"Are We There Yet?" and the American Dream

TBS has launched a new sitcom to join Meet the Browns and House of Paynes on their Wednesday night lineup and this new show also caters to the African-American/Tyler Perry-loving demographic, though less extremely as its predecessors. The show is Are We There Yet? and it is indeed based on the 2005 family comedy starring Ice Cube and Nia Long. The sitcom is a continuation of the film (thankfully erasing the dreadful theatrical sequel Are We Done Yet?). While the film was about a road trip, the sitcom is a traditional family sitcom, sort of a "black version" of The Brady Bunch with about 5 fewer characters.

The basic premise: Nick (now played by Terry Crews, of Everybody Hates Chris fame) is adjusting to life with his new wife Suzanne (now played by Essence Atkins AKA Yvette from Smart Guy) and her two kids Kevin (Coy Stewart) and Lindsay (Teala Dunn). Nick's friend Martin (comedian Christian Finnegan) and Suzanne's assistant/best friend Gigi (Keesha Sharp) help the two figure out how to achieve familial and financial success. The sitcom offers a new interpretation of the American Dream, the "there" in the title. Are We There Yet? is essentially about a couple who wants to have it all--the house, the kids, the friends, the job, the life.

I first wanted to watch this show because of Essence Atkins, who was my favorite on Smart Guy. But after I saw the first episode, I realized that this sitcom was BAD (but luckily not worse than TBS's other original sitcoms). The jokes are predictable, the characters are obvious and the show has a 1990s feel to it. It's a show that wants to be one of those comfort food-sitcoms like Full House or The Cosby Show--but it's sadly about 12 years too late.

Not to say that the "family sitcom" has disappeared completely--it's just evolved. We now have shows that are single camera, laugh-track-free and that tell the stories of less traditional families. For example, we have the happily struggling family on The Middle, the wacky extended family on Modern Family and the hilariously self-obsessed surrogate family on Cougar Town (all of which are coincidentally on ABC). These new shows are the face of the 21st century family sitcom. So when Are We There Yet? premieres with its tired dialogue and sleepy plots, it looks like a failure.

Even the episode titles are lazy--"The Day Off Episode", "The Soccer Episode", "The Rat in the House Episode" and so on. I take it as an attempt to give these episodes the same iconic feel as a Friends episode or a Seinfeld episode (both of which had episode titles that maintained a pattern) but both of those shows were groundbreaking and iconic, which Are We There Yet? certainly is not.

But, like with all bad sitcoms, Stockholm syndrome sets in and I start to enjoy the show (I once had obsessions with both Yes, Dear and The Steve Harvey Show). Are We There Yet?, despite its old-school sensibilities, has some charms. Most of them come from the charming and likable cast, who rise aboce the dreadful material. Essence Atkins, Terry Crews and Teala Dunn all excel in their roles and they have great chemistry. Less impressive is Coy Stewart, but he's young and will probably improve in the future. As the two sidekicks, Christian Finnegan and Keesha Sharp all too easily slip into boring best friend cliches.

The thing is, I don't know if I would recommend this anyone. It's pleasant, inoffensive and harmless but it's no outstanding piece of television history. Let me put it this way. The opening credits has the four leads walk into a brightly colored but empty room. Then Terry Crews does some awkward breakdancing while the other three look at him. Then they all sit on a random couch. If that repulses you, stay as far away from this sitcom as possible. If not, then check it out--you might just enjoy it.

These Are the Girls I Love the Most

I love television--watching it, writing about it, dreaming up ways to perfect it. And with every TV show with which I become obsessed, I find myself falling in love with one of its characters. So here's a list of my eight favorite TV heroines.

Roz Doyle (Peri Gilpin) on Frasier

Even though the first two seasons suffered from a "Lack of Roz", she was always a scene-stealer. The reason why I love her is because she serves as a perfect foil to Frasier--she's down-to-earth, no-nonsense and completely willing to bring Frasier back to reality when he's off on one of his pretentious rants. Also, Roz is rather "romantically-experienced" and yet she's never embarrassed about it despite Frasier and Niles's constant teasing. Peri Gilpin has a deadpan comic timing, often nailing her lines with a wonderful precision. How did she never get an Emmy nomination?

