The Finest Hours

Period drama. Huge, sinking ship.  Freezing cold conditions. Based on a true story.  No, I'm not referring to one of my favorite movie of all time, Titanic.  Last night I saw The Finest Hours, a relative flop released by Disney this year to mostly lukewarm reviews.  Unfortunately, I can see why; well-intentioned as the movie is, and incredible as its story may be, there's too much lacking in the character department to earn Finest a solid recommendation.  It's not a total bust though; the film has some pretty outstanding sequences that build good tension and feature an unnerving sound mix, but they are sandwiched in-between really lackluster dramatic scenes that feel rather inconsequential.

In 1952, near Cape Cod, Massachusetts, a young man named Bernie Webber (Chris Pine) and a young woman named Miriam (Holliday Grainger) fall in love and plan for a marriage right away.  But Bernie works at the Cost Guard station in Chatham, and the storm on this particular day is monstrous.  When the SS Pendleton, an oil tanker literally breaks in half due to the stormy conditions, no adequate rescue is possible.  Bernie, simply because it's the right thing to do, risks his and a small crew's life to bring a tiny lifeboat out into the merciless sea to rescue the men on the Pendleton.  The crew struggles to survive, coming up with creative ways to stay afloat and in one spot, but they know that their hours are numbered.  Despite constant urging from Miriam down at the station, Chief Quirey refuses to call the men back, stating that it's their job and they knew the risks.

Being a film shot for a 2016 audience, much of The Finest Hours' storm scenes are accomplished using computer-generated water, which frankly becomes the star of the show.  Combined with the sound design, the waves and the storm are incredibly visceral, especially in IMAX 3D.  However, there's so much water, and so many scenes that start to blend into one another, that the use of CG becomes overuse, and has a numbing effect.  The VFX used for the split ship are really well done, but unlike the aforementioned Titanic (which used mostly practical sets and models), the stakes don't feel all that real.  This isn't helped by the flat writing of the characters; Bernie is too much of a Gary Stu to get invested in and has no perceivable character flaws.  Miriam keeps edging on being interesting, with her insistence on calling back her husband, but I just don't know anything about her besides the fact that she lived in a time period that has strong restrictions for her gender.  Performances from the cast are fine, but Ben Foster in a supporting role steals the show entirely (as he often does).

I was much more invested in the story of the men trapped on the oil tanker, but once again, there aren't really any "characters" to be found.  Oh, look... there's the asshole.  Oh look... there's the timid one.  Oh look... there's the genius that no one wants to follow but clearly need to.  These aren't characters, they're archetypes; shells that the writers need to fill with fleshy goodness.  I understand that designing a story based on truth has its limitations, but I still feel more could be done here.  This doesn't help that the plot is paper-thin; there's really only enough material here to be interesting for about an hour, and the film pushes on two.  As a result, parts drag here and there and by the end there's a feeling of fatigue rather than relief.  The film has a sweet center, and a refreshing sense of optimism, but it doesn't have much staying power.

The Finest Hours rides on its spectacle, of which there is much.  There are moments that truly stun, like a grandiose image of the half-ship sticking emerging from a dark fog amidst the black, stormy sea.  The rescue of the men at the film's climax is also very well-choreographed, with some breathtaking shots and a few inventive extended shots.  Dialogue can be a bit corny at times, but that's not a problem for me; what sours it is the lack of investment I feel with the characters.  It isn't a bad movie, it's just a disappointingly hollow one that tries to honor a man for an incredible act of heroism without making him interesting.

5/10

Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation

In theory, the Mission: Impossible franchise should not be running anymore.  But man, am I glad it is.  In fact, for my money, the series' revival, starting with Ghost Protocol, has made it better than ever.  The cast is always great and likable, the action and stunts incredible, and the spy movie cliches used to brilliant (and sometimes hilariously over-the-top) effect.  Rogue Nation is no different; motorcycle chases, underwater deathtraps, and on-top-of-flying-plane fights are just a sampling of the action this fifth outing with Tom Cruise and company has to offer, and each is absolutely stunning in their own way.

Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise), an agent working for the Impossible Missions Force, is wrapped up in an ongoing chase to uncover an international crime syndicate called... uh... the Syndicate (note: this is not a series known for its strong villains).  After stopping a terrorist plane full of nerve gas in the most entertaining way possible, Ethan tries to convince the CIA that the Syndicate exists and they are too dangerous to be ignored.  CIA director Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin) not only doesn't believe Ethan, but wants to disband the IMF altogether.  Ethan continues his search against his orders, and is labeled a fugitive by the CIA.  Six months later, Ethan has been putting the pieces together in order to find out where the Syndicate will strike next.  He needs the help of Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg), a technical field agent (with excellent comedic timing as a bonus).  Ethan and Benji get mixed up with Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), a double agent trying to infiltrate the Syndicate and take them down from the inside.  Are chase scenes, gunfights, and outragous explosions soon to follow?  The answer is a resounding YES.

The film as a whole is exiting, funny, and full of fantastic special effects, but nothing compares to its action. Its story may be cobbled together from other action-spy movies, but Rogue Nation's shear energy makes it all seem fresh.  Tom Cruise is famous for insisting on doing his own stunts in these films, and with the opening sequence (wherein he was actually strapped to the side of a real plane as it took off), he might just have outdone himself.  Another breathtaking scene involves a motorcycle chase in Morocco, where in my IMAX theater, I felt such exhilaration and impact... it was something special, as was an assassination attempt scene that was edited to perfection.  I won't go too far into describing a certain underwater scene, but I won't deny that I had to remind myself to breathe every so often.

While Cruise remains the star of the movie with his charisma, Simon Pegg is essential.  His comedic timing may be at its peak in his collaborations with Edgar Wright, but the man's a gifted comedian all on his own.  He helps ground the movie when things gets too absurd, and even though he's a tech expert, he gets his fair share of action.  The only other performance of note was Ferguson's Ilsa Faust, who kicks a considerable amount of ass and never feels like a shoehorned-in love interest for Cruise.  She remains unpredictable and interesting throughout, though Ferguson's physical presence leaves more of an impression than her actual performance.  The rest of the cast is fine (I was letting wishing Jeremy Renner had more to do), but nothing to write home about.

Sonically, Rogue Nation delivers on all fronts, from the outstanding sound mix to the classic theme song.  While most modern action scores are still BWAM-sound fests, the Mission Impossible movies keep their iconic TV theme alive and well throughout their film scores.  How damn hard is that, Transformers? The action would be nothing without its sound design, and the film's many locations settings, car chases, and operatic assassinations rely on a steady sound mix to keep everything feeling grounded. Visual effects are pretty much top notch, with a great deal of notable practical effects as well as CGI-aided set pieces.  I'm always happy to see more in-camera effects used in action movies, because they age better and create a better sense of tangibility.   I think Rogue Nation finds a good balance between the two methods, something I really wish the Marvel movies would take note of.

When I wasn't gushing over how incredible the action scenes were and how hilarious the comedy was, I was wishing Rogue Nation had a better villain with more clear motivations.  What does the Syndicate, or in other words, the titular Rogue Nation, really want?  If you're going to have a villain rehash a "take over the world" plot or give them a revenge story, make that character interesting.  We don't remember The Dark Knight's Joker because he had elaborate plans or even a defined backstory; we relish in his character.  I'm not saying every movie villain has to be the Joker (I'm not even sure there can even be another Joker), but the best action/spy movies give me someone I love to hate.  Rogue Nation might as well not have true villains, and that's a problem.

Although I didn't find myself getting caught up in the story's mystery, I did care about what happened to these characters.  That's where the joy comes from, and Rogue Nation is happy to be what it is.  If it doesn't quite match the balls-to-the-wall awesomeness of Ghost Protocol, that's not a criminal offense.  It does come close, and in spite of its weightless story, I desperately want to revisit this world.  I'd even call it better than this year's Bond film (Spectre), and that film features the largest practically-filmed explosion in cinematic history.  Full of spectacle and heart in equal measure, it's just a great time.

