Millennial Movie/Media Critic (2024)

03/08/2022

*DC League of Super-Pets* - a spoiler free review

DCLoSP is aptly named and is an ingenious, timely move for DC, who continues to bleed super-hero market share to the MCU in theaters all over the world. It alters the comic lore surrounding Superman's dog, Krypto, and tasks him with saving the iconic Justice League with a band of misfit shelter pets bestowed with various familiar powers. If that sounds like the plot of a movie that could've been generated by an AI program attempting optimal mass-appeal... well you wouldn't be wrong. But it works, mostly!

Perhaps the wisest thing the film does is provide a self-contained entry point, free from all convoluted super hero multiverses, for very young fans to develop a connection with DC's stable of heroes. There's certainly franchise and crossover potential here, and as the young fans grow it could coincide nicely with the timing of the much-needed DCCU reboot that feels nigh imminent.

The cast is the main selling point here. They're all clearly having fun with a script that provided ample fodder for experimenting with one-liners. Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson anchors as Krypto, but he may be the low point, delivering a pretty standard performance. This is more a compliment to the strength of the rest of the cast, carried by Kevin Hart who I'm convinced has reached the point of his career where he is contractually obligated to accept any animated animal role he's offered. The only drawback to the ensemble performance is that it may make some viewers very nostalgic for the time when animated movies let actors give distinct personalities and voices to their animated characters as opposed to just hiring a bunch of comedians and having them play themselves.

The plot is very simple and very silly. But neither of those is a knock, per say. The story rarely takes itself seriously and during the rare moments it does, it conveys the sentiments its trying to.

The phrase "fun for the whole family" has been the de facto goal of most animated movies for decades. It's a fine line to walk- keeping things simple and zany enough to hold the attention of young minds, while also being creative and witty enough to not bore the adults footing the bill. But DCLoSP manages to navigate those waters comfortably. It doesn't reach the heights of Shrek or Pixar's golden age. But very few families will leave theaters feeling disappointed that they didn't wait for streaming.

Score: 8/10

27/07/2022

*Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris* - a spoiler free review

MHGtP is a theatrical remake of a 1992 made-for-tv-movie of the same name. It's a throwback to an era when movies were little more than pleasant escapes, as opposed to the spectacle-heavy set pieces and self-absorbed art house flicks that dominate the box office these days.

MHGtP is about a 1950s widowed house-maid in the UK attempting to fulfill her dream of owning a couture Dior dress. Lesley Manville replaces the iconic Angela Lansbury in the titular role and infuses the film with an authentic sincerity similar to what Jason Sudeikis does with Ted Lasso. But at some points this film goes too far with that tone.

A common criticism with Aaron Sorkin movies/shows is that the characters are too smart to come off as real. Similarly, Amy Sherman-Palladino characters often feel too quick witted. MHGtP is guilty of its characters being too cheery. It doesn't fit a culture still in the grips of its centuries old caste system. The entire premise of the film is examining the absurdity of a mere commoner wishing to own a symbol reserved for elites but the tone of the film doesn't fit that, at least if looked at critically for longer than a few seconds.

The cast is well rounded. And director Anthony Fabian lets them play with nuance- fans of dialects will definitely enjoy the authenticity. And it's great to get to see Jason Isaacs playing a role that doesn't reduce him into being a villainous caricature.

Summary: MHGtP is a confectionary take on historical period fiction- it's a film about a past we want to remember as opposed to the past that really was. But it doesn't overstay its welcome and is enjoyable throughout; even if it is a bit predictable by its third act. If you're lucky enough to have a grandmother or classic fashion-lover in your life, point them in the direction of this movie.

Rating: 7/10

26/07/2022

*Elvis* - A spoiler free review

Baz Luhrman is no stranger to taking risky projects and doing unorthodox things with them, having directed "Romeo + Juliet", "Moulin Rouge", & "The Great Gatsby". It's immediately clear that "Elvis" is a pet project that he felt deserved his flamboyant touch. The end product suggests he was right.