Sookie Stackhouse (Anna Paquin) on True Blood

Sookie can come off as being naive, immature and somewhat stupid. However, I see it as just her wanting to believe that the world is a better place than it is. Sookie, in my eyes, is courageous, loyal, genuine and subtly fierce. Anna Paquin is gorgeous, with that golden hair and sunny smile. I think she's a competent actress, albeit one with some limitations. But she also has an addictive screen presence.

Liz Lemon (Tina Fey) on 30 Rock

Oh, man, Lemon is the perfect woman with her food obsession, her love for the Star Wars films, and her devotion to pop culture. Combine that with Tina Fey's comedy chops and you have a classic TV character. Lemon is the everywoman--actually, the everyperson--and that makes her more attractive. This makes the running joke that she's the ugliest woman on the 30 Rock version of the planet even funnier.

Sydney Bristow (Jennifer Garner) on Alias

Whether she's scaling the wall of a shady warehouse at midnight Russian time or impersonating a French diplomat in Cairo, Sydney was the coolest heroine on prime-time TV from 2001-2006. Even when the show became caught up in its own mythology and lost some of its 1st season charm, Jennifer Garner still rocked it in every episode. What other actress looked as good in every hair color and sounded convincing in every language?

Robin Scherbatsky (Cobie Smulders) on How I Met Your Mother

She likes guns, scotch, a good steak and was a Canadian teen pop star. What's not to love? Robin is a unique TV female character because she's not looking for marriage and kids. Once she broke up with Ted in season 2, the show had to refigure what her purpose on the show is but that didn't stop Cobie, the least experienced of the cast, from being totally hilarious.

Rachel Green (Jennifer Aniston) on Friends

Rachel was and is my favorite of the Central Perk-ians. The traits that some find whiny and annoying, I find endearing and adorable (maybe because I'm a Ross?). Of the girls, she may not have been the funniest (that honor goes to Miss Monica Gellar) but she did have a unique comic presence--she kind of puts herself in embarrassing situations via her desire to prove herself. And she had the best chemistry with each of her castmates.

Olivia Dunham (Anna Torv) on Fringe

When Sydney Bristow ended her reign as Queen of Spy TV, the throne was empty until Torv debuted as Dunham on Fringe. I like Agent Dunham because she is so hardcore in her pursuit of justice that she's consistently unsatisfied unless she has all the answers or captured the criminal mastermind. Anna Torv is a very capable actress--with such a serious role, she still allows some charm and warmth to sneak in. And she's one of the most beautiful women on TV right now.

Jules Cobb (Courteney Cox) on Cougar Town

There is something about Cox's portrayal of Jules that makes this potentially obnoxious character so adorable. Jules is perky, self-centered, a maybe alcoholic and downright obsessed with her son and her friends. Thanks to Courteney Cox, she's also endearing and a total sweetheart. I like that she's flawed and three-dimensional and that she strives to be a perfect person. That makes her a lot more realistic than other sitcom heroines.

Even though I stole the title of this blog from Snoop Dogg's verse in Katy Perry's "California Gurls", it's still true. I genuinely adore these TV characters and I look forward to watching them every week (or rewatching them on DVD.)

Mid-Life Shrek-sis

As much as I love the Shrek series, Shrek the Third was a bit of a downer. It was funny in parts and had an interesting plot but it just felt off. And it was sad to see the groundbreaking animated series end with a whimper instead of a BANG. So when they announced a 4th edition, I was excited to see if it could live up to the hilarity of Shrek and Shrek 2. Bad news: Shrek Forever After is nothing like the first two. Good news: IT WORKS!

The fourth time we see Shrek, he's a semi-unhappy ogre. He has three crying babies, a demanding wife, friends who are at his house all the time, an unwanted celebrity status in Far Far Away and a desire to be a "real ogre" again (meaning mean and scary and hated throughout the kingdom). He finally loses it at his kids' birthday party and meets Rumplestilskin, a dwarf creature who is infamous for his seductive but ultimately one-sided contracts. Shrek stupidly makes a deal with him that sends Shrek into an alternate universe in which Shrek never saved Fiona from the tower and the Rumpster now rules Far Far Away. Shrek must now find Fiona and kiss her in order to make the world right again.

