Les chroniques de San Francisco

I'm two episodes in, I'm quite enjoying it, but the flaws are glaringly obvious. I'll start with the biggest one and that is the supposed gap in decades that has occurred. I would have much preferred that it was set in the 90s or early 2000s, with the first series being set in the 70s this just doesn't add up for me. I'm finding it hard to move past it and very distracting.

The second flaw is the constant nods and winks to the younger generation and references to Instagram etc. There was an annoying pause in the flower shop when a customer paid for his purchase using his phone. This approach, which I think is intentional, is incredibly obnoxious.

Aside from these criticisms, I'm still a fan of the original material, and I am hopeful it settles down. Laura Linney rocks

This ten-part miniseries has some very high highs and some very low lows.

Back at Barbary Lane are Laura Linney as the sometimes annoying Mary Ann and Olympia Dukakis and the magical Anna Madrigal. Two superb actresses. Also back is Paul Gross, the original Brian. Michael is now played by Murray Bartlett, a huge improvement over smarmy Paul Hopkins in the previous two outings, but not as sweet as the original Michael played by Marcus D'Amico. Barbara Garrick also returns as DeDe, but she's a marginal character here.

Chief among the newcomers to Barbary Lane is Ellen Page as the tough Shawna, the daughter of Brian and Mary Ann .... or is she? We also get a complicated lesbian couple (Garcia and May Hong), a snoopy "reader" (Victor Garber). and a strange lesbian filmmaker (Zosia Mamet).

I found DeDe's misbegotten twins extremely annoying. I'm not sure if they were meant to be comic relief, but they ain't funny. There are several other recurring characters but they're not terribly important.

A few name actors pop up in one or two appearances: John Glover as an old cop, Mary Louise Wilson as the home resident, Luke Kirby as a 1960s cop, Stephen Spinella as a dinner guest, Molly Ringwald as an art collector, and Danny Burstein as Connie's old husband.

The standout episode of this series in #8, which re-enacts the infamous drag queen riot at Compton's Cafeteria in San Francisco. This looms as the backdrop to the flashback of Anna's arrival in San Francisco in 1966 as a 40-something woman.

And despite a largely annoying storyline that clutters the achingly sad finale, we finally clear the gaudy debris and get to the great loss we all knew was coming.

Many kudos to the indomitable Olympia Dukakis for her portrayal of Mrs. Madrigal over the decades and to Laura Linney for her chirpy performance as Mary Ann and also for producing this series.

I thought this production was done well and was really poignant, although at times the acting was a bit contrived. However, speaking as one who was born and raised in The City, I found this to be very "San Franciscan"... the gay, the straight and the in between. I found myself getting nostalgic and teary eyed, especially with the night scenes from the roof showing North Beach....I could just feel and smell that night air. All in all, enjoyed it.

I had alread red the Tales Of the City books at least the first 5 or so, and lived in the Bay Area in the early 80s when the books were being published to my then delight. So these remarks are from an oldie.

The Netflix 2019-extensions of the Tales Of the city saga is ten hours of uneven yet satisfying setup for perhaps another future generation of tales.

It's presented in the form of a whodunnit (whoisdoingit) plot with a some wrapping up of previous loose ends with new characters to carry it forward. Seems each episode has a different writer so the intensity varies between episodes. Superficially it's just the same old nonsense as the previous series, but this time with a slower pace and with current obsessions and topics. Mr Maupin makes a cameo as usual.

Nice that the Gene Compton's cafeteria event gets attention, no doubt will bring that to international attention.

My initial reaction was distaste at episodes-1 and 2. I wanted to dislike this effort out of imaginary respect for the old characters. I did not immediately like the new younger characters until later in the series.

Despite the dodgy timeline (Michael Tolliver is portrayed as 54 when 64 might be more consistent with the books ) and the initial difficulty of accepting the new younger characters, it won me over. Some scenes dragged however. Episode-3 dinner scene was intense, as was a young character rifling though an older character's 80s address book with most names crossed out, a familiar agony for my generation.

Nice musical background too.

In short schmatltzy magical soap for millennials and nostalgic oldies.

I really wanted to like this series and went into it with a very generous, open mind because it's the sort of series I tend to enjoy. Unfortunately the weak writing, wooden acting, constant cliches and cloyingly over-sentimentalized tropes made it really difficult to love.

I did stick with it in hopes that it would 'get better' but unfortunately it never did. A real shame because the idea had potential but it felt more like a bad after school special than a ground-breaking diversity story. It actually feels dated (in a bad way) and it's from 2019.

I gave it 7 stars because there are so few LGBT-friendly series out there I just didn't have the heart to give it less, but if I was being more honest it really doesn't deserve much more than a 5 or 6. While it does have some charming moments, it's too cutesy and devoid of grit to be truly ground-breaking.