If Steve McQueen shows the racial discrimination in England between 1969 and 1982 en su antología "Small Axe", we could almost take "It's a sin" as the witness to sex discrimination from 1981 to 1991. "They all died because of you," says the character in Jill, in a phrase that is a clear accusation to Margaret Thatchers or Ronald Reagans that caused thousands of deaths. In times of coronavirus, it is important to remember that there have been diseases doomed to inaction and rejection.
It has been said that it is the best series by Russell T. Davies and without a doubt it is, perhaps because he has managed to create a mosaic of lives in which practically all positions are in front of AIDS, starting with ignorance and misinformation. Ritchie, Roscoe, Colin and Jill, perhaps to a lesser extent Ash, are representations of a threatened community (aka society), facing unknown danger. But the anger that has caused the abuse, denial and death is replaced by an optimistic position: "I wanted you to be the first to know: I'm gonna live." The first episodes, above all, show the vitality of a secret but explosive freedom.
"It's a sin" is an exciting series, heartbreaking, difficult to see especially for those of us who live the AIDS pandemic in the present, who feel fear and pain very close. It is a tribute to the victims, but also a story of survival.
One of the weirdest documentary series that can be found. The irony of John Wilson manifests itself in episodes with strange themes such as scaffolding or ways of covering furniture. The mastery of the project is in how it manages to make each episode drift towards unusual paths, which cast doubt on the lucidity of the human being. It is an unusual look at life, a discovery of the most remote places of our existence.
It is again a show that tries to build an environment so complex that it never ends up going too deep into it. And, as is becoming too common, it gives the impression that there are two linked stories, that of the puppeteer Vincent and that of the policeman Michael, which come together to form a whole that ends up being dispersed. And it ends up being more interesting in the section that focuses on the secondary character than the one that develops the main character. There are so many ups and downs in the plot that it ' difficult to know if this is a disappointing series or just a poorly developed story.
[tv+] Throughout this kind of anthology that establishes connections between the characters, there are some stories that are more interesting than others, especially as it moves forward in time and show more distant possible futures. It isn't so much a question of imagining a future marked by climate change, but of forecasting, based on current scientific data, what life in our society would be like in forty years from now. There is less dystopia to propose some solutions through bioengineering, and although it is inevitably discursive, the proposal is more interesting than usual.
A pirate adventure that takes place mainly indoors, a children's series that conveys the sensation of a cheap product, not only because of the recycling of settings from the series "Black sails" (Starz, 2014-2017) but because of a mediocre staging and poor visual effects. That a battle between pirate ships is resolved visually with medium shots and close ups demonstrates the scant talent and minimal resources. Instead of translating the animated universe into more or less believable real action, the result is actors in costumes imitating cartoon actions.
An intelligent adaptation of the Anne Rice novels that manages to be faithful but at the same time update the story and its characters. It introduces interesting elements of reflection and builds much more complex characters, who are made credible by the splendid performances. The destructive and violent romanticism is shown without limits, and especially the appearance of the new Claudia is brutal and ironic. There is a dark sense of humor that accompanies an outstanding series.
[Netflix] As with many stories featuring teens, the inability to give them a believable voice is disappointing. Once again, this short stories anthology series, that builds a main plot to stretch it out to exhaustion, offers implausible dialogues of fifteen-year-olds talking as if they were thirty years old. And it reflects on life and death through characters who don't have a solid life experience.
[HBO Max] The comic made a harsh criticism of the manipulation of journalism in war zones, but the objective of the series turning the protagonist into a doctor in search of her son is not clear. An inclusive story that is as classist as it claims to be, using all the stereotypes about minorities. The feigned depth turns into deep boredom. Only fragments remain of the graphic novel. John Carpenter did it better in "Escape from New York" (1981), one of the references to the original.
From the beginning, the show marks its own style with an intelligent and acid sense of humor. These small stories that are carried out by the main characters, with their own entity, build a vision of race and tradition through a new generation that has been raised with white popular culture, as the reference to Tarantino shows. But above all it's full of unforgettable characters (Uncle Brownie, Big or Spirit).
A fun, delicious comedy that explores the topics of the representation of the Muslim woman using those same topics to smash them. Though it seems harmless, with that silly humor, it is nevertheless brave in the approach to religious taboos ("Ain't no one gonna honor kill my sister but me"). Nida Manzoor manages to create one of the funniest comedies of the year.
