"The Truman Show" Review (No Spoilers)
Also reviews for the latest episodes of The Simpsons, The Great North, Bob's Burgers, and Family Guy, and the novel Intensity. There are no spoilers in The Truman Show review but there are major spoilers in the other five reviews.
The Truman Show
I honestly suspect this is going to be the hardest review I've ever had to write. That previous sentence both scares the HELL out of me and excites me in equal measure. I can do this. I'm sure of it.
The Truman Show is probably the most unfortunate movie I have ever seen. I wish to God I and the rest of the world had seen it under different circumstances. We were all robbed. I think the only people who have ever seen this movie the way it was meant to be seen must have been the preview audiences at test screenings. For the rest of us, this amazing movie is much less amazing than it should have been.
I mentioned the review is going to be difficult to write. Because I am going to do everything in my power to not describe a single thing that happens in the movie. On the one in a million shot someone who reads this review has never heard of this movie and is intrigued by the review, my suggestion is to watch it immediately on HBO Max (or whatever streaming service is currently playing it) but under NO circumstances read the synopsis accompanying it. It amazes me that the movie is constructed as a mystery, revealed about two thirds of the way through. And the solution was literally spoiled in every ad and trailer. The real answer to what is going on is the most self-evident answer of course, and explains various other character viewpoints, and how they know the things they do. But I truly believe this movie would have been better appreciated by society if nobody had known that specific twist ahead of time, and puzzled it out along with Truman himself.
The thing that kills me is that I can't think of a single way to sell the movie otherwise. But I mean, The Crying Game did a mysterious ad campaign that revealed nothing but hyped the audience on the fact that everyone was talking about the movie but refusing to give away its secrets. I wish this movie had been able to do that.
But it couldn't. Because it starred Jim Carrey. I don't wish it starred anyone else, as I think Truman is his best role, and I can't picture anyone else as the character. But it's also Carrey's first real serious role outside of the TV movie "Doing Time On Maple Drive". If you sell people a Jim Carrey movie while refusing to say what it's about, his many talking-out-the-butt fans are going to be pissed it's a drama. So I get the trailers and marketing campaign.
I shouldn't even be comparing it to The Crying Game. Because people kept that secret. Maybe The Empire Strikes Back is a better comparison. The Empire Strikes Back is another movie whose enjoyability has been completely destroyed by pop culture. And while many people will agree with me in hindsight about this, the truth is it's ALWAYS been that way, even the summer it was released. I'll drop some spoilers for that now because we've all seen it.
People can say as many complimentary things about Empire as they want. They can call it the best Star Wars film ever and praise it as having never been equaled. The truth is it does not pack the punch it did when it was first released. And in fact, I'll argue why this was a problem for that movie even BEFORE it was released. Maybe if I talk about these things from THAT movie, you'll understand why marketing failed THIS movie.
But "Luke, I Am Your Father," is the surprise twist of Empire. But everybody knows that line now, and even before any modern kid has seen that movie, not matter what age they are, they all know Luke is Vader's kid. All of them. It's in the pop-culture zeitgeist. That ending shocked, amazed, and appalled Star Wars fans in equal measure back in the early 80's. And that reaction is simply not possible anymore. "Rosebud" from Citizen Kane has a similar problem, although nowhere NEARLY as bad.
But I would argue viewers of that movie were ALWAYS screwed out of a perfect moviegoing experience. Because of damn George Lucas. Time Magazine had this utterly tacky cover the summer it was released, which was a grotesque close-up of Yoda's head which made him looks even uglier and more vulgar than he already did excitedly saying "Can you believe this weird little green guy is actually gonna be Luke Skywalker's new Jedi trainer?" And while the cliche of the wise ninja master being the annoying old person the student initially dismisses is a well-worn trope, that doesn't change the fact that in the movie itself, Yoda's real role was played as a surprise, utterly spoiled and ruined by the Time Magazine cover. Like The Truman Show, I believe there really aren't any people who ever actually saw that movie the way it was intended to be seen.
I want to go over every inch of The Truman Show with you. I want to discuss the perhaps controversial nature of the ambiguous ending and why I felt it was absolutely right and perfect, but I can't because that would reveal details. Here is my compromise. If and when I see this film again, I'll do another review with a spoiler-filled deconstruction. I'll talk yer ear off. Until then I'm using no spoilers in this review in the one in a million chance someone who reads my reviews and has never heard of this film is intrigued by the review itself. Avoid spoilers at ALL costs. You will be in for an amazing treat. It was amazing for me too, but even back when I first saw it in the theater I was annoyed that was spoiled ahead of time. Do not let society's mistakes be your own, if you're never heard of this. It's an amazing film. *****.
