Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Streaming Video Power Rankings: Week 1

All rankings are highly subjective, but, hey, it's me. You can trust me.

1) Netflix: May always be #1 just because it's Netflix, and right now it's getting some good vibes for recent premieres like the Pee Wee Herman movie and new seasons of "Daredevil" and "Happy Valley." But watch me complain next week about the loss of "MASH" April 1...and I am not even a fan of "MASH."

2) Hulu: I haven't been thrilled with the recent acquisitions, but the acquisitions keep coming, proving Hulu isn't done collecting content. And positive buzz is building for upcoming original "The Path."

3) HBO Now: It's way too expensive, but announcement of the return of "The Larry Sanders Show" reruns is a great bit of news.

4) Amazon Prime: I'm not into Doctor Who, either, but that's a good get for Prime in a week when many of the other contenders were off their games.

5) Shout TV: I am PUMPED to see what this FREE service adds April 1.

5) WWE Network: Expect a big surge of viewers for WrestleMania week even though the Mania build is alarmingly weak this year.

6) Pub-D-Hub: I love you, Pub-D-Hub, but you haven't updated in several weeks, and your home screen merely says no update 3/12-3/19 due to office closure. Don't go Warner Archive on us!

7) Crackle: Good news: Got some pub in the wake of the sudden passing of Garry Shandling as people realized Crackle had "Larry Sanders." Bad news: Crackle dropped the series several months ago.

8) Warner Archive Instant: Deserves credit for actually doing something for the first time in months. It actually added some movies! Unfortunately, they're TV movies that were on WAI before. Furthermore, WAI added titles to its dreaded "Leaving Soon" category. Remember when we thought this would be a real boon to classic movie lovers?

9) Tubi TV: Underrated FREE channel that deserves more love.

10) Acorn TV: Needs an influx of exciting programming.

Monday, March 28, 2016

ClassicFlix TV Time EXTRA: Top rated shows of all time

I hope you read and enjoyed my two-part look at the top-rated TV episodes of the "ClassicFlix" era over at their site. Let me plug Wesley Hyatt's book again: "Television's Top 100" isn't a cheap book, but it is loaded with info and is a fun read, too.

In these two articles, I presented these high-rated broadcasts in chronological order, unlike Hyatt's book, which ranks them according to viewers. Today I want to rank them in my order of preference.

Again, note that I am not including those episodes that aren't on DVD. From top to bottom:

1) The Fugitive, "The Judgment Part 2": An emotional, resounding finale to one of the best TV series of all time, and a classic episode that rewards multiple viewings. Tough to choose between 1 and 2.

2) The Ed Sullivan Show (Beatles debut): The Beatles are magic, despite some rough aspects to the presentation. I mean, this is TV history, the kind of event for which everyone claims they saw it even if they didn't. I feel guilty picking this second, and maybe on a different day I wouldn't! In the end, it's not an all-Beatle show, and some of the other material doesn't hold up beyond the historical value.

3) The Dick Van Dyke Show, "Third One from the Left": Not even in the top 20 of "DVDS" episodes, but so what? It's still "The Dick Van Dyke Show."

4) Gunsmoke, "Love Thy Neighbor": A powerful episode that would have benefited from the hourlong format.

5) The Beverly Hillbillies, "The Giant Jackrabbit": It's still kind of a mystery to me how this series was so popular, let alone this episode, but watching it for this piece, I was pleasantly surprised how entertaining it was. These days they'd bring the "jackrabbit" back for another guest shot during sweeps.

6) Wagon Train, "The Colter Craven Story": A solid hour, but if we didn't know it were directed by John Ford and if we didn't know of the big-time cameo, would it be so memorable? I don't think so.

7) Mayberry RFD, "Andy and Helen Get Married": I rate this over the "TAGS" episode by virtue of the "wild" bachelor party at the beginning.

8) The Andy Griffith Show, "Barney Hosts a Summit": The show is running out of steam by this point, but Don Knotts really enlivens the proceedings.

9) Bonanza, "The Pure Truth": Some nice guest star turns in this, but it's hardly the "Bonanza" you'd show to someone who has never seen the series. The main reason to watch is for the hand-wringing by the boys over how to handle Hoss' extreme horniness.

10) The Lucy Show, "Lucy Waits Up for Chris": I'm not a big fan of this series, but this one has some historical value for being the premiere episode, though.

11) Gomer Pyle, USMC, "Love Letters to the Sarge": I'm not a huge fan of Gomer, either, and this one doesn't win me over.

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Shameless Self-Promotion: TV Time at ClassicFlix!

My new article is up at ClassicFlix, and this month I continue my exploration of the top-rated TV episodes of the 1960s. A few of these are obvious and are bedrock pieces of television history, but some may surprise you.

