Despistados

Except for the occasional bad word and mentions of sex this show was nothing more than innocent teen fodder in the tradition of "Saved by the Bell". Though stylish it fails to match the cleverness, hipness and satire of the original 1995 hit film. The pacing of the show seems off as well and Cher's commentary, a highlight in the film, here it seems like it's coming from a completely different show. The show hardly even resembles the film, if it wasn't trying to be like the movie then they should have changed the name but since they stuck with the title "Clueless" then they should have tried to keep the spirit of the film. On it's own it's pretty lighthearted fun so if you haven't seen the film then you might enjoy it but if you're a fan of the film then this series might depress you especially considering that so many of the same people who worked on the film also worked on the show including writer/director Amy Heckerling and producers Twink Caplan, Julie Brown and Scott Rudin.

This is a pleasant television show ... nothing much, mildly amusing, and having likeable characters. This is quite acceptable UPN/WB type fare and is superior to some of the "comedies" on the air these days (think CBS on Monday) I don't know why some dis the tv Cher, who does a good job, and surely reminds one of the movie Cher. The other main characters (both dads have their charms) are fine, though Amber at times seems to be going through the "Amber" motions.

It should be remembered guys, especially all you adult fans of the show, the Stacey Dash (Dionne) wasn't a teen in real life in the movie, and surely wasn't a few years later. Thus, it is not "perverted" or anything to know she looks sexy in that bikini in the opening credits.

Writing ... mixed. Some of the episodes are pretty good ... some even touching. One problem is that there is not enough teen/"Clueless" speak ... we need more "as if" material.

-j

What a let down! I was so excited to learn of the existence of the television series 'Clueless'. I loved the movie with Alicia Silverstone and was looking forward to weekly installments of Cher's life. The television series pales in contrast to the movie. It lacks the same zest as appeared in the screen version. Rachael Blanchard can't quite carry it off the way Silverstone as is the case with Doug Sheehan who plays Mel. Overall, this series is really a Monet; alright from afar but up close it's just a big ol' mess.

The first season of the TV version of the hit movie reassembled a good chunk of the movie's cast, plus the movie's director Amy Heckerling as executive producer. So why was it such a pale imitation? Two words: Rachel Blanchard.

Blanchard took over as lead character Cher from Alicia Silverstone (who understandably had other things to do at the time). Though Blanchard was physically right for the role, her flat performance makes you realize how perfect Silverstone really was for the role, with her fizzy, lighthearted, charismatic performance. Blanchard, by contrast, was dull as dishwater, with no spunk or charisma or anything. She pulled the whole series down. They should have hired Christine Taylor (Marcia in "The Brady Bunch" movies) instead.

The second season got even worse. Moving to a smaller network (from ABC to UPN) necessitated budget cuts, so Heckerling was gone as well as movie vets Wallace Shawn and Twink Caplan. "Very special episodes" started to creep in as well. Ugh.

Skip this one and rent the movie again instead.

yet another example of industry bigwigs trying to milk success far beyond the limit. What made the film a success was the way in which Jane Austen's Emma was cleverly adapted for 1990s Los Angeles. The television version removes all trace of Austen and adds extra vacuity - this may be an ironic gesture, but somehow that seems doubtful. Overall, a steaming pile of pants.