8/10

American Idol: The Farewell Season Premiere

No. NO. That's impossible.  American Idol did not premiere FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.  I refuse to believe it.  Regardless, here we are on the eve of the season premiere of what will be the last season of the show.  In the early 2000s, Idol redefined reality television and spawned countless imitators in the intervening years that have mostly been interesting, but never quite captured what American Idol has, or at least what it used to have.  Based on the British reality show Pop Idol, the first few seasons were cultural phenomenons because of a few golden factors, chief among them being two questions you could "How cruel can Simon Cowell be?" and "Who out of these everyday nobodies is going to be the next ultra-famous pop star?"  Everyone was addicted. Without those two factors, it's just another talent show, and unfortunately, that's kind of what it turned into.  Simon's been gone for years with no one asshole-ish enough to replace him and Idol winners just don't go on to become stars... like at all.  No more Kelly Clarksons, no more Carrie Underwoods, and no more Chris Daughtrys.  But all of this is ok; American Idol was special because it was lightning in a bottle. It's good to see it bow out now before it jumps the shark... oh wait, Nikki Menage was already a judge.  Ok, so it won't be going out with dignity, but it is nice to see that the producers are proud of it enough to make its final season seem like a big deal, in spite of what I'm sure must be cataclysmic ratings.

What to make of the premiere?  I haven't followed the show in years, but not much has changed format-wise.  Good ol' Ryan Seacrest is still charming his way through scene transitions and the judges are still clearly trying too hard to ad-lib (which is part of the fun), but there's definitely a sense of deflation when it comes to the formula.  These judges are no Randy Jackson, Paula Abdul or Satan himself, but I suppose they're alright.   Jennifer Lopez, Keith Urban, and Harry Connick, Jr. clearly know the business well enough, but they like to use the word "pitch" a lot without giving much interesting criticism to offer to the people they pass or the ones they reject.  They lack chemistry and good interactions,  so they're little jokes, like standing in different places before an overweight honky-tonk singer, come off as a bit forced.  One of the contestants fake arrests Harry at one point.  Um... hilarious?  I don't know, I think it would have been more fun if they'd somehow reunited the original judges, or maybe even got some Idol alums to judge.  That might have been fun, no?

I have to admit that I did get a good laugh at the build-up of sad stories culminating in the sixteen-year-old yodeling girl who busts out her whole privileged life story without taking a breath.  Good to see that the producers can parody themselves a bit.  But there were a few good tearjerkers, including a fifteen-year-old who lost his brother and sings like a freakin' angel.   Seriously dude, your voice just dropped, like, last year.  While many of the talent that made it through was pretty mediocre, there were a few teens who were absolutely stellar.  Also, since when can you bring an instrument to the audition?  Last I checked, this was a singing competition first, and then later on people could play an instrument if they wanted.  It seemed like every other contestant was playing guitar, which... I don't know it just feels like a distraction.  A cappella is much harder to pull off and can be more impressive (or more damning).

Part of the (admittedly mean-spirited) fun of watching the auditions is to see some really bad auditions (probably the third major reason Idol took off the way it did), and I must say there wasn't anything all that memorable.  One of the rejected men, the previously mentioned honky-tonker, was let down rather cruelly after the judges all danced and sang along with his audition.  It's a combination of mean-spirited and awkward that's just cringe-inducing.  Have all the whacked-out people auditioned already?  We Americans are a bloodthirsty bunch, and we need weirdos to make fun of and make ourselves feel better! Oh well.  This was only Georgia, there's still time.  Also, can someone explain what that Kanye West stuff was at the end?  I mean, besides the ego stroking.  I got that loud and clear.

Knowing that the winner of this competition might not be a superstar kills a bit of the mood the show needs to keep it interesting, and the judges are less-than ideal, but I can't say it was a bad two hours of television.  It's still better than the average reality show, and a few of the winners did hit me right in the feels against my better judgement.  And who knows?  Maybe because it's the last season, the show will get more attention and the winner will be something special, but only time will tell.  In any case, I might as well enjoy the show while I can and see if I can get wrapped up in it the way I used to.

