Mastering the Johnsons?

Well, there were a lot of lame puns to potentially apply for our title on the new Showtime series, "Masters of Sex." Given the title and topic of the show, one would expect there to be a great deal of whoopee being made. However, season one so far has not opened with a bang (sorry, couldn't help it). Yes, there's some sex going on but a lot less say than in Spartacus - although here at least we aren't treated to slow-mo blood splatters every 3 minutes.

The show concept is intriguing, the characters are interesting - some of them anyway and the backdrop of helping to spur the sexual revolution certainly has potential... Butt - oops, But, this show seems conflicted on several levels:

•  Dr. Masters comes across as supremely odd (and maybe he was?) but more to the point Michael Sheen seems to be having a hard time reigning him in. We could just imagine what Bryan Cranston might do with the role (he loves being conflicted). Sheen spends much of the show merely looking uncomfortable.
• Lizzy Caplan started strong as the free-wheeling Johnson, but it seems as though the show is trying to unliberate her as season one progresses - no idea what's going on there.
• The story arc is still murky as well. 
• The one part of the show that seems to be taking hold is the deteriorating marriage of Dr. Masters and his wife played by Caitlin FitzGerald. It is a powerful subplot but can't make up for what's missing in the main one (which isn't clear yet - is it the struggle to do the study or Masters and Johnson getting together or Masters ticking everyone off - its just not clear).

Good trailer for season 1, yet it seems to be teasing us a bit...

Sometimes as the show drops little hints at what the historic sex study is going to conclude the revelations seem overwhelmingly obvious - although that's from our perspective in the 2013 (we have flying cars now you know). Were people in the 1950's as backwards as the in Victorian era - were they backwards then? Who knows... There was a very funny movie about the invention of the vibrator (Hysteria) that came out two years ago. It was informative but more than that - Hysteria was funny. Master's of Sex has a deep rooted identity crisis - it doesn't know what it wants to be.

If you watch the opening intro, you'll note all sorts of cutesy innuendo image montages rolling by - reminiscent of Dexter (but less grisly). If you just watched the opening you'd think you had tuned into a comedy - and there has been some comedy injected in it. Yet, most of the show seems deadly serious - perhaps too serious for its own good. Showtime has an all-star cast and probably will be given the luxury of second season; it might be worthwhile rethinking the show to make it more one thing or the other (sex, funny or serious).

The real Masters and Johnson circa the 1960's - note the Star Trek original series sweater
(bow ties are always in fashion)

Verdict for season one - we don't have to see the whole season - we're simply not interested anymore; we've got a headache and are going to to bed early.


postscript - We have decided to continue watching the series for now and it has gotten better. There has been more humor, a little more sex and several new plotlines introduced which are together making the show more interesting and entertaining. Michael Sheen isn't growing much in the role, but Beau Bridges has made an unexpected impact and Allison Janney (you may remember her from the from West Wing) was thrown into the mix (the Dayton native is always excellent).


Copyright 2013, Raving Reviews

#RavingReviews

Read More

Game Over, Ender

I was eating at an Indian Buffet the other day and overheard some folks who had gone to see Ender's Game - the main one talking was a true fan who was measuring the movie against the book. Now, I read Ender's Game some time back but I wouldn't want to be quizzed on it. Besides, the real question regarding any movie adapted from a book ought to be does it work on the screen - not "was it faithful to every detail of the book."  Ender's Game works, but not as good as a should have.

Harrison Ford starring in 'Grumpy Old Men Go to Space'

This weekend we went to go see it for ourselves (in IMAX, no 3D for this one although I think it would have worked well given all the zero G possibilities) and I'm fairly certain that most of the key elements of the novel were covered. There have been others that have already noted some striking similarities to other sci-fi classics including:

• Various aliens as bugs motifs (which is odd given there are far more insects on Earth than humans so maybe all the aliens ought to look like us)
• Jet flying into the mothership (and central control of drone ships from it)
• Harrison Ford (doing anything - he is becoming a cliche)

The film is visually striking and the pace is well metered throughout most of the film. The performances were fairly uneven though. We'll start with the standouts:

• Ben Kingsly - He doesn't always convince, but this time he does a good job although hes not given a lot of screen time. The tattoos probably deserve half of the credit.
• Hailee Steinfield - This girl has got Charisma. You may recall her standout performance in True Grit a few years ago (you know the one where Jeff Bridges sounded like he was chewing on biscuits the whole time). She practically steals the show in Ender's Game and deservedly so.

Jennifer Lawrence may be good with a bow and arrow but Hailee can act...

And that's about it. There's a lot of other folks running around doing things but by and large they're forgettable or ineffective. The two main stars; Asa Butterfield and Harrison Ford fall into the ineffective category, the rest are just forgettable. 

Don't get us wrong; the film is hugely entertaining - much more so than recent sci-fi films like Star Trek (something about Darkness - BTW - why the heck is every film Dark now???) and After Earth (which was just silly), however Ender's Game could have been a lot more had the right talent been applied. Perhaps most disappointing was the rapid juxtaposition from the movie climax to the set up for the sequels. More time and care should have been applied to constructing that segue. 

Another bizarre aspect of this film was its use of video game like animation - they were trying to approximate Xbox 3000 I guess; anyway it didn't come off well at all. Assume the movie is taking place more than 50 years from now and then ask yourself why the graphics don't look any better than PS 4? 

Here is our Raving Ratings grid:

Category	Score
Acting	5.5
Story	8
FX	9
Cinematography	8
Animation	4
Script	6
Cliches* (low score=high cliche factor)	3
Total	6

 

Copyright 2013, Raving Reviews

Read More