Television

Subterms

    More stories

    • 63 Shares75 Views

      in Television

      ‘Squid Game’ Review: Game Over

      by

      It’s time for Netflix’s global phenomenon to give up its final answers, if there are any.Contains spoilers for Season 2 of “Squid Game.”“Squid Game” is back for what is said to be its final round, with a six-episode third season on Netflix. If only all beneficiaries of free-floating, pandemic-boosted nihilism would fade away as quickly.The South Korean drama’s creator, writer and director, Hwang Dong-hyuk, had a couple of very profitable insights: that what was missing from “Survivor”-style competition shows was machine guns; and that greatly increasing the pool of contestants — the show’s dour hero, Gi-hun (Lee Jung-jae), is No. 456 — would increase the amount of blood that could be shed while simultaneously giving most of the deaths an anesthetizing, video-game irrelevance.He then gave his package an Instagram-friendly visual wrapping of bright colors, gargantuan toylike structures and massed minimalist costumes, and replaced plot with a series of elaborate variations on children’s games. No candy was ever designed and marketed with greater effectiveness.But the series wasn’t strictly a consumer product, and it wasn’t a reality show. As a work of fiction, it needed to do something to surprise us to merit a second or third season (they are really 2A and 2B). Most television shows may be formulaic to one degree or another, but it is harder not to notice when the formulas you are repeating are ones that you just created.The last batch of episodes picks up halfway through a set of the games in which debt-ridden proletarians are killed, or kill one another, as they compete for an ever-increasing pot of cash, all for the entertainment of anonymous, hyper-rich spectators. The previous winner Gi-hun, whose attempts to halt the spectacle and unmask its ringleader have failed miserably, is battered but alive. Sixty players remain for the final three games.The proximity to a resolution of Gi-hun’s fate gives this season a tension (artificial as it may be) that the show’s second installment, released in December, lacked. Otherwise, it is “Squid Game” business as usual.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares91 Views

      in Television

      Barbara Walters Film ‘Tell Me Everything’ Sticks to Highlights

      by

      “Tell Me Everything” is more of a puff piece than its subject might have liked, but the film is at its best examining TV journalism’s evolution.Given the subtitle — and, to be honest, the subject — of Jackie Jesko’s documentary “Barbara Walters: Tell Me Everything” (streaming on Hulu), I expected a bit more soul-baring. That’s what Walters, the pioneering journalist who dominated the TV interview for decades, was known for. As Oprah Winfrey notes in the film, Walters’s specialty was getting subjects from Fidel Castro and Anwar Sadat to Monica Lewinsky and Winfrey herself to say something they’d never said to anyone.There’s nothing that really qualifies as a bombshell or revelation in this film, though. Like most documentaries about celebrities these days — and Walters, who died in 2022, was undoubtedly a celebrity — it features some frank comments from various interviewees, but carefully positions Walters in her best light: not a flawless woman, but one whose foibles don’t detract from her overall legacy.That means the film comments upon but doesn’t dwell on some of Walters’s more controversial moments: grilling women like Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga on their romantic lives, or cozying up to men like the notorious Roy Cohn. The lives of women in the spotlight are often scrutinized far more intently than those of their male colleagues, but here it’s not without reason: journalists who aspire to do their work in a fair, independent way have to accept that close personal relationships with subjects are off-limits in their private lives, and some questions probably cross ethical lines. But the film tries to frame most of these moments as responses to her upbringing, without spending much time on how they play into a broader American attitude of mistrust toward journalists.By those standards, “Barbara Walters: Tell Me Everything” is disappointing, and more of a puff piece than I suspect Walters herself would have wanted. Yet seen through a different lens, it’s also fascinating — a rather thrilling history of television journalism, as seen through Walters’s life.That’s because she was absolutely a trailblazer for women in news, subjecting herself to plenty of ridicule as she took on one barrier after another: co-hosting a morning show, then anchoring evening news, landing consequential interviews, breaking ground with newsmagazines and innovative talk formats like “20/20” and “The View,” and ultimately creating a brand out of herself that signaled something to the public. There was a time when “the Barbara Walters interview” with a celebrity was an Event, something to stay up late and watch.Throughout the film, a host of voices — including Walters’s own, via archival interviews — tell this story. Winfrey and the seasoned news anchor Katie Couric, in particular, are valuable in filling in the historical background, showing how television journalism progressed from an era in which “hard news” was the realm of serious men in suits, all the way to the years when Walters sat around on a couch with her fellow hosts on “The View,” mixing news and interviews with live-wire conversations. Alongside Walters, they tell the tale of a shift in the shape of TV news. A medium built for entertainment has slowly changed how journalism is delivered and what you expect, and you can see it happening right before your eyes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares50 Views