[Amazon] With this work, Barry Jenkins offers a new dimension to that representation of the trauma of slavery that is already common in movies and series. Majestic in the visual concept, deep in the psychological journey through the discovery of many forms of slavery and many forms of liberation. There are episodes that are masterpieces, there are ideas that reveal the genius of a great director.
[Netflix] Lupin without Lupin. An entertaining series that is based on a character whose modern version would have been interesting to discover. Instead, we have an Arsène Lupine impersonator (proper Omar Sy) who is, however, a more tormented character, with less spark than the original. The proposal is entertaining, although not very ingenious in the way of developing the story (entering the jail, the disguise ...). It achieves part of its goal, but more creative effort would have been interesting.
[tv+] There is a tense construction in the two central characters of this show that manage to maintain a constant pulse throughout the entire season. Especially when it surrounds them with an ambiguity in which we sometimes doubt both the probable corrupt activities of Peter Capaldi's Hagerty and the psychological stability of Cush Jumbo's June Lenker. So the story always manages to stay on the knife's edge to lead to an outcome that is less predictable than it might seem. Which is already an important merit.
[Prime Video] Has elements too similar to "Westworld" but less attention-grabbing. In the first part, the characters are well introduced and it creates a mystery that is interesting, but as it develops, it seems that it never ends up specifying its path, as if it were thinking more about the next season than the current one. And we discover an artifice wrapped in a sci-fi fantasy that is actually profoundly empty, even with characters taking center stage only to play secondary roles as the story unfolds.
[Disney+] For many parents it can be a frustrating series because they don't live up to the playful Bluey and Bingo's parents, but basically it's a very entertaining show, which episodes like "Sleepytime" that are short film masterpieces. Although controversial for a somewhat patriarchal vision of the family, it's a celebration of playing as a fundamental educational process. And only for that it is worth it.
[Netflix] A series that shows a realistic youth, far from the artificiality, and that presents a love story with honesty. The breaking of the fourth wall in two moments is interesting, as a search for the viewer's complicity. Faced with more conservative representations of young love, it has the freshness of characters who show their imperfections. S2, however, falls into the predictable and the monotonous.
[Netflix] As subtle as a reggaeton song. A road-movie that does not move from the same place, stretching the excesses with unnecessary flashbacks, determined to construct supposedly impressive dialogues that are actually road bar phrases. It offers a message of denunciation that is lost between tits and buttocks, a cynicism that claims the empowerment of women while it brings her to her knees.
There is a dangerous trend in some recent "adaptations" that seem to take the original more as a marketing ploy than a real source of inspiration. "Ratched" (Netflix, 2020) was a typical Ryan Murphy "American Horror Story" (FX, 2011) with hardly any connection to the character on which it was supposedly based; "Clarice" (CBS, 2021) is a typical CBS procedural show that little or nothing maintains the creepy atmosphere and psychological depth of "The Silence of the Lambs" (Jonathan Demme, 1991). And "The watch" (BBC America, 2021) supposes the construction of a Discworld with characters that little resemble those of the novels in which they are inspired. The reference works as an element of attraction, but the development follows different paths, which is ok, but in many cases insulting the original source.
In "The watch" there are characters that work well if you do not know the one on which they are based. For example, Richard Dormer is a good Jack Sparrow, but he has little to do with Sam Vimes. And the show in general works the same way. There are interesting and funny moments, as long as you don't take Terry Pratchett's novels as a reference. And it almost looks more like "The magicians" (SyFy, 2015-2020) cyberpunk than the original.
A boring story that wants to be a dark and ambiguous psychological thriller but ends up being a disappointing development of themes and paraphilias such as hybristophilia, the sexual attraction to criminals, which in the end it never delves too much into. There is a good setting in a grayish and rainy Bilbao city, with a bluish hue that transmits a hostile environment for the possible reinsertion of a young man who has killed his parents. But the development is so absurd and implausible and some characters are so blank that the final plot twist isn't worth six drowsy episodes.
[tv+] The Addams Family turned "Home After Dark" meets "Harry Potter" may hold its own, but the series indulges in the standard product with some gothic touches without apparently having anything to contribute. The tendency to reconstruct the original stories in conventional productions that use the referent as a mere marketing element has become a common formula. Even Wednesday seems like another character, as if her sense of cruelty and darkness had to be explained through trauma or fragility. In Tim Burton's career it is one of his most impersonal creations, one of the least relevant contributions of his filmography.