The Simpsons "Boyz In The Highlands"
I'm giving that a solid four stars, but the truth is, the season has been dynamite. In a worse season I'd be giving that five stars. It's only four because of the curve. It was great.
I like how there wasn't an unrelated first act. I understand that is a Simpsons staple, but it's one I've never liked or appreciated. I like the rare episode that's confident enough in its own story that it tells it from the beginning.
Lisa's only child subplot felt very weird, and a demand no kid should ever be allowed to make. When Homer's initial reaction to the idea was to pass, it was right. I think Marge was being far too indulgent in overruling him.
Let me say this and see if you agree. I believe this was Martin Prince's best showing ever. His fury at Bart's cowardice was righteous, and his anger at his lot in life also explained a LOT about the character and the hang-ups he's always had. It was a Tour de Force for the character. And yet, it was Grey Griffin who voiced him. Would Russi Taylor have done a better job? Yes. But the fact that this WAS my favorite Martin appearance in 32 seasons says that the show's (and the rest of animation's) insane rule of "retiring" most characters whose original voice actors have died is appallingly wrongheaded. Can you imagine the amazing Lionel Hutz and Troy McClure episodes we're been denied over the decades for no good reason? Edna Krabappel's arc feels weirdly unfinished too. And yet, Martin has achieved untold depths because the producers knew that Russi "The Show Must Go On" Taylor would not have liked the character to be retired after she died. Do you now see how dumb it is to get rid of cartoon characters just because their original actor is unavailable? It's like saying nobody else but Ian McKellan should ever be allowed to play Macbeth again. Like characters in stage plays, cartoon characters should be designed to outlive their original actors (with very few exceptions, mostly on Family Guy).
You heard this exact opinion cross my lips when it looked like John DiMaggio wasn't going to return to Futurama. That whole "Nobody can play Bender but DiMaggio" idea was put forth by people who truly don't understand the selling point of cartoons. The selling point is you CAN use Bender if DiMaggio says no. I'm glad they worked it out, and he was treated fairly. But him returning was never a deal-breaker for me, and it shouldn't have been for the producers either. That's not how cartoons should work.
I really liked the smashcut flashbacks of the kids committing their crimes. Bart's was best, probably by virtue of being first. But they were all funny.
Nice brutal shots at film students. The Simpsons has never been afraid to make irreversible enemies of large segments of society for no apparent reason whatsoever (or even actual benefit to the show). The writers are simply buttholes. And sometimes, that's enough as far as comedy is concerned.
The traveling montages were pretty funny too.
I will say this. In the episode where Martin FINALLY called Bart on being a conformist and a follower, it felt wrong that the happy ending for both characters involved them ultimately being praised by the bullies. I am aware that children will say one thing and do another about this precise topic, but it felt wrong from a narrative standpoint, and sucky kids don't actually write this show. Do they?
In short, this was a really good episode for this season. In a different season, it would have been considered a great one. I will still argue it's Martin Prince's best episode at any rate. ****.
The Great North "Saved By The Spells Adventure"
The Alanis Morrissette bit at the beginning was a good one.
I am struck by what a nice guy Judy's principle is.
Beef's stuff with Moon over the CB radio was adorable.
I have no idea why Honeybee and Wolf work. But they somehow crazily do.
Cute. ***1/2.
Bob's Burgers "Frigate Me Knot"
Man, what a great ending. The idea that those guys always looked up to Teddy and considered him their friend is this show at its best.
I liked Louise's twisted monkey thing.
For the record, when Linda is finished telling her story, it reminded me why I would never be friends with that character for any reason. She makes Melania Trump look classy in comparison. She is so freaking gross.
I liked the guy having to explain the knot to Bob as if he's a little kid. Him finally being able to do it is not the moral victory the characters think it is.
That was great, but I'm subtracting half a star because Linda makes me want to puke. ****1/2.
Family Guy "Lawyer Guy"
Huh. New character. Brick Baker won't be replacing Doug's place of importance on the show anytime soon.
Frankly, I found the idea that Peter sued his neighbor without even meeting him ridiculous. Far more ridiculous than it being his lawyer.
Also, I have always considered "Family Guy" one of the worst names for a popular TV show ever. Only Arrested Development is worse. It's a name the show should be ashamed of. It pisses me off instead that they have been putting it in the end of random episode titles since the show came back. This was probably the worst example of that ever. Awful episode title, and maybe the worst the show has done since Season 1.
