Briarbruin

This was a great disappointment. On paper this sounded brilliant. Watching it all the way through was excruciating. I wanted to bail on several occasions but persisted through to the finale.

I know this is a spoof of a cheesy1970's Christmas special, so was it purposely badly written to amp up the cheesy factor? Or just badly written?

The majority of the jokes fall flat and just aren't funny to begin with. Most of the performers are over the top and just embarrassing to watch.

I gave three stars because of the actors portraying Paul Lynde and Liberace. The Paul Lynde managed to be snarky but not mean, just like the real Paul Lynde, plus he had the voice and mannerisms down pat. The Liberace was amazing - he looked and sounded like Liberace plus appeared to be an extremely talented pianist.

I would recommend this only for the Paul Lynde and Liberace impersonations but otherwise it was an excruciatingly long hour.

This movie is a thinly disguised rejiggering of "Boy Did I Get a Wrong Number", which also featured Bob Hope and Phyllis Diller. An aged-appearing Bob Hope, the father of a brood of young children, is a bank teller accused of embezzlement. As in "Wrong Number", both Bob Hope and Phyllis Diller coast through the film popping off one-liners which must have been boffo in 1967. Bob Hope goes on the lam with his kids, setting up a series of unconvincing and improbable situations. While "Wrong Number" had Elke Sommer as a femme fatale (speaking in an accent somewhere between Zsa Zsa Gabor and a sassy French maid), this film has Jill St. John as a scheming golddigger who seems to be basing her performance on Betty Boop. The film, like "Wrong Number", ends with a tedious and overextended chase sequence featuring a hilariously unconvincing stunt double in a scary Phyllis Diller wig. This is one of those bad movies that for some reason is fun to watch. If anything, the film (like "Wrong Number", is a time capsule of hideous 1960's design and fashion.

I have really mixed feelings about this show.

The idea of attending a cooking school in Julia Child's Provence home sounds amazing, and the scenery and surroundings are beautiful. That is where the connection to Julia Child (and it's "Child", people, not "Childs".) starts - and stops.

The cooking school advertises itself as a no-recipe cooking school- other than being shown some very basic kitchen techniques and knife skills, the students are encouraged to be creative and combine ingredients in a free-form way.

I like to make up new recipes and dishes and I am here to tell you NOT EVERYTHING goes well together, including various combinations of herbs and spices. I have learned by trial and error in my home kitchen, as opposed to the privilege of coughing up $8000 (yes, that's correct, $8000) to do the same thing in Provence. (Although the location is gorgeous and more visually appealing than my generic Midwestern suburb!)

Julia Child is referenced and mentioned multiple times, but it seems almost disrespectful to her memory that a cooking school located in her Provence home (and getting a lot of publicity from that connection) makes a point of rejecting and refusing to teach even one her most basic, approachable recipes. If her legacy is to be ignored, why bother mentioning Julia Child at all, other than to give the cooking school and location some cachet?

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade - the participants look like they are having a wonderful time, but if I had already forked over $8000 for the experience I would make darn sure I was having a wonderful time as well.