TV TIME: Top-Rated TV Episodes, Part 2
By Rick Brooks
Last time, we began an exploration of the highest-rated television episodes of the classic era, as reported by Wesley Hyatt in his excellent book Television's Top 100: The Most Watched American Broadcasts 1960-2010. This month we continue our journey in chronological order. As mentioned in Part 1, to avoid repetition, each series only gets one entry in Hyatt's book. Also, for the purposes of this piece, we are excluding specials, movies, and sporting events.
 
(click HERE for the whole article)


Check it out, and tell 'em Cultureshark sent you! Don't you dare miss it! And come back here this week for a TV Time extra in which I expand on my thoughts on these episodes.

Monday, March 21, 2016

5Q Movie Review: Ant-Man (2015)

Q: Ant-Man? Why would Marvel spend valuable time and resources on a hero like Ant-Man? I mean, remember the superhero sketch on the original "SNL" when Dan Aykroyd as Flash said, after hearing an explanation of Ant-Man's powers, "Check this guy out. He's got the strength of a human!" Then he pretends to be afraid and says, "Every molecule is quivering!"

A: Let's just say the filmmakers are well aware of that moment!

As for the character, he is kind of cool. His shrinking power brings something new to the Marvel movies, and his interaction with little robot ants looks good. They can't all be super strong or shoot lasers out of their butts.

Q: Wasn't Hank Pym the original Ant-Man? Why did they make him an old dude and go with the newer one (Scott Lang) for the movie?

A: I'm the wrong guy to ask about current incarnations of all these characters, but I will say that while, yes, Hank Pym was a founding Avenger, the current movie group has enough super geniuses. It's refreshing to see a hero who is not one.

Oh, Hank Pym is still a super genius, but he's not the one suiting up. Michael Douglas' Pym guides Paul Rudd's Scott Lang, and it's an interesting dynamic, something a little different. Since they already have this Avengers established, it made sense to go a different direction with Pym. Some Pym/Stark banter down the road will be amusing.

Q: How does this fit in with the other Marvel movies?

A: It references the Avengers, but other than a clumsy post-credits segment setting up another Marvel movie, it feels separate from them in a good way. In fact, Ant-Man tries to reach out to the Avengers in the narrative, but he meets Falcon. I love Falcon and am thrilled that he's a part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe or whatever, but he's a B-lister, and the Avengers portions of this movie make it feel like a second-tier movie.

And you know what?  I'm fine with that. There should be room for some of these solo movies with lesser-known heroes.

Q: Does this have a nice juicy villain for Ant-Man?

A: Sadly, no. There are some oily corporate types who are easy to root against, but while Corey Stoll  is skilled at playing an a-hole, he's not really a good super villain. Perhaps the idea was that Any-Man is sort of an anti-hero and that the other elements of the story would make up for the lack of a decent foe. In some respects, they do, but this is perhaps the movie's biggest weakness.

Q: How excited are you for the sequel?

A: The superhero movie docket is getting pretty full, but as long as the films are good, that's not my problem. "Ant-Man" is a solid movie, not one that makes me overly anxious for a follow-up, but one plenty good enough to make me want to see it when it does come out. I felt on some level we weren't supposed to like it because it was directed by Peyton Reed and not the original guy, the much hipper Edgar Wright, but Ant-Man delivers. Rudd and Douglas are charming, and their dynamic has a lot of potential that can be explored in the future. I'm less enthused about Evangeline Lilly's character, but perhaps the sequel will make her more interesting.

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

One of the dumbest attempts to hype a TV series in print

The "Entertainment Weekly" issue with the big "Walking Dead" section tried to boost "The 100," a CW show which I refuse to believe is as great as the magazine (and, I will admit, several prominent critics) indicate. I don't mind talking up the stories, the cast, the craft, or things like that, but this is not a blockbuster hit.

Still, in an apparent attempt to impress readers, the "catch up on The 100" piece includes this "proof" of how the show's popularity "skyrocketed":

According to Twitter, the season 3 bow on Jan. 21 (Rick's note: I like how EW is too cool to spell out January. It's not like IT'S limited to 140 characters) racked up roughly 10 times as many tweets as the series premiere and saw #THE100 trend worldwide.

Oh, well, that's that. I gotta get on board this unstoppable juggernaut! God forbid I get left out of the water cooler talk of a show that got its title trending worldwide on Twitter once for some   unspecified amount of time!

Any sentence beginning with "According to Twitter" should be suspect, but at least we could get some kind of actual numbers rather than some sketchy comparative figure. If the first episode generated a dozen tweets, than 120 would be 10 times that. Plus do you know how difficult it is to get something "trending worldwide"?

Well, I don't, either, but I've heard that it's not actually difficult at all. It's especially plausible when you get an event that would bring people interested in the topic together at one time...like, you know, a hyped series premiere.

It sounds like "The 100" is doing quite well by CW standards and is even drawing some modest critical attention. But let's not act like it's--to pick an example totally out of the blue--"The Walking Dead." If I were involved with the production of the series, I'd be overjoyed to get this kind of coverage, but I might be a little embarrassed by the use of Twitter as an important metric. I don't think advertisers are paying rates based on relative tweet totals or times trending worldwide.