From the start, audiences are confronted with a movie that aims to be every bit as brash and in-your-face as the iconic hip gyrator himself. This ain't your granny's Elvis; this is an homage to the lasting cultural impacts that still affect the music industry and race relations still today.

The cultural and racial crossroads the country faced during Elvis' rise to notoriety serve as the driving theme of the film. It's handled deftly for the most part, with ample acknowledgement of the role African American sounds and influences played in Elvis' life and music.

Austin Butler is brilliant in the titular role and does all the heavy lifting of carrying the 2.5 hour spectacle. He will deserve leading actor nominations. Tom Hanks serves as the narrator as we see Elvis through the eyes of his manipulative, narcissistic longtime manager.

The issue that arises throughout the film, however, is that Elvis perhaps lived too grandiose and complex of a life to fit onto the silver screen. The film will push audience's patience with its run-time while also leaving huge swaths of Elvis' career and controversies barely touched. Pedophilic concerns surrounding courtship of a 14-year-old Priscilla - ignored. Elvis' time in the military - barely mentioned as a plot point to segue from his music career to film career. That entire film career set over many years - a two minute montage.

With so much left out, and with television show budgets on premiere streaming services now rivaling their movie counterparts, it's hard to not think that this "Elvis" movie could've been even better if it were "Elvis" the miniseries.

Summary: "Elvis" is a spectacle worthy of its namesake; but perhaps its namesake deserves a more in-depth visual biopic than the sizzle-heavy film could provide. It's worth seeing for anyone even a tad interested. But it's probably too long for enjoyable rewatching and too shallow for diehard Elvis fans. Leaving it somewhat in the middle and lacking an identity beyond, "That was a heckofa music number".

Rating: 8/10

22/07/2022

*Thor: Love & Thunder* - a spoiler free review

True believers rejoice! Actor/director/comedian Taika Waititi and the rest of his Thor Ragnarok cast returns to rekindle their zany take on the MCU. And this time around might be even better than the last.

The improvement is due in large part to the gravitas that comes with Natalie Portman returning to the MCU for the first time in 9 years. She's as polished as ever, relishing getting to shed her previous damsel-in-distress archetype, and brings out the best Thor performance Hemsworth has delivered to date, merely by him getting to play off her cues.

MCU newcomer Christian Bale is also a tour de force as the movie's antagonist. Given that the MCU is 36 (and counting) iterations deep, it has had some memorable villains. But Bale's Gorr the God Butcher deserves a spot at or near the top of the list for how he channels Ralph Fiennes Voldemort energy (the highest of compliments). If anything, one of my main complaints about the movie is that it cut Gorr's origin a bit too much and could've used an extra 15-20 minutes to better develop his character, weapon, and motives.

Speaking of criticisms, the toxic marvel fanboys who Captain Marvel and Black Panther gave birth to are only getting louder and this movie does little to assuage their complaints. Their cries for less woke-ism and more foreshadowing of the next big Avengers-level event grow louder with each passing phase 4 entry. But phase 4 was always meant to be a changing-of-the-guard phase. It's laying the foundations of those future big event-movies the same way the phase 1 movies did for the OG heroes. That certainly continues here, as it has every other phase 4 entry, but perhaps not in the way many may expect.

I'm quite looking forward to seeing how all the new characters evolve and interact as we segue into phase 5; though at this rate I admit to being a bit concerned about whether there is enough hair dye and chicken nuggets in the MCU to sustain its burgeoning roster of teen girl heroines! (I kid, I kid 😂)

Summary: The closest comp to Thor: Love & Thunder is its predecessor (Thor: Ragnarok) with Portman replacing Tom Hiddleston as Hemsworth's primary costar. Fans of the franchise should find plenty to like. It's hard to even fathom seeing these movies as a newcomer though with the knowledge barrier for entry so high.