Putting Shrek through an It's a Wonderful Life-style reevaluation of his life was a super-smart move. This is because it completely validates the events that take place in the wonderful first film. We get to see Fiona and Shrek fall in love all over again, we get to see a new version of Shrek's friendship with Donkey and we get a villain similar to Lord Farquaad--short, vain, flamboyant and mercilessly funny. Essentially Shrek Forever After reminds us exactly why we're hopelessly in love with these characters and their world.

The best thing about this movie is our lovely ogress heroine. When we first see Fiona in the alternate universe, she is a blood red-haired Viking sex goddess, the Princess Leia of the Ogre Rebellion against Rumplestilskin and his tyranny over Far Far Away. She's still the same Fiona we've loved and cheered for the last nine years. In the 1st film, she is a beautiful princess who is embarrassed by her nightly transformation into an ugly ogre. In this film, she is ashamed of her daytime persona, afraid it undermines her authority. Both Fionas are too insecure to be themselves for fear of being judged--this film just offers a different spin on her character. Shrek (and we with him) falls in love with Fiona for all the same reasons but in a different way. And it is really cute to see Shrek make a fool of himself in front of Fiona in the scene where he tries to tell her who he really is. His monologue ends with the future classic line "And then my donkey fell down your waffle-hole." It's just too funny.

The film offers a darker and grittier version of Shrek's world, which is interesting. The story is more dramatic than the three previous films which I think was a risky but ultimately successful move. Of course, the movie is really funny especially when the obese Puss-in-Boots, Donkey and Rumplestilskin are involved. The film's supporting characters (Rumpy's witch police squad, the ogre soldiers, and all the returning characters like Pinocchio, Gingy, etc) are very funny. Shrek Forever After makes some good use of two old-school songs: The Carpenters' "Top of the World" and Enya's "Orinoco Flow (Sail Away)" which is a nice callback to the first two films' amazing musical selections.

Shrek Forever After is an extremely solid end to the story of Shrek, Fiona and their wacky group of friends. It's funny, has a good story and completely reinforces everything that the Shrek films means to us. It's an entertaining flick that I would highly recommend to all fans of this crazy-awesome ogre. Shrek Forever After: B+

The Karate Kid: Charming but Empty

The Karate Kid (1984) is an 80s classic (not one I particularly like, mind you). A remake was inevitable. A remake starring some young hot starlet was inevitable. Was I surprised that Jaden Smith, son of Will and Jada Pinkett-Smith, was cast in the Ralph Maccio/Hilary Swank role or that Jackie Chan was cast in the Pat Morita role? No, these all seem like natural choices. Any adolescent boy would jump at the chance to play the role of the victorious underdog. So I tried to go into this movie with no expectations. I don't really think Jaden Smith has any more talent than any other young actor (he's no Dakota Fanning circa I Am Sam/War of the Worlds) but I don't think he has any less talent than any other young actor either. Honestly, I could care less that he's Will Smith's son. Even the late Natasha Richardson was the daughter of screen legend Vanessa Redgrave.

The remake, whose goal is to bring the original's story to a younger generation, follows pretty much the same outline as the original. Dre (Smith) moves to China with his mother Sherry (the radiant Taraji P. Henson) and finds it hard to adapt to the new culture (actually refusing to learn Chinese). He meets a pretty girl and gets beat up by her over-protective friends. He then enlists his apartment building's handyman Mr. Han (Jackie Chan), who turns out to be a martial artists master, to teach him Kung Fu (not Karate, despite the film's title--more on that later). Dre's goal is to beat his enemies and win their respect.

Being the son of Will and Jada, Jaden obviously inherited their natural charisma and screen presence. Unfortunately, he also inherited their limitations as actors. Will and Jada are so charismatic and charming that they are unable to show any humility or self-doubt, or when they do, it's as if they're fishing for compliments. (This is why I cannot watch any Will Smith movie (other than Hitch, duh) or Jada Pinkett-Smith's medical show HawthoRNe on TNT.) Dre is confident and sure of himself in the beginning of the movie, soooo what exactly does he learn?

