I just deleted a long and not very complimentary review. The shooting segments are fine, and, for the rest, it is simply television doing what television does most devotedly -- scrambling for audience.
Closely paraphrasing our buddy Travis McGee: "Anything several million people like, aside from their more private functions, can not be very good."
The forced emotionalism and strained introspective ramblings of the vote-off segments can probably be attributed to a film school lecture on the need to give your characters depth and texture.
3 comments:
I've been reading about that on Tam's site. It doesn't sound very interesting. And the fact that the History Channel, of all places, is running "reality" shows now...well, it makes me glad I don't have a TV.
I just finished watching a rerun. There are some things that I think stunk on ice, leaving me with questions as to what really went transpired. Some of what happened defy belief. Ah, well, television...
Joel: I envy you. Life without teevee is better. I was without cable for more than a decade but had to accept it in order to get high-speed net.
John: At 100 yards, 30 misses at an eight-inch target with a 1903 --from a rest fer cryin' out loud -- just don't add up. The SEAL should have been able to tell the guy about the battle-sight zero, and any "expert" should have been able to ID a mechanical problem. I join you in sniffing a made-for-teevee contrivance.
Post a Comment