the individual interest of the uniforms). The main story seems to involve a rookie (Ben McKenzie) who is stumbling through his first day under the tutelage of his experienced trainer (the enjoyable Michael Cudlitz). There was another story introducing us to the detective crew (Regina King, Tom Everett Scott, et. al.), but for me this lacked the interest of the uniforms.

We'll start with what's good. The show should be commended for avoiding the popular models mentioned above, instead aiming for a more traditional cop show. The visual style is also interesting; the show apparently was filmed on HD hand-held cameras in a faux-documentary style. The performances are good, for the most part. It also seems to avoid the gloss-over storyline. In the first episode a young victim of gang violence is not just another face, but peripheral family characters are introduced.

Unfortunately there is much that's not so good. As I mentioned, it should be commended for its throwback nature, but at times this can seem like a re-treading of Colors. The dialogue is a bit stilted ("You do what they tell you in the academy, you die.") and a couple of the actors specialize in scene-chewing. The vast contingent of characters can cause me to lose interest in the other story-line and some of the elements only serve to remind me of better shows; the gritty nature makes think of The Wire; the visual style reminds me of Boomtown; the moral ambiguity reminds me of The Shield. I don't know if NBC will give this one time to find its footing, but networks don't have a good track record.

With so many cop shows out there, the best bring a new element to a tired genre (Life, The Wire). So far this one doesn't have anything to add.

Jay Mohr, in the right vehicle (Go), is pretty good. In the wrong vehicle (Ghost Whisperer, this steaming pile), he's horrible. He has this smarmy ego that can come across as strangely charming at times, but merely annoying at others, and boy is this one of the others.

Ed Begley Jr. is rarely in good form. I think the only exception was Veronica Mars, and that's because the writers gave him some good lines, and he was killed off before he could act himself over a cliff.

Jaime King is still a mystery to me, but only because she's only been in bad shows (The Class anbody?).

Paula Marshall is the exception here. Almost always worth watching, she lights up her scenes, even with Mohr trying his hardest to pull her under. She's a relatively well fleshed out character, for a show of this type. If they made her the protagonist, I might give this another shot, but she's not, so I won't. Oh, and go back and watch Veronica Mars for her as well.

At first glance, this looks like a "Girls Gone Wild: the Movie" type of movie. Which would be fine; those videos may be morally bankrupt, but at least they don't misrepresent themselves. This, on the other hand ... ugh.

Firstly, you get more titillation from a "Girls Gone Wild" commercial than you do from this entire film. This film is actually done in the style of a documentary, following several young folks on spring break, wandering around Cancun, trying to get laid and drinking a lot. The problem is that the people are not interesting, and nothing they do matters. However they manage, the filmmakers make Cancun seem boring. So, that combined with the exploitative nature of spring break ... if I could give this negative stars, I would.

Oh, and you can't spoil a movie with no plot. Except maybe to say so-and-so hooked up with what's-her-name. But who cares?

Bill Engvall is one of those comedians that I pause for, whenever I see him. Which is why, when I spotted a television show with him starring, I decided to give it a shot.

From almost the first line, I was not impressed. And things just went from bad to worse. The jokes are not just flat, they're stale. He has problems communicating with his wife ... just like Dick Van Dyke! His kids don't listen to him, but he's proved right in the end ... just like Bill Cosby! His work keeps him away from home ... just like, eh, you get the idea. the jokes are recycled, the story lines are recycled, and the characters are recycled.

Now, I don't necessarily blame Mr. Engvall for most of this. TV after all, has a long history of pulling the teeth from comics to make them palatable for the general public. I was quite looking forward to the George Lopez Show, for example, only to be similarly disappointed. But frankly, based on the utter blandness of this show, I have to wonder, just what did Engvall fight for? Anything? Oh, and I gave this two stars instead of one because Nancy Travis is worth watching.

Adaptations of books are almost never up to the same quality as the source material, which is why this movie pleasantly surprised me.

Horror or shock movies seem to work best before the big *reveal*. Once the creature, or alien or whatever is shown on screen, there is an unavoidable disappointment, because what the human imagination creates is almost always more terrifying that what appears on screen. Jaws being a prime example. Scary as heck when all you see is someone being pulled under water; not so scary when you're watching a mechanical shark munch on a boat.

This story, by its very nature, rarely encounters this. Mist hides rather than reveals, which gives the movie makers ample opportunities for things to jump out and grab someone, just to vanish again. It works best when sticking to this formula.

There is also an interesting psychological component to the story, taken straight from the novella. Everyone is under intense strain and everyone reacts to it in different ways, with most people grasping what little control they still have. Marcia Gay Harden portrays a bible thumping lunatic (one of Stephen King's favorite caricatures) who convinces a number of others that this is the end of days and that they need to make right with God. Another group is positive that there are no creatures in the mist and that the others are scaring themselves into delusion. This exploration helps move the movie beyond the standard kill/die/survive themes of most modern horror.

The movie is not perfect. The momentum does flag a bit in the middle and the when the makers do show the monsters, they reek of CGI. And then the much talked about ending. I should mention that I was very fond of the non-ending that King penned, so I may be a bit biased, but the movie seemed to try too hard for a "you'll never see this coming!" Unfortunately I did.