[HBO Max] A quirky and entertaining thriller that benefits from a dark comedy tone and some excellent work from Jamie Dornan and Danielle MacDonald. The Australian desert is almost a representation of the memory void of the protagonist, and reflects on the power of the past, which connects him with his antagonist. With a good rhythm, the plot solidly builds a fragmented puzzle to create a thriller that manages to surprise.
[HBO] A disrespectful documentary that feeds on rumors and sensationalism to reach no conclusion about the death of actress Brittany Murphy. A movie that uses comments from gossip vloggers and interviews people like Perez Hilton has little credibility. The worst thing is the use of images from her movies to underline the comments in a way that seems comical, and that degrades the image of the actress.
So Kaley Cuoco wanted to do "Killing Eve" and this came out. The problem is a lazy script that uses cliches (antagonists must have British accents), impossible subplots (espionage), ridiculous justifications (alcoholism comes from childhood trauma), and random script twists (CIA agent). The feeling is of being an elongated series introducing stylistic resources (flashbacks) that try to slow down a poor plot.
It is possibly one of the most interesting approaches to feminist movements in the United States, far from partial views. The contradictions of the character of Phyllis Schlafly, the power struggles within the feminist movement, the legal twists and turns in making small passes in favor of equality... show a complex, fascinating, deeply political reality. Splendid cast of actresses for an extraordinary miniseries.
Unfortunately, this documentary series adds nothing new to the surprising story of pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Actually, it is more interested in sexual details, as a kind of tabloid press that offers morbid instead of research. One of the victims laments that many of those "monsters" who participated in the sexual abuses have not even been mentioned or judged.
And this documentary, although it uses not very serious interviews (the ex-worker of the island) does not investigate beyond the names that have been released in the press. It doesn't even offer a complete profile of the pedophile and his accomplices. It is an effort wasted for an useless show.
[Prime Video] It extracts the most striking elements of "The Boys", such as some gore and some thuggish sex, but without wrapping them in an interesting story or characters with any depth. This one lacks ambiguity and satire, it builds a plot so simple that it's not very entertaining, and it only manages to resemble that one in some moments. But it is something like a soft and boring version for teenagers, an attempt to broaden the audience target without any of the to broaden the target without any of the characters (or the actors) having anything to contribute.
It belongs to that type of production that adapts without adapting, that modernizes what doesn't need to be modernized and that sexualizes what has a subtle and enigmatic approach, as if translating a classic text would mean underestimating its value. In the middle of the season Knight gets tired of Dickens and readapts his "Taboo" show, building a new plot more conventional than the original. At least Olivia Colman gives Miss Havisham the right touch of tragic pathos, but Pip and Estella are bland characters. For Steven Knight, modernizing Charles Dickens consists in considering the audience idiots.
[Disney+] Although there are some creative decisions that can be debatable, especially in terms of updating the story through fictional characters, the series grows as the shadow of the Nazi threat becomes more suffocating. Actress Bel Powley does a great job of developing her character from her idealism and naiveté to a moral commitment to victims of persecution, putting humanity before safety. It has a good production design and a great soundtrack by Ariel Marx that turns Anne Frank into a secondary character, but whose spirit of resistance and dignity permeates the entire story.
[tv+] Although with notable changes from the Japanese manga on which it is based, the series develops a family drama that feeds on elements of intrigue and suspense provided by the competition around a wine legacy, but at the same time elaborates an interesting approach to the world of wine that feels less conventional than other productions. The opening towards France regarding the origin of the story contributes to establishing a confrontation between cultures that, although it may sometimes seem conventional, manages to raise interest around the two opposing characters.
[Netflix] Funnier than the films created by Charlie Brooker for Netflix, the idea is sustained thanks to the character that Diane Morgan has performed for years. This idiot reporter who believes her cousin more than the experts, is the reflection of a society that prefers unidirectional knowledge. The show is not as superficial as it seems, although the comedy is structured around the same idea of anachronistic questions to surprised historians. Philomena Cunk represents the worst face of historical presenteeism, and despite this, she is capable of drawing us a smile from her serious face.