Rating: 7.5/10

13/07/2022

*The Black Phone* - a spoiler free review

The Black Phone is a thriller that follows a small community in the 70s whose adolescent boys are disappearing due to a serial abductor.

Seasoned director Scott Derrickson helms as director and screenplay writer, based on a short story of the same title. He does a serviceable job, but it's not one of his best, or most cohesive films. He doesn't exactly reach the authentic nostalgia heights that the Duffer brothers do in "Stranger Things", but he does elicit very strong performances from his mostly unknown young cast.

Ethan Hawke anchors the cast as the primary antagonist and, like many others before him, is clearly relishing his chance to see how believably creepy and disturbed he can make his character.

Like many movies of this genre, much of the plot and supernatural forces at work are there to serve the overall metaphorical theme. Derrickson paints a very good, nuanced take on the role child abuse plays in our culture - the ways it hides in plain site, the ways it gets noticed, the ways it affects abuser, abusee, and everyone who eventually comes into contact with them. He exaggerates the violence a bit, but it's mostly in service of the point(s) he's trying to make.

This is one of the rare films that could be better if it were about 20-30 minutes longer. It's got a few too many unexamined aspects and characters that all play vital tangential roles in the plot, yet never really get looked at or talked about. Both Hawke's antagonist and the sister of the protagonist, played well by Madeleine McGraw, needed scenes that delved into their idiosyncracies. That those scenes aren't included leaves a few too many loose threads that water down the potency of the end-product.

Summary: The Black Phone has the feel of "The Lovely Bones" meets "Thirteen Ghosts" with a cast and pre-internet setting reminiscent to "Stranger Things". Fans of psuedo-supernatural thrillers will enjoy it, but wish it were a bit better. Others will find it to be hit-or-miss.

Rating: 6.5/10

06/07/2022

*Mr Malcolm's List* - a spoiler free review

I have to imagine somewhere in the pitching of this movie that the phrase, "So you want to do Bridgerton as a movie" got thrown around a lot. It's an easy comparison to make. But "Mr Malcolm's List" has more in common with staples of the period romance fiction like "Downton Abbey" and "Jane Eyre" than it has to the scandalous Netflix sensation.

The reason "Bridgerton" is the most obvious comparison, besides pop culture relevance, is MML's embrace of racially-blind casting. I'm a fan of media leaning in this direction, but I admit that perhaps this is the one genre (period fiction) where it feels most odd; because the only way to do a racially-blind period fiction film is to also ignore the role race plays in the foundations of the caste system and aristocracy that gave support to the setting driving the story being told. It feels inauthentic, not aesthetically mind you, but inauthentic to the people who suffered from such injustice for such specifically heinous reasoning to gloss over and ignore its role... Ultimately it doesn't affect the quality of the film at all, but may affect how some viewers feel about its story.

Speaking of the cast, it's a big plus with everyone involved giving great performances. Zawe Ashton in particular serves as a catalyst in what could be a breakout role.

Emma Holly Jones directs, in what is easily the biggest film release of her career. She does a solid job. Production values, pacing, transitions, and cinematography are all good. However, like the story the script is based on, she takes no real risks; everything is very predictable, almost to a fault.

Summary: If Jane Austen meets Nicholas Sparks sounds like something you'd enjoy, I have a movie for you. Fans of the genre will find enough to be entertained here; everyone else probably doesn't even know it exists, and there's a reason for that - it's likely not their cup of tea.

Rating: 6.5/10

02/07/2022

*Lightyear* - a spoiler free review

First I want to talk about the Christian Taliban, errr Republicans, errr I mean the elephant in the room. "Lightyear" is the latest in a long line of media that conservatives have railed against for depicting a same s*x couple. I knew that going in. But the offending scene is so innocuous, I had to resist laughing that anyone would be put off by it - it's a congratulatory peck kiss between two middle aged women that is less intimate or romantic than Europeans greeting each other.