I'll give it six Sanjayas out of ten William Hungs.

Brooklyn

If there’s a word to describe Brooklyn, it would be “quaint.”  It is straightforward, extremely likable, and aggressively… quaint.   It provides plenty of drama, but it’s understated.  There's a good love story, but it’s quiet.  I don’t think a single character yells or screams throughout the film’s two-hour runtime; a rarity to find during awards season.  I had no idea what to expect from Brooklyn, having seen no trailers beforehand, but it didn’t take long for the opening scenes to win me over with their peaceful nature and abundance of charm.   It was probably for the best; my ears were still ringing a bit from seeing Spectre the day before.

The film follows Eilis (Saoirse Ronan), a young woman who lives in Ireland in the 1950s.  With a bright mind but no discernable future, she moves to America (Brooklyn, to be exact) to start a new life.  Naturally, she’s homesick beyond belief; her mother (Jane Brennan) and sister Rose (Fiona Glascott) were all she ever had, and every day she feels increasingly isolated and lonely.  That is until she meets Tony (Emory Cohen), and Italian plumber (insert Super Mario joke here) who practically falls in love with her at first sight.  Now in love with Tony, Eilis has a choice to make when it becomes possible for her to move back to Ireland; can she leave it all for him?

Based on a novel by Colm Toibin, there doesn't appear to be a pretentious bone in Brooklyn’s body.  It knows what it is and fully commits to its reserved, understated tone.  Does it ever become bland?  Occasionally.  It’s shot very well, but I wouldn’t call the movie “beautiful.”  But that’s hardly an issue; while slow-moving, the story never drags because screenwriter Nick Hornby does a great job of moving piloting their scenes with well-developed characters.  The cast is really solid as well; major talent like Jim Broadbent and Julie Walters show up to add some prestige to the affair, but the film really hinges on Ronan’s performance.  She and Cohen have wonderful chemistry and are very easy to root for. There’s a sweetness and authenticity to their relationship that I found refreshing and honest.  And I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention James DiGiamcomo, who plays Tony’s eight-year-old brother and is an absolute scene-stealer.

Though Brooklyn is a period piece through and through, its themes of social isolation and starting a new life are relevant and relatable today.  More specifically, it captures a very specific cycle of what happens to young people when they leave home for the first time: the leaving, the wanting to die of homesickness, the surviving, the loving of your new life, and then the dilemma about which place you want to live permanently.  Think modern college life or studying abroad.  Brooklyn is a funny and romantic film that has modest goals and meets them with deceptive ease.  You won’t find explosive arguments or dramatic speeches about feminism here (but make no mistake, this is a strong feminist piece), and that’s precisely why I liked it so much.

8/10

Straight Outta' Compton

"I got something to say."

Biopics are a tough beast to tame.  On the one hand, the story needs to be faithful to real life events.  On the other, the characters need to be likable and the plot needs coherency.  How can one manage that and still deliver an entertaining film?  Straight Outta Compton seems to manage it pretty well; I've heard some criticism about decisions that may have been made by producers Ice Cube and Dr. Dre in order to protect their image somewhat, chief among them being Dr. Dre's misogynistic tendencies. Other important real-world people in the N.W.A story, including Arabian Prince, were reduced to cameos in the film.  While these can be viewed as detrimental, I prefer to see them as par for the course when it comes to biopics, and it doesn't matter much to someone just looking for a good film (which I often am).  I watch documentaries if I want a thorough education, not Hollywood movies.  More importantly, Straight Outta Compton succeeds in overcoming the cliche trappings of the genre while capturing something raw and timely in the process.

"Speak a little truth and people lose their minds."