I love the guy from Brooklyn doing the play-by-play to the Surfin' Bird musical.
I loved Chris cheering at the excited energy Peter brought into the room.
Man, I forgot Tom Everett Scott existed. That bit answered the question of what would happen if that untrue mean-spirited joke about Ron Livingston being forgettable were an actual thing for another actor. Tom Everett Scott qualifies. I don't even remember what he looks like.
Local commercials always getting cut off at the end drives me nuts. It's amazing. All of the commercials are awful and I'm still always frustrated when they get cut off. Why is that? What is this deeply held belief in my psyche that everything on TV deserves a sense of completion, no matter what it is? It's very weird and human at the same time.
I love Lois making fun of the woman at the market who called Peter for her real estate business. That was super embarrassing.
I like hearing Sam Elliot say the words "fish whiz".
It was a pretty good episode. As far as winning the night of Fox toons goes, it surprises me that on the night The Simpsons delivered perhaps the greatest Martin Prince episode EVER, that they were not only slightly edged out by Bob's Burgers, but a Bob's Burgers that contained a poopy story from Linda. Weird night. ***.
Intensity by Dean Koontz
I read this years ago and vaguely liked it. The idea of a horror story with no tension breaks is an interesting trope subversion. But I think there are points Koontz crosses the line here from female victim empowerment to actual exploitation
Oh, well, he wouldn't be the first horror writer that did that. I love Stephen King, and even I will acknowledge his stuff during his cocaine days crossed those lines multiple times.
Years later, as I've become a slightly (but only slightly) more sophisticated reader and absorber of pop culture, I'm able to recognize that Koontz's prose kind of stinks. If he told this exact story straight, it would be fine, but Koontz has this laughable tendency to try and write powerfully lyrical phrases and beautifully poetic text. And he's no good at it. And if you aren't good at that specific thing, and you try it, you look silly. I consider myself a pretty good writer. But I suck at poetry and profound prose. And NONE of my writing has been worse for its absence. Write what you know, Mr. Koontz. Trying to rise above your narrative station just makes you look foolish. Stay in your lane.
I get why this book sold a ton of copies, and why Koontz is as successful as he is. And it is pretty interesting as a page-turner, no doubt. But it also feels poorly written. Maybe if a story is decent it shouldn't matter how it's told. But maybe it actually does. And the story may be decent (if offensive on some level). But it's told poorly. **1/2.
The Truman Show
I honestly suspect this is going to be the hardest review I've ever had to write. That previous sentence both scares the HELL out of me and excites me in equal measure. I can do this. I'm sure of it.
The Truman Show is probably the most unfortunate movie I have ever seen. I wish to God I and the rest of the world had seen it under different circumstances. We were all robbed. I think the only people who have ever seen this movie the way it was meant to be seen must have been the preview audiences at test screenings. For the rest of us, this amazing movie is much less amazing than it should have been.
I mentioned the review is going to be difficult to write. Because I am going to do everything in my power to not describe a single thing that happens in the movie. On the one in a million shot someone who reads this review has never heard of this movie and is intrigued by the review, my suggestion is to watch it immediately on HBO Max (or whatever streaming service is currently playing it) but under NO circumstances read the synopsis accompanying it. It amazes me that the movie is constructed as a mystery, revealed about two thirds of the way through. And the solution was literally spoiled in every ad and trailer. The real answer to what is going on is the most self-evident answer of course, and explains various other character viewpoints, and how they know the things they do. But I truly believe this movie would have been better appreciated by society if nobody had known that specific twist ahead of time, and puzzled it out along with Truman himself.
The thing that kills me is that I can't think of a single way to sell the movie otherwise. But I mean, The Crying Game did a mysterious ad campaign that revealed nothing but hyped the audience on the fact that everyone was talking about the movie but refusing to give away its secrets. I wish this movie had been able to do that.
But it couldn't. Because it starred Jim Carrey. I don't wish it starred anyone else, as I think Truman is his best role, and I can't picture anyone else as the character. But it's also Carrey's first real serious role outside of the TV movie "Doing Time On Maple Drive". If you sell people a Jim Carrey movie while refusing to say what it's about, his many talking-out-the-butt fans are going to be pissed it's a drama. So I get the trailers and marketing campaign.
I shouldn't even be comparing it to The Crying Game. Because people kept that secret. Maybe The Empire Strikes Back is a better comparison. The Empire Strikes Back is another movie whose enjoyability has been completely destroyed by pop culture. And while many people will agree with me in hindsight about this, the truth is it's ALWAYS been that way, even the summer it was released. I'll drop some spoilers for that now because we've all seen it.