That being said, "Lightyear" is an interesting movie. It's a movie that hardly anyone was asking for. It doesn't do anything boundary pushing or memorable. And yet, it is still entertaining enough to justify existing.

Angus MacLane, who co-directed "Finding Dory", gets his first full length feature and does good things with it. I went into this movie thinking it'd be a lazy use of a pre-established IP. In some ways it is. But there's enough humor to stay entertaining throughout, namely in sharp performances by Taika Waititi and an cgi animatronic cat played by Peter Sohn.

I also really enjoyed how they blended a Buzz Lightyear origin story with the convoluted canon of the Buzz Lightyear toy. Wondering if/how they'd justify toy Zurg revealing he's Buzz's father in "Toy Story 2" or how the Space Ranger crew from the "Buzz Lightyear of Star Command" animated show would fit in? Satisfactory answers will exist for those seeking them.

A curious aspect about "Lightyear" is that it seemingly doesn't know or understand who its target audience is, or should be. All the Buzz Lightyear super-fans I've ever known have been 5-9yo boys. But the tone and pace of "Lightyear" is aiming more for the fun-for-the-whole-family archetype. It succeeds, but only partially; ultimately it ends up seeming a case of a movie trying to target as wide appeal as possible and ending up being a bit too generic.

Summary: "Lightyear" sits squarely in the middle of reaching for infinity, and being a yawn. It's a 90 minute, animated Star Trek episode with 30% more zaniness. Worth a stream for fans of the franchise/character.

Rating: 6.5/10

01/07/2022

*Jurassic World Dominion* - a spoiler free review

Perhaps the most iconic line from the original Jurassic Park movie, back in 1993, was Jeff Goldblum ominously explaining that, "Life always finds a way." But just because life always finds a way to keep going, doesn't mean that the Jurassic Park film franchise needs to.

Colin Trevorrow, the man responsible for writing the trash heap that is "Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker" helms as director, trying to re-find the magic he had when he directed the Jurassic World reboot; which is probably where the franchise should've rode off into the sunset on a high. Sadly he fails, delivering what is probably the worst of the six dino-thrillers.

The high note is the fan service of reuniting all the key players of casts of past movies and allowing those characters to play off each other one last time in swan song fashion. It certainly provides a sturdy foundation for closure for fans seeking such.

Summary: Sometimes things go extinct for their own good. If this is indeed the last JP movie, that will certainly be the case here. Big fans of the franchise will find enough to enjoy watching once, in theaters or waiting for streaming. Everyone else can skip it without missing out on anything.

Grade: 5/10

11/05/2022

*Dr. Strange in The Multiverse of Madness* - a spoiler-free review

Not counting the ABC (Agents of Shield, Agent Carter, Inhumans) or Netflix (Defenders, Punisher, etc) shows, DSMoM is the 34th piece of the MCU puzzle. The fact that we're 34 pieces in and not all bored to death by the types of redundancy that has turned other once successful long-running pieces of fiction into drivel (looking at you "Supernatural" and "The Walking Dead") is in itself worthy of a lot of praise.

We're not all bored to death because the MCU is built on the strength of its characters, not solely on their stories. Where the MCU succeeds is that it's been able to develop the types of long-running continuity that can provide the tying up of character arcs introduced 20 movies ago, or Easter egg references introduced 30+ movies ago. For those who appreciate that sort of slow-burn payoff, the MCU is a one-of-kind delight. For those who do not have the time or energy or desire to invest in a franchise of such proportions, it creates an entry-barrier that only grows with each passing entry; even amidst the MCU's 4th phase, which I've dubbed the newcomer friendly "Changing of the Guard" phase.

The entry-barrier for DSMoM isn't as high as for recent MCU movies like "Spider Man No Way Home" or the two-part Avengers finale. But it still probably requires having seen a decent chunk of the MCU to understand and enjoy the threads playing out on screen.