Monday, March 14, 2016

Bobby Ware is Missing (1955) from Warner Archive

NOTE: MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD!  I'M TALKING THE ACTUAL FINAL SHOT OF THE MOVIE! But you ain't missing much with the spoilers because, for reasons I will make clear, there is very little narrative tension in this movie.

Allied Artists' 1955 thriller "Bobby Ware Is Missing" is an odd one. It runs only 66 minutes, it puts children in jeopardy, but then it derives much of its narrative tension from what we know is a red herring. It depicts two young boys trapped on a high mountainside, but it doesn't really attempt to establish the height with gimmicky "looking down" camera shots. Well, as someone who is a little spooked by children in jeopardy and by heights, I didn't mind so much, but it makes for an offbeat picture.

We open with a construction site, where blasting, digging, excavating, and all the other various types of constructing are occurring. Bobby and his friend Mickey Goodwin are biking around and going places they shouldn't be, like all kids used to do. Ah, the good, old days, when you left your house in the morning and did God knows what until it got dark, maybe stopping back home for a sandwich around lunchtime.

And remember when there used to be giant dirt piles all over the place and tools and all kinds of questionable stuff lying around? Bobby and Mickey skip right past the rusty nails, broken glass bottles, and "men's magazines" surely scattered about and go right into the unsecured heavy machinery! These days there would be chain link fence, maybe a MOAT, around this type of site, or at least a video camera or two. The unfortunate youth of today have to get their danger and thrills from their game consoles...or in some places by drinking from the tap. Suffice to say I was appalled at what Bobby and Mickey were able to do at the beginning of this movie...and a little envious.

My jealousy evaporated when the two climbed up a little mountain (maybe it's more a hill, but that doesn't sound as exciting) and suddenly slipped down, landing on a small ridge. They can't climb up, and there's no way to get down. These two are TRAPPED! At first it's not so bad, but when night falls, it's cold and kind of spooky:


Note: Left unexplored in the entire 66 minutes is how the kids go to the bathroom on this ridge. Perhaps director Thomas Carr thought it best not to delve into that. I don't know much about Thomas Carr, but this strikes me as a reasonable judgment on his part.

Meanwhile, Mr. and Mrs. Ware (Arthur Franz and Jean Gilles) are worried sick about their missing boy, and they start to get a little panicky. We soon meet Mickey's father Max (Walter), a single father who has had some issues raising his boy. Someone tossed a brick through the Wares' window, and the attached note claims the kids are being held for ransom. Business picks up as we get going with the star of the show, Neville Brand.

Brand is a world-class geologist the Wares and Max hire to analyze the brick to find clues to the kids' location. At this point, director Carr, through Brand's charismatic but geeky scientist, takes the viewer on an engrossing thrill ride through the high-stakes world of forensic mineralogy.

I'm kidding, of course, but, yes, some sick part of me really wishes that were true.

In fact, this point of the movie is where "Ware" (oh, I'm a wordsmith) squanders an opportunity. I think the most compelling aspect of the thin story is the internal disagreements among the 3 parents over how to handle this. Do they follow the lead and hand over the money? Do they fully cooperate with the authorities (Brand is in charge of the investigation)? There is some interesting debate, and I think if the film had another 10-15 minutes to explore these questions, plus Max's guilt over being an inattentive parent, we might really have something.

Instead, "Ware" shifts focus to a pursuit of the fake kidnapper. The problem is we know immediately the rock thrower has nothing to do with the boys' disappearance. Actually his identity isn't even much of a mystery; anyone paying attention to the credits and keeping track of how often people have been featured in the story to that point could make a pretty good guess. So the movie generates its thrills with a long car chase of a suspect the audience knows is a red herring. Again, I am not a huge fan of heights, not of kids in jeopardy, but I think this film could have benefited from a stronger attempt to leverage those factors.

Long story short (and this IS only 66 minutes, remember), Neville Brand and his men eventually track down the boys, but their rescue plan involves a precarious harness contraption someone tosses out of a hovering helicopter. Hopefully this comes across in the screencaps, but this rescue is brief but looks dangerous as hell, and it made me more uneasy than anything else in the flick:





However, Bobby and Mickey do survive to enjoy embraces with their fathers, and just as a reminder of who the real star of this is, we get a somewhat incongruous closing shot of Neville Brand looking...happy, I guess:

"Snakes...Why did it have to be snakes surrounding those kids?"

It's an odd, almost anticlimactic end to a fun but inconsequential thriller. "Bobby Ware Is Missing" is worth a rental or a watch on, say, TCM, but at 66 minutes and with no extras, this seems a bit of a steep purchase at Warner Archive's standard prices. I would have liked to have seen this as part of a double feature instead of a regular standalone. That said, more power to WA for cranking out even these smaller pictures on DVD.