In 1986, times are tough for a group of teens living in Compton, Los Angeles.  Filled with drugs, poverty, and police brutality, they get by with little money and not much hope for the future.  They dub themselves Ice Cube (O'Shea Jackson, Jr.), Dr. Dre (Corey Hawkins), and Eazy-E (Jason Mitchell) and record a rap album with a few friends called "Boyz-n-the-Hood." It sells so unexpectedly well that it attracts the attention of Jerry Heller (Paul Giamatti), and he offers to be their manager.  During a recording session for their next album, the boys are harassed by some cops just for standing outside their own building.  Angered by the incident, Ice Cube writes "Fuck tha Police," causing huge controversy and effectively putting the group, now called the N.W.A., in the public limelight in a way no hip-hop artist had before.  In the proceeding years, success forces the group to shift in different directions, and with all of their newfound "friends" and business partners, it becomes impossible to know who to trust.

"What's NWA stand for anyway?"

Some of the best scenes in the film are the most subdued.  The early scenes in Compton are extremely effective, letting the actors breathe and be natural with each other; it's easy to believe that they could all be real-life friends.  I think it's because there's not a whole lot of "performing" going on; the actors, including Ice Cube's real-life son, embody their characters naturally, giving the film a sense of authenticity.  That's not to say that the actors falter in the more emotional scenes; they don't.  But the film's heart lies in seeing these kids, who are growing up in rough-as-hell conditions, just hanging out, ragging on each other, and being people.  Also, I've gotta give it up for Paul Giamatti, who absolutely knocks it out of the park with his performance.

"I like Afterschool Specials"

Screenwriters Jonathan Herman and Adrea Berloff do a good job pacing the film and working with a story that takes place over a long period of time.  The development feels natural and the script doesn't pull punches with language, difficult realities, racism, and violence.  No film about the N.W.A was going to be a "safe" one, but it's still a relief that it doesn't appear to have been censored too much by its producers.  We see the boys act like complete jackasses and make terrible decisions, but the consequences are often devastating (and thankfully pulls the film together at the tail end).  The culture of hip-hop during the 80s and early 90s is oozing out of the film's aesthetics as well, which does its job in transporting the audience back in time.

"That shit was DOPE."

If there's something missing from the experience, it's a small but vital moment.  Where's that moment when the group realizes that they've got their first big hit?   There are scenes with small reactions peppered throughout the first act, but I didn't feel the excitement I was expecting when they essentially become famous.  I needed some kind of reaction from the boys that signifies what's really happening; their lives will never be the same.  In addition, transitions between scenes (which sometimes also means transitions between years) sometimes come a little too soon; for example, a scene where the group narrowly escapes a very intense concert is ended somewhat abruptly so that the movie can get onto the next big event in the "real world" story.  No more referencing that crazy scene, time to move on!  I'd call it a plotting problem; I shouldn't be able to remove scenes of the film and still be left with a coherent story, but in certain cases I definitely can.  Also, while we're being negative here, the film is not subtle about its messages... like AT ALL.  It's dangerously close to PSA material, which is a bit disappointing because most of the movie is better than that.

"Is this taking care of me?"

Straight Outta' Compton isn't a paint-by-numbers biopic that trudges through a cradle-to-grave formula without personality, and given its subject matter, that's a great thing.  What's sad about its themes of racism are that they are still as relevant today as they were twenty-five years ago, and what's interesting is how the shock waves sent out by N.W.A. can still be felt today in full force.  Their music was angry, intense, and unhinged, but that's exactly what it needed to be.  You don't grow up in hell and learn to sing about the clouds.  The film's themes about the rise to power and subsequent fall because of overindulgence may seem a bit cliche on paper, but they are used to good effect.  Add in the great performances and solid directing by F. Gary Gray, and you have a blunt film that doesn't shy away from the ideas it presents.  Its messages may not subtle, but then again, neither was N.W.A.

8/10

Terminator: Genisys

"I'm old, not obsolete."