I went into DSMoM expecting a tent-pole that would advance the MCU significantly towards its next end-of-phase climax. What I got instead was a reminder that Director Sam Raimi of Tobey McGuire Spider-Man trilogy fame was going to Sam Raimi - that is to say, he was going to put his indelible mark on the feel of the movie; for better or for worse.

DSMoM isn't that narrative advancing tent-pole. What it is is an origin story for an important future piece - joining its phase 4 brethren "Black Widow" & "Hawkeye" in that regard. It serves as the seeming swan song for a long running character and ties off many of the emotional threads and baggage for another.

Perhaps the movie's greatest strengths lie in its villain and how all the foreshadowing and events of MCU past allowed for a well-developed motive and arc that stayed true to a comic character's core profile, even though the events and backstory of the characters' MCU iteration vastly differ from its comics counter.

Raimi's touch came in a sense that watching DSMoM very much felt like I was watching a visual adaptation of a Dr Strange trade paperback event. There's an air of originality in both the pacing and the aesthetic- which is much darker than standard MCU fare. The flaw to a comic-heavy style of story telling is it only holds up as long as its audience members are willing to allow it. Any focus lost on questions of whys or hows, even within the pre-established confines of the superhero multiverse, will wear the glossy sheen off the madness of the multiverse fairly quickly. Especially in our current meta/multiverse heavy media landscape.

Summary: DSMoM is a middle-of-the-pack MCU offering. I laughed less than usual, but was never bored. The heartstrings get tugged a little during the climax. It's more of a "wait until it's convenient to see or streamable" than something to rush out and see immediately.

Grade: 7/10

01/08/2020

"His Dark Materials" - a spoiler free review of season one

I'm a big fan of Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials" trilogy of books. In fact, I rank it directly under Lewis Caroll's universally beloved Alice books in terms of children's literature.

For those unaware, "His Dark Materials" is a trilogy that revolves around a fierce female tween protagonist fulfilling a prophetic destiny that puts her at odds with a fascist monotheistic regime largely set in a reality where instead of souls all persons have corporeal animal companions they can converse and interact with.

The book series explores deep complex themes such as fatalism, spirituality, love, death, multiverse theory, and the knowledge suppressing role that state sanctioned organized religion plays in human culture. But it does so all through the eyes of an 11-year-old girl, making it both easily accessible to readers of all ages and also incredibly beautiful in its simplification of such complexities. It's one of the best ways of introducing young readers to the study of philosophy I can think of.

That being said, this is a review of the recent television adaptation, not of the novels.

The television series isn't exactly what I'd call a faithful adaptation. It seems to me that it's gotten a mass-appeal facelift, perhaps in the goal of avoiding it flopping as the 2007 film version of "The Golden Compass", the first book of the series, did.

But while the main characters have been aged from around 11 to around 14, supposedly to appeal to a larger demographic, the show also leans into a lot of cheesiness like characters awkwardly embracing and staring into the camera or off into the distance after climactic moments that should've been represented as the traumatizing experiences they were.

Casting feels like a miss in a lot of areas. I was a big fan of the 2007 movie's casting choices. Some of the shows casting is good: Dafne Keen's main protagonist Lyra is a good mix of stubborn, strong, contemplative and empathetic; and James McAvoy brings an appropriate amount of gravitas to his Lord Asriel character.

But Ruth Wilson's Miss Coulter and Lin-Manuel Miranda's Lee Scoresby both feel like miscasts. Wilson fails at every turn to deliver Coulter's defining sweet-but-deadly open manipulation of the patriarchy she navigates. And Miranda can not pull off the Han Solo-esque lovable scoundrel character that makes Scoresby a fan favorite in the books.

The television series also makes the creative choice to eschew the timeline and linearity of the books. The first season tells the plot of the first book but also introduces lots of characters and backstories of characters and worlds from book 2 all throughout the season. It creates a lot of added exposition fluff that isn't in the books and as I picture watching as a casual spectator who hasn't read the books, I would think it would be equal parts confusing and dull trying to figure out who these characters in this other world are and why they're important, with no payoff at all until the second season.