People can say as many complimentary things about Empire as they want. They can call it the best Star Wars film ever and praise it as having never been equaled. The truth is it does not pack the punch it did when it was first released. And in fact, I'll argue why this was a problem for that movie even BEFORE it was released. Maybe if I talk about these things from THAT movie, you'll understand why marketing failed THIS movie.
But "Luke, I Am Your Father," is the surprise twist of Empire. But everybody knows that line now, and even before any modern kid has seen that movie, not matter what age they are, they all know Luke is Vader's kid. All of them. It's in the pop-culture zeitgeist. That ending shocked, amazed, and appalled Star Wars fans in equal measure back in the early 80's. And that reaction is simply not possible anymore. "Rosebud" from Citizen Kane has a similar problem, although nowhere NEARLY as bad.
But I would argue viewers of that movie were ALWAYS screwed out of a perfect moviegoing experience. Because of damn George Lucas. Time Magazine had this utterly tacky cover the summer it was released, which was a grotesque close-up of Yoda's head which made him looks even uglier and more vulgar than he already did excitedly saying "Can you believe this weird little green guy is actually gonna be Luke Skywalker's new Jedi trainer?" And while the cliche of the wise ninja master being the annoying old person the student initially dismisses is a well-worn trope, that doesn't change the fact that in the movie itself, Yoda's real role was played as a surprise, utterly spoiled and ruined by the Time Magazine cover. Like The Truman Show, I believe there really aren't any people who ever actually saw that movie the way it was intended to be seen.
I want to go over every inch of The Truman Show with you. I want to discuss the perhaps controversial nature of the ambiguous ending and why I felt it was absolutely right and perfect, but I can't because that would reveal details. Here is my compromise. If and when I see this film again, I'll do another review with a spoiler-filled deconstruction. I'll talk yer ear off. Until then I'm using no spoilers in this review in the one in a million chance someone who reads my reviews and has never heard of this film is intrigued by the review itself. Avoid spoilers at ALL costs. You will be in for an amazing treat. It was amazing for me too, but even back when I first saw it in the theater I was annoyed that was spoiled ahead of time. Do not let society's mistakes be your own, if you're never heard of this. It's an amazing film. *****.
The Simpsons "Boyz In The Highlands"
I'm giving that a solid four stars, but the truth is, the season has been dynamite. In a worse season I'd be giving that five stars. It's only four because of the curve. It was great.
I like how there wasn't an unrelated first act. I understand that is a Simpsons staple, but it's one I've never liked or appreciated. I like the rare episode that's confident enough in its own story that it tells it from the beginning.
Lisa's only child subplot felt very weird, and a demand no kid should ever be allowed to make. When Homer's initial reaction to the idea was to pass, it was right. I think Marge was being far too indulgent in overruling him.
Let me say this and see if you agree. I believe this was Martin Prince's best showing ever. His fury at Bart's cowardice was righteous, and his anger at his lot in life also explained a LOT about the character and the hang-ups he's always had. It was a Tour de Force for the character. And yet, it was Grey Griffin who voiced him. Would Russi Taylor have done a better job? Yes. But the fact that this WAS my favorite Martin appearance in 32 seasons says that the show's (and the rest of animation's) insane rule of "retiring" most characters whose original voice actors have died is appallingly wrongheaded. Can you imagine the amazing Lionel Hutz and Troy McClure episodes we're been denied over the decades for no good reason? Edna Krabappel's arc feels weirdly unfinished too. And yet, Martin has achieved untold depths because the producers knew that Russi "The Show Must Go On" Taylor would not have liked the character to be retired after she died. Do you now see how dumb it is to get rid of cartoon characters just because their original actor is unavailable? It's like saying nobody else but Ian McKellan should ever be allowed to play Macbeth again. Like characters in stage plays, cartoon characters should be designed to outlive their original actors (with very few exceptions, mostly on Family Guy).
You heard this exact opinion cross my lips when it looked like John DiMaggio wasn't going to return to Futurama. That whole "Nobody can play Bender but DiMaggio" idea was put forth by people who truly don't understand the selling point of cartoons. The selling point is you CAN use Bender if DiMaggio says no. I'm glad they worked it out, and he was treated fairly. But him returning was never a deal-breaker for me, and it shouldn't have been for the producers either. That's not how cartoons should work.
I really liked the smashcut flashbacks of the kids committing their crimes. Bart's was best, probably by virtue of being first. But they were all funny.
