danhicks
A rejoint le août 2000
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges3
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis11
Note de danhicks
The show created quite a bit of ire among some parents because kids would draw on their TVs using ordinary crayons and without using the "magic screen" (sometimes doing real damage to the TV). I remember always wanting a "magic screen" so I could participate, but then, just weeks after I got one, the show was cancelled.
Excerpts from this show were featured in the April 3, 2007 episode of "Boston Legal" on ABC. In the Boston Legal episode Denny Crane (Shatner) was portrayed as his Kenneth Preston character 50 years later, when the son of the murdered woman sought revenge on the man that Crane/Preston had successfully defended fifty years earlier.
The son (who blamed Crane for his father's subsequent breakdown) takes Crane, the original defendant, and several of the Boston Legal regulars hostage, using bombs and a "dead man" switch, and then stages a retrial of the original trial, based on the original transcript (presumably taken from the "Studio One" dialog).
The son (who blamed Crane for his father's subsequent breakdown) takes Crane, the original defendant, and several of the Boston Legal regulars hostage, using bombs and a "dead man" switch, and then stages a retrial of the original trial, based on the original transcript (presumably taken from the "Studio One" dialog).
It does not simply have "some" crude humor, most of the movie is gross and tasteless. It's only saving grace was Steve Carell himself, and Kathrine Keener, both of whom managed to maintain their dignity (more or less) in an otherwise juvenile movie seemingly targeted at 13-year-old boys. (Well, I'll modify that somewhat -- Kat Dennings turned in an honest and touching performance as Keener's daughter, without appealing to any of the usual stereotypes of teenage girls.)
It's sad in a way. While it's understandable that a movie with this theme would include some crudity, it's obvious that far too much is simply gratuitous. From the good parts it's clear that writer/director Judd Apatow could have constructed a better movie -- he just chose not to.
It's sad in a way. While it's understandable that a movie with this theme would include some crudity, it's obvious that far too much is simply gratuitous. From the good parts it's clear that writer/director Judd Apatow could have constructed a better movie -- he just chose not to.