For example, when Dre is trying to woo his ladylove, he isn't awkward or fumbling all over his words. He's self-assured and suave (in the world of the movie, that is--in reality, he's arrogant and obnoxious). In an underdog movie, the leading lady should be charmed by the awkwardness of the hero not by the American-inner-city tough guy routine. But of course, god forbid Jaden Smith be nerdy or awkward or self-conscious. As a young male starlet, it's almost as if he's forbidden from being anything other than charming, confident and, like, OMG totally cool. Jaden Smith is being manufactured into a future heartthrob which makes him that much more annoying.

The film isn't without its charms. Most of them come from Jackie Chan, who finally has his first role in a long time that actually has some meat (I shudder to think of The Spy Next Door and Around the World in 80 Days). His character is full of cliches but Jackie Chan is a natural. Taraji P. Henson is a wonderful actress even if her character is reduced to naggy tendencies.

I think my biggest problem with this movie is its title The Karate Kid. WHY IS THE MOVIE CALLED THAT WHEN HE LEARNS KUNG FU?! I get the whole "a brand name is a brand name" defensive argument the studio/producers are giving us BUT it is also downright offensive to those wonderful masters of the art of Kung Fu. We all know that this remake is a just a cash cow (it's already made more than $105 million at the box office) but not giving it a proper title and hoping that the idiot Americans won't notice is just insulting.

Also, running at 140 minutes, the movie is 3o minutes too long. Some scenes are redundant and/or unnecessary. And there are a lot of themes that aren't really explored. The biggest is how an American adapts to Chinese culture. In fact, if it weren't for the Chinese cast and the beautiful Chinese locations, I would have forgotten the movie takes place in China.

None of what I've written about this movie matters anyway. This movie will entertain its target audience (kids aged 5-12 and their nostalgia-drunk parents). But unfortunately in 2030, we'll probably see another remake starring a new young actor (or actress!) and not a 20th Anniversary Special Edition Blu-Ray. The Karate Kid (2010): C+

Stabbed in the Back with a Stiletto While Drinking a Poisoned Cosmo

Sex and the City 2 is a frontrunner for the Worst Movie of 2010.

And it pains me to say that because I have such respect for the series, the 1st movie, Cynthia Nixon, Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Krisin Davis and their respective characters. But writer/director Michael Patrick King really lets us down with redundant drama, cringe-worthy dialogue and the murdering of the characters and the franchise we loved from 1998-2008 (or in my case, from 2008-2010). In the words of Sean Kingston, "Somebody call 9-1-1!"

There are so many things wrong with this film. Here's an in-depth analysis.

*Big & Carrie

Showing this New York super-couple in marriage was probably tough. What are they like in a stable, emotional-abuse-free relationship? He's boring, she's a nag. Actually, Big is one of two characters who remains most like himself. But throughout the first hour of the movie, Carrie is whining and whining about how he's so boring because he just wants to sit at home and eat take-out and watch amazing Clark Gable movies. Uhhh, Bradshaw, dude's over 50. He's tired of the glamorous Manhattan life. And he consistently tells her to go on without him--sooooo what's the problem? Right, she HAS to do things with him. But she does have fun in the Middle East for a week without him. So, again, what's the problem? And don't even get me started on the 2-day weekly break from marriage which is just a stupid way to give the Prestons a "modern marriage."

*Samantha

Poor, Kim Cattrall! She is just mercilessly humiliated throughout the film. The thing is Samantha is probably closer to Big's age than to Carrie's. She claims to be unafraid of her age--then why is she taking a monster amount of pills to reverse her menopause? Right, so we can hear tons of easy menopause jokes once her pills are taken away at the airport. Blech! Also, Samantha is just too old to be the frat boy of the group. She should be aging gracefully. I would've rather have seen her live fabulously at a more calm level. Look at Meryl Streep, Helen Mirren, Betty White--they are older, classy and so sexy women who don't say things like "Lawrence of my labia". There should be a filmmaking rule: the word "labia" should NOT be said in a scene that DOESN'T take place in a doctor's office. Finally, I find it hard to believe that a professional, successful New York-living PR executive cannot adapt herself to another culture and will actually insult the residents of Abu Dhabi to their face. Character assassination pure and simple.