To say that Terminator: Genysis was dead on arrival isn't really fair.  It was dead while it was being conceived. This premise was not going to work under any circumstance (unless at the end of the film Sarah Connor, portrayed by Linda Hamilton, woke up at the end in bed next to Arnold Schwarzenegger and remarked about the strange dream she just had... Sure, it would have raised some questions, but at least it would have been entertaining).  For Terminator fans, myself included, there’s no easy way to say it: our franchise started at the highest of highs and has since been at the lowest of lows.  The Terminator?  A masterpiece of low-budget sci-fi/horror filmmaking. Terminator 2: Judgment Day? One of the greatest action spectacles of all time, and it helped revolutionized the visual effects industry.  This second entry in James Cameron's masterful film series about an Austrian, body-building robot sent back from the future to kill a waitress concludes so wonderfully. So Terminator 3 and Terminator: Salvation are unnecessary additions to the series (not to mention mediocre films in their own right), but at least they had interesting premises and tried to push the story forward.  Genysis wants to reboot the franchise, work as a sequel, and create an alternate timeline story akin to the new Star Trek movies.  Does it succeed at at least one of these highly ambitious ventures?

"Nice to see you. Get out."

The year is 2029, and the Earth is a post-apocalyptic wasteland.  Skynet, an A.I. program that went rogue, took over the world's nuclear defense systems, and waged a decades-long war against the humans, has finally fallen.  Just as the human resistance, led by John Connor (Jason Clarke), seem to have taken down the last Skynet base, they discover that a Terminator has been sent back in time to 1984 to kill John's mother, Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke), before he can be born.  John's right-hand man, Kyle Reese (Jai Courtney) volunteers to travel back to the same time and protect Sarah from the Terminator.  However, when Kyle arrives, he doesn't find the timid Sarah he was expecting; she saves his life from a T-1000 (Lee Byung-hun) and apparently knows about Skynet, the future, and her son the savior.  She know how to handle herself against Terminators, because she was raised by one: a T-800 (Arnold Shwartzenegger) was sent back in time to when she was a child and became her father figure.  Now it's up to Kyle, Sarah, and this "good" Terminator to stop judgement day from happening, which more time traveling, gun fights, and Terminator re-quotes than ever before.

"I'm neither man nor machine..."

While it may be faint praise to say that the first act of Terminator: Genesys is not the worst possible version of itself imaginable, I’m afraid that’s about all it has going for it.  We finally get to see the events that lead up to Reese being sent back to 1984 in the first movie, which is the next logical step in the film series.  From an art direction standpoint, the attention to detail is admirable when it comes to recreating some of the original 1984 set pieces.  Some shots look as though they were spliced in from the first film in order to really take us back in time and relive the experience from a fresh perspective.  What’s especially impressive is the way the original Terminator is brought back to life onscreen; the CGI-assisted creation is stunning when ’84 Arny looks at his surroundings in a very convincing extreme close-up.  So hats off to the effects department and set designers, they really deserve praise for their work on this film. 

"I'll be back... tehehe..."

I can’t give that same credit to the screenwriters though, whose output is damn near inconprehensible. The story, to be polite, is like a painfully stitched-together series of Terminator fan fictions; clunky in its conception and ugly in its execution.  It becomes more and more preposterous as the plot thickens, with twists that don't make any sense, too many people building time machines, and characters that spend copious amounts of time explaining what’s happening to each other.  The action is mostly shot in close-ups of the actors faces, totally removing any sense of fun, and while I mentioned the great CGI at the start of the film, it's nowhere near as consistent throughout.

"A straight line... you just go and you don't look back..."

As I'm sure it goes without saying, the cast was mostly a disappointment. Arny isn’t playing the Terminator that we fell in love with in T2, he’s playing a parody of himself.   No one was going to be able to replace Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor, but I will say this: I’m surprised that Emilia Clarke works as well as she does in the role. I almost do buy her as a mix between the soulless warrior in T2 and the innocent waitress from the first movie, which makes sense given the altered timeline.  But Jai Courtney as Kyle Reese?  He was playing an entirely different character (who apparently had way more time to go to Gold's Gym in the post-apocalyptic future than Michael Biehn's version).  I love Jason Clarke, but he gives a terrible performance as John Connor, not aided by the cheesy dialogue he has to spew.  The best performance has got to be from J.K. Simmons, who despite being given a criminally low amount of screen time, totally steals the show.

The future is not set... but thank God the past is! 

That way the original films can remain untouched...