It's hard to judge creative decisions like that currently because perhaps all the extra details will create a more complete narrative in the end result. But for now, they leave fans of the books disappointed at the lack of authentic portrayal and non-fans of the book checking out the series for the first time likely a bit too bored and confused to stick with it long enough for a payoff.

Summary: "His Dark Materials" still has potential to build off the foundation it has laid. But the first season disappointed me as a fan of the ip.

How to watch: HBO

Metacritic score (50 average): 69

MMC Grade: B-

27/07/2020

Spoiler-free review of "Killing Eve" seasons 1-2

"Killing Eve" is the latest critically acclaimed darling of the BBC and there's good reason for that. It takes the beloved international spy/assassin genre, adds a comedic cat-and-mouse flair to it, and finally throws in some sultry homoeroticism from its dual attractive female protagonists for good measure.

Add sky high production values and a fun 'dramedy' tone and it's easy to see why I have several friends moderately obsessed with it and an ever-growing online cult following.

But is the sum of its parts worthy of such acclaim or is it just the genius marketing product of ticking off a lot of historically under-represented demographics (female sociopathic assassin, forbidden le***an love-affair, etc.). It's refreshing to see these things, for sure. But a show simply putting them at the forefront does not automatically create good fiction.

The acting is consistently superb. Led by Sandra Oh and Jodie Connor who are both clearly at home and loving the roles they're being tasked with. Connor in particular should be a perennial award nominee for humanizing the quirks of a broken sociopath navigating a world she'll never really belong to - reminiscent of Michael C Hall's "Dexter" in its early glory days.

My personal main criticism of the show is its inconsistent pacing. High action set pieces are sprinkled throughout but often feel shoehorned in and otherwise many scenes end up feeling like superfluous fluff that drag on and create bloat.

A secondary criticism is that it straddles back and forth over the realism/sensationalism boundary a bit too often. On the surface, "Killing Eve" would appear to be set in our universe in our era of time. However, one would have to know pathetically little about modern day policing or society in general to believe the plausibility of many of its plots. They often stray into ridiculous 70s era action flick territory and that feels odd given how the genre has moved away from that sort of thing.

Lastly, I'm not a fan of how s*x/lust is handled. Everything is very heavy-handed and forced, a la "50 Shades" and while that sort of thing excites many people bored with the vanilla aspects their lives have settled into, it doesn't at all reflect the natural state of human s*xuality and tends to make people who actively shun puritanical norms and participate in real-life kink culture roll their eyes.

Summary: "Killing Eve" is not a bad show at all. And there is certainly value in the way it's promoting strong female centric protagonists and normalizing non-traditional s*xual relationships. But at the same time, I find it undeserving of the practically unanimous acclaim it receives. It is by no means one of the 10 best currently airing dramas. And it joins a list that includes both "The Americans" and "Mad Men" as shows that I consider to be at least a bit overrated.

How to watch: Hulu

Metacritic score: 79

MMC grade: B

09/07/2020

So normally I only post reviews for stuff that's currently in theaters, however, there was a special request for this one and I do try to honor such requests.

**Spoiler-free Review of "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse"**

First things first, "SM:ITSV" oozes style, originality, and substance from every pore. The artistic merit of this blended animation that draws from cgi-realism, to comic paneling, to stop-motion, to cel-shading, and probably a lot more I'm woefully uneducated on really makes this one-of-a-kind. If I was to get super nitpicky, I didn't particularly like how they chose to sometimes blur animated segments that weren't the focus of a scene, mimicking what a live-action camera does. It felt strange every time it happened. Its purpose is to draw the viewer's attention to where the director wants it, but it looked so unnatural with this style of animation that every time it happened my attention was drawn to the blurring instead. Conversely, I really loved how they gave the animation a grainy texture - it really made it feel like watching a comic in a way no other animation has achieved.