*Charlotte

It's always been hard to feel sorry for Charlotte with her WASP upbringing and that pesky golden platter people use to hand things to her. Her little non-problems (not including the MacDougal Mess) can be charming for a half-hour episode. So when she had an actual problem in the 1st movie, it was refreshing. But that movie was an anomaly. Here she feels overwhelmed by her two little girls despite her full-time nanny (who serves as a temptation for Harry in Charlotte's mind but not in reality). This would have been a funny episode but stretched to two hours, it becomes hard to listen to her complain. Especially since the scene that shows her at the height of being overwhelmed is utterly ridiculous. She's making cupcakes and the nanny's out. So this is when she decides to call Carrie to complain about how hot the nanny is? Her kids are screaming and she's running around the kitchen holding a baby in one hand and frosting a cupcake with the other and she's on the phone. She wouldn't be so overwhelmed if she knew when not to multi-task. And if she just talked to Harry (AKA Best Husband Ever) then she would know that he would never cheat on Charlotte.

*Miranda

Luckily for Cynthia Nixon (and for those of us who admire her) Miranda remains unscathed. She's the only one who takes an actual interest in Abu Dhabi culture by learning some phrases in Urdu (I fell in love with her every time she said "shukraan"). She always warned Samantha to be more respectful of the Abu Dhabi laws. Even her sillier lines are forgivable because we know she's the only one of the women with a seriously demanding job that takes away from her family time. When she makes it to Brady's science fair after quitting her horrible job ("I made it! I never make it!") we cheer for her. And she has the only scene that rings true to life. She teaches Charlotte that it's okay to complain about motherhood. It's a nice scene that actually allows the characters to breathe and help each other. I would love to see a Miranda solo movie.

*Abu Dhabi

The movie is called Sex and the City 2, not "No One Gets Laid in the Desert 2". I want to see a movie that takes place in New YorK City with the four women who represent different aspects of the city. So the whole hour that takes place in the Middle East is just useless. Not even Aiden's surprise appearance gave us anything interesting. Samantha only makes out with a guy. The worst part is that everything is just decadent and wasteful. Do they really need four butlers, four cars, their own bar, their own dining room and their own kitchen? It's like the recession didn't even happen. It would have been nice to see the girls living glamorously on a budget instead of just wasting money.

*Stanford and Anthony's wedding

One of the things I love about the SATC franchise is how universal it is. Yes, it is about four women but it's a show anybody can relate to. So when you have an extended sequence at a gay wedding that is just offensively flamboyant (offensive to both the hetero community and the homosexual community), it is too alienating. Of all the gay people I know, I doubt any of them would enjoy that sequence. And why, why, why would Liza Minelli sing "Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)" at a gay wedding? Having her sing that song seems like the only reason why the wedding took place. That especially seems true since, last time I checked, Stanford and Anthony hate each other (Team Stanford all the way, Anthony is so irritating!). And if Michael Patrick King had taken a screenwriting course (which he clearly did not) he would know to show, not tell, something as huge as a romance between these two former enemies. Oh, and Carrie continually telling Big not to call their wedding a "gay wedding" was just really offensive. The only good line from that awful sequence (which generally had even worse writing than the scenes in Abu Dhabi) was when Miranda said that Liza Minelli manifests herself whenever there is this much gay energy in a room. It's a cliched line but Nixon delivered it well.

Sorry for the long post but this movie was just offensive to both us the fan ands the four women. Let's not even talk about how Steve and Harry and Smith and Aiden were completely wasted (and not in the fun way which would have made the film easier to watch). There was also a too-short cameo from Penelope Cruz and a surprisingly funny cameo from Miley Cyrus. The thing is not even the few charming moments could save the film from the monstrosity that is Michael Patrick King and his lack of writing skills. If they make a third one (which I hope they do to redeem the franchise from this film), I hope King stays as far away from it as possible.

Thanks for proving the haters right, Michael! Sex and the City 2: D-minus.