There’s nothing to get invested in, and not unlike Dumb and Dumber Too, there’s just something awkward about the whole affair.  It's a movie made far too late in the game and serves no real purpose (other than it has a fanbase that will probably see it).  It's boring to watch people explaining what's happening between chase scenes, and it's insulting to lay down so many nonsensical story elements the way Genisys does.  The best parts of the film are retreading old ground, but the spirit of Cameron's original movies is nowhere to be found.  If Genisys has a theme, it's that we shouldn't just make new things because we can; we have to think about the horrible consequences that the over-reliance on technology can have on us as a culture.  It's good advice, no?

2/10

FOX Night of Sitcom Premiers: "Grandfathered" and "The Grinder"

"Sometimes you find exactly what it is you're looking for and you aren't allowed to pursue it for literally no reason."

It's always fun to watch the premier of a new series, never knowing exactly what you're getting into. Will it be a forgettable, horrible, or the next big thing?  Maybe it'll be the masterpeice no one was watching, but you were, and years later when it's a cult classic on Netflix you can be like, "Yeah, I watched that when it was on. Good shit."  You know what I mean? The point is, it's worth it to dive blindly into something new.

So it was with tonite's newest sitcoms on Fox, a network that despite being notorious for its quick cancellations has produced a multitude of great shows over the years.  Would it be that way with either of tonite's premeirs?

First up, we have Grandfathered, which features John Stamos in the role of a fifty-year-old ladies' man who owns an extremely sucessful restaurant and lives a carefree life.  Suddenly one day, he is approached by the son he never knew he had, played by Josh Peck.  But wait... it's gets zanier.  It turns out that not only does he have a twenty-six-year-old son, but that son has a baby daughter. John Stamos, you just got GRANDFATHERED.  Needless to say, I don't really like this premise.  It's nice to see Stamos back in the spotlight (despite the fact that I don't really like Full House either, though I've likely seen every episode in reruns).  It's good to see Josh Peck holding his own as well, having been all but absent from the sitcom scene since his Drake and Josh days (a show that I did actually like).  The character-driven comedy is there in spurts, but the celebrity cameos are mostly pointless (save for one by a certain Fully House cast member who will remain nameless) and the soundtrack is overrun by popular songs to cover up for the fact that the story is lacking.   While it certianly could get better, Grandfathered is likely going to fall into the "forgettable" column of TV shows by the end of its run.

After that, The Grinder aired its first episode, and the difference in writing style is striking.  I was laughing my ass off within seconds of seeing a phony "previously on" segment from a fictional courtroom drama called "The Grinder."  The spoof on drama shows in the current era was spot on, hitting every cliche and over-the-top melodramatic beat it could within the allotted minute or so it had to do it.  From there, I was hooked.  The Grinder is a show that features two brothers: one, played by Rob Lowe, is a famous TV actor who has been playing a lawyer named Grinder for eight years.  The show has just ended and he's trying to figure out what to do with his life.  The other brother, played by Fred Savage, is an actual lawyer who is sick of his dealing with his brother's constant attention for being on a mediocre show while he goes out into the much blander "real world" to work on actual cases.  However, he isn't the best at articulating himself in court: that's where Rob Lowe comes in.  Despite not being an actual lawyer, he's able to put on a hell of a show while Savage does more of the book work, making them a formitable team.  While I wouldn't call it a "great" show by any means, The Grinder has a lot of potential.  The writing is sharp and the cast is excellent, with Lowe and Savage sharing good chemistry.  Do we have a classic on our hands? Only time will tell.

While I found Grandfathered to be less than stellar and The Grinder to be more amiable than hilarious, I will say that I was entertianed by both.  It's difficult to make an original sitcom in the television world in 2015; most shows are serialized and planned out so that every little detail matters.  Sitcoms traditionally take place as a series of isolated incidents.  Is this style of TV dying out?  I certianly still think there's a place for it.  A memorable story is a memorable story.  Whether or not either of these sitcoms have one to tell remains to be seen, but my money's on The Grinder if I were to guess which show will likely be seeing a Season Two.