The new Fox show "New Amsterdam" premieres tonight after being pushed back from last fall and the critics were ready. Jane Ivory at the website eFluxMedia wasted no time in getting a review out over the weekend.
The headline is bland and obvious. There is not even a real attempt at wit. Perhaps the site was trying to avoid something cheesy, but in so doing they lose the first chance to grab attention. This is something that the review might want to do since I see that Ms. Ivory has given the show a "Recommended" stamp.
The headline seems to be very apt though since the review itself is lacking insight, wit or even an actual critique of the show. Instead we get what appears to be a detailed summary unless you have seen the promos for the show last year.
I guess we have learned that you can judge a book by its cover, or at least a review by its headline.

I have a complicated relationship with Will Ferrell. When I first saw him on Saturday Night Live I thought he was an idiot in the same vein as Adam Sandler. I slowly began to realize that there was a skill and talent in his comedy and began to see the humor. Now I have seen about a million ads of him in his short shorts and ugly 'fro and I think I am done with him again. That is why I get a perverse sense of joy from seeing "Semi-Pro" underwhelm audiences and critics alike. As a celebration of sorts I will review a few "Semi-Pro" reviews.

Kurt Loder at MTV.com is clearly not impressed by the latest Will Ferrell film and I, sadly, am not impressed with Mr. Loder's prose work. This is a disappointment because i always enjoyed Mr. Loder's style and presentation on MTV News but it is clear that that style does not translate well to the written word. sentences are long and unnecessarily repetitious which may sound witty when read aloud, but cause confusion and the rolling of eyes when seen in print.
A minor criticism is also that Mr. Loder has underplayed the significance of the ABA and its role in the history of American Basketball. It does not really effect the review but tit does show a slight lack of preparation for the piece.
The plot summary is strong and highlights what the movie is without revealing to many details. Mr. Loder also goes out of the way to point out who will like the film and uses this to deftly set up his humorous observation of the film. He even offers a few lines on the cast.

All in all not a horrible review of what may be a horrible movie, but it might be better on TV than on a website.

I have been looking at DVDTalk for a while and waiting for something to pique my interest. There usual reviews seem to be heavy with anime, which is not a genre/form that I am particularly interested in. But when I saw that they had reviewed "The Whitest Kids U' Know," a sketch comedy show i had seen advertised and had wondered whether I would enjoy, it seemed like a perfect time to critique this critic.
The reviewer, Francis Rizzo III, like myself is not a fan of the station that airs "The Whitest Kids U' Know" so had not seen the show yet. Mr. Rizzo was impressed with the work of the troop leader, Trevor Moore, and his cast mates and begins to compare them with the "Kids in the Hall" but then decides half way through the review that they are actually more like "Saturday Night Live." His reasoning is not strong and I don't quite believe this comparison but then that may be because I am thinking of the past several seasons of "SNL" which have been uninspired, bland, and pedestrian.
The final section of the review is devoted to speculation about why the show had to switch networks from Fuse to IFC. This speculation is pointless for several reasons; it does not pertain to the DVD reviewed and the Mr. Risso clearly does not have enough information to make any useful conclusions.
The format of the review is like any other site devoted to mass reviews in that it clearly breaks down the components giving the reader a quick way to find what they are looking for. Sections of the review are provided to describe the DVDs themselves, the quality, and the extra features as well as a final summation of the reviewers overall verdict.
This review was helpful in allowing me to determine whether I want to see the show, but... it was lacking in depth and analysis. Ideas were thrown out and comparisons were made that did not have support or reason behind them. It was no where near a good review, only perfunctory at best.

Powered by ScribeFire.