Nice brutal shots at film students. The Simpsons has never been afraid to make irreversible enemies of large segments of society for no apparent reason whatsoever (or even actual benefit to the show). The writers are simply buttholes. And sometimes, that's enough as far as comedy is concerned.
The traveling montages were pretty funny too.
I will say this. In the episode where Martin FINALLY called Bart on being a conformist and a follower, it felt wrong that the happy ending for both characters involved them ultimately being praised by the bullies. I am aware that children will say one thing and do another about this precise topic, but it felt wrong from a narrative standpoint, and sucky kids don't actually write this show. Do they?
In short, this was a really good episode for this season. In a different season, it would have been considered a great one. I will still argue it's Martin Prince's best episode at any rate. ****.
The Great North "Saved By The Spells Adventure"
The Alanis Morrissette bit at the beginning was a good one.
I am struck by what a nice guy Judy's principle is.
Beef's stuff with Moon over the CB radio was adorable.
I have no idea why Honeybee and Wolf work. But they somehow crazily do.
Cute. ***1/2.
Bob's Burgers "Frigate Me Knot"
Man, what a great ending. The idea that those guys always looked up to Teddy and considered him their friend is this show at its best.
I liked Louise's twisted monkey thing.
For the record, when Linda is finished telling her story, it reminded me why I would never be friends with that character for any reason. She makes Melania Trump look classy in comparison. She is so freaking gross.
I liked the guy having to explain the knot to Bob as if he's a little kid. Him finally being able to do it is not the moral victory the characters think it is.
That was great, but I'm subtracting half a star because Linda makes me want to puke. ****1/2.
Family Guy "Lawyer Guy"
Huh. New character. Brick Baker won't be replacing Doug's place of importance on the show anytime soon.
Frankly, I found the idea that Peter sued his neighbor without even meeting him ridiculous. Far more ridiculous than it being his lawyer.
Also, I have always considered "Family Guy" one of the worst names for a popular TV show ever. Only Arrested Development is worse. It's a name the show should be ashamed of. It pisses me off instead that they have been putting it in the end of random episode titles since the show came back. This was probably the worst example of that ever. Awful episode title, and maybe the worst the show has done since Season 1.
I love the guy from Brooklyn doing the play-by-play to the Surfin' Bird musical.
I loved Chris cheering at the excited energy Peter brought into the room.
Man, I forgot Tom Everett Scott existed. That bit answered the question of what would happen if that untrue mean-spirited joke about Ron Livingston being forgettable were an actual thing for another actor. Tom Everett Scott qualifies. I don't even remember what he looks like.
Local commercials always getting cut off at the end drives me nuts. It's amazing. All of the commercials are awful and I'm still always frustrated when they get cut off. Why is that? What is this deeply held belief in my psyche that everything on TV deserves a sense of completion, no matter what it is? It's very weird and human at the same time.
I love Lois making fun of the woman at the market who called Peter for her real estate business. That was super embarrassing.
I like hearing Sam Elliot say the words "fish whiz".
It was a pretty good episode. As far as winning the night of Fox toons goes, it surprises me that on the night The Simpsons delivered perhaps the greatest Martin Prince episode EVER, that they were not only slightly edged out by Bob's Burgers, but a Bob's Burgers that contained a poopy story from Linda. Weird night. ***.
Intensity by Dean Koontz
I read this years ago and vaguely liked it. The idea of a horror story with no tension breaks is an interesting trope subversion. But I think there are points Koontz crosses the line here from female victim empowerment to actual exploitation
Oh, well, he wouldn't be the first horror writer that did that. I love Stephen King, and even I will acknowledge his stuff during his cocaine days crossed those lines multiple times.
Years later, as I've become a slightly (but only slightly) more sophisticated reader and absorber of pop culture, I'm able to recognize that Koontz's prose kind of stinks. If he told this exact story straight, it would be fine, but Koontz has this laughable tendency to try and write powerfully lyrical phrases and beautifully poetic text. And he's no good at it. And if you aren't good at that specific thing, and you try it, you look silly. I consider myself a pretty good writer. But I suck at poetry and profound prose. And NONE of my writing has been worse for its absence. Write what you know, Mr. Koontz. Trying to rise above your narrative station just makes you look foolish. Stay in your lane.
I get why this book sold a ton of copies, and why Koontz is as successful as he is. And it is pretty interesting as a page-turner, no doubt. But it also feels poorly written. Maybe if a story is decent it shouldn't matter how it's told. But maybe it actually does. And the story may be decent (if offensive on some level). But it's told poorly. **1/2.