The voice acting is top-notch, and it should be. The cast is full of recognizable star-power, both established and on-the-rise.

The story here is fun and unique. It is far better than the vast majority of superhero fare. In fact, Miles Morales might have received the best super-hero origin movie in the history of cinema. I'm certainly struggling to think of an origin-story movie I'd rank higher.

It would also be a failure on my part to not mention the soundtrack that perfectly complements not only the animation style, on-screen action, and tone of the movie but also the thematic symbolism of the significance of what this movie represented in terms of progressing the equal racial representation narrative in our culture.

The truly remarkable thing about this film is that it was directed by three co-directors, none of whom had a single significant feature film directing credit to their names. But they apparently managed to collaborate to achieve something greater than their individual sums.

Summary: "SM:ITSV" is the rare movie that is bold and takes risks with its choices, but where seemingly every one of them pays off. This isn't just a great superhero or animated movie. It's a great movie, period. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if in a few years it started being mentioned on the shortlists (top 20/50/100) for the best animated films of all time. And I pray that Sony realizes what a special piece of intellectual property they have on their hands and develops the franchise correctly, lest it become just another superhero franchise to wither into critical irrelevance under their watch.

Metacritic Score: 87

MMC grade: A

09/07/2020

Spoiler-free review of "Normal People"

"Normal People" is a new drama available on Hulu based on the Sally Rooney novel of the same name. It is also easily one of the best new television series 2020 has given us and is being severely underappreciated.

That underappreciation is especially odd given the popularity of the "Twilight" series and its more adult spiritual spinoff "50 Shades". NP follows a similar classic will they/won't they forbidden romance blueprint. There's no supernatural elements. Instead, our star-crossed lovers are affected by the leftover effects of the caste system and socioeconomic cultural differences that have developed in Western Europe over the last century. These are real people in a real world. In fact it is their realness that allows the series to avoid the pitfalls of sensationalism and happy endings that plague many other members of this genre.

Say what you will about your love/hate for the "50 Shades" series and what it did to broaden the s*xual discourse throughout our culture. But it's hard to argue with the fact that it's fairly terribly written. Its characters are shallow. Its plot and dialogue are laughable. It's a softcore bdsm-centered p**n written in the format of a young adult novel.

Conversely, "Normal People" is the antithesis of that. It manifests itself as true art in its accurate reflections of love and the infatuations, jealousy, miscommunications, and s*xual evolutions that all real people go through in their lives.

"NP" takes the will they/won't they end up together and ratchets it up to levels that will have you clamoring for the next episode, or in my case the next season.

Like the best pieces of fiction, the characters in this universe, particularly its two protagonists, will become people viewers care about and develop attachment to over the course of the series. As they mature and grow into themselves and see how that growth affects their personal relationships, viewers will be able to identify similar parallels in their own lives.

Speaking of those two protagonists, I'm hard-pressed to not call their casting perfect. It's so refreshing to see a male actor (Paul Mescal) pull off a complex, believable brooding, conflicted nature that fits his character, unlike the shoehorned types that come with the lazy writing in universes like Twilight or the Vampire Diaries.

For her part, Daisy Edgar-Jones flawlessly goes from insecure-yet-assured schoolgirl, to hot commodity it-girl, to someone so lost and disillusioned with the world she's seen and understands too much of. It's all wonderfully real and heartbreakingly beautiful.

Summary: This series is to the romance genre what Game of Thrones was to fantasy fiction - the pinnacle. So fans of real love stories, I implore you to get on this wagon early. For people who enjoy their television shows to have artistic merits, I assure you you won't regret it.

Metacritic score: 84

MMC grade: A+

Millennial Movie/Media Critic

03/08/2022

27/07/2022

26/07/2022

22/07/2022

13/07/2022

06/07/2022

02/07/2022

01/07/2022

11/05/2022

01/08/2020

27/07/2020

09/07/2020

09/07/2020

Address

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share