      in Television

      Diego Luna Gives Jimmy Kimmel the Gift of Fox News Coverage

      by

      While filling in for Kimmel this week, the actor-director got the attention of Laura Ingraham, who said she’d never seen the show before.Welcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. Here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.Reaching New ViewersDiego Luna delivered his final monologue as the first Mexican guest host of “Jimmy Kimmel Live” on Thursday. The actor-director thanked audience members for their support, saying he “didn’t do this for the recognition, or the money, because there’s nothing.”“But there has been such an outpouring of support over the past few days, and last night — last night, I got the highest honor a late-night host can receive.” — DIEGO LUNALuna rolled clips of Fox News reacting to his guest-hosting stint, including Laura Ingraham, who said she was unfamiliar with his work and had never before watched “a ‘Jimmy Kimmel.’”“Thank you. By the way, Jimmy, that’s my gift to you. Yeah, whatever name this woman has, I got her to finally watch your show.” — DIEGO LUNAIn another parting gift, Luna promoted Kimmel’s sidekick, Guillermo, to executive producer, with help from Charlize Theron.The Bits Worth WatchingJimmy Fallon got stuck in the freezer with Jeremy Allen White, star of “The Bear,” on Thursday’s “Tonight Show.”Also, Check This OutWet Leg onstage at the Reading music festival in England in 2023. Scott Garfitt/Invision, via Associated PressThe British band Wet Leg is enjoying indie rock stardom ahead of the release of its second album, “Moisturizer,” on July 11. More

    • 138 Shares50 Views

      in Television

      ‘And Just Like That …’ Season 3, Episode 5 Recap: Heels

      by

      The Goldenblatts and the Wexleys go glamping on Governors Island, but all is not well. Carrie meets her moody new neighbor.Season 3, Episode 5: ‘Under the Table’I’m sorry, there’s a crappy apartment below Carrie’s lavish Gramercy Park palace? With a tenant — her tenant — she has never met or heard of? This is an unexpected (and, like many things on this show) somewhat unbelievable twist.Sure, garden apartments are common, but Carrie is a rich person who bought this house from another rich person. Would either owner really leave the bottom floor in such shambles? Maybe so if it doesn’t bother the sexy biographer Duncan Reeves (Jonathan Cake) who lives there only six months of the year solely to write — and smoke a pipe, apparently, which is a detail that took the brooding London author thing a step too far.The only thing that does bother Duncan is the clickity clack of little Carrie heels, which keeps him up all day long as he is trying to sleep. (Brooding London authors can write only at night, see.)It’s this complaint that kicks Carrie into her petty era.Duncan requests that Carrie please remove her shoes when she is home, which offends her to her core. He even gifts her a pair of slippers, which she impolitely declines. “It’s New York. There’s noise,” she tells him, and continues to click-clack away, albeit with a bit more tiptoe.From there, Carrie’s pettiness only grows. When Miranda’s Airbnb neighbor comes at her half-naked with a meat cleaver, Carrie insists that her friend come stay in the safe harbor that is Gramercy. Miranda obliges, and then Carrie immediately begins to pick at her for consuming the last yogurt, the last banana and the last Mexican Coke. Again, Carrie is a rich person. And they are best friends. Why is Carrie acting as if Miranda should put down a credit card for incidentals?However, Miranda is rich, too, and she has been divorced from Steve for what, three years now? (Season 1 was a long time ago!) Why she still hasn’t found a permanent place to live is perplexing to say the least. Remember the first time Miranda left Steve in the first “Sex and the City” movie? All she had to do was walk through a gentrifying neighborhood and say the incredibly regrettable line “White guy with a baby. Wherever he’s going, that’s where we need to be, and boom, she had a new apartment. (Where was Woke Charlotte when we needed her?)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares50 Views

      in Television

      ‘Art Detectives’ Is Good Nerdy Fun

      by

      Murder? Of course. But this British series also gets excited about things like Viking gold, Chinese artifacts and Dutch master paintings.“Art Detectives,” on Acorn TV, is another strong cozy-nerdy procedural, this time oriented around murders connected to arts and culture. Stephen Moyer stars as Detective Inspector Mick Palmer, the sole member of the Heritage Crime Unit and a knowledgeable, passionate, observant dork. In the pilot, he recruits a devoted underling, Detective Constable Shazia Malik (Nina Singh), a young cop whose potential he spots and whose shabby boss he abhors.Each episode opens with a jazzy little murder vignette, and then Palmer and Malik show up to educate us all about Viking gold or Chinese artifacts. Given that Palmer is an art cop, perhaps it is no surprise that his dad (Larry Lamb) is an art criminal — a forger in particular, and also a real absentee dirtbag. Their relationship and Palmer’s grief and abandonment issues form the serial story line of the show.But the fun here is in the episodic aspects, and “Art Detectives” has a good time in the worlds of, for example, wine fraud and Titanic collectibles. Most of the mysteries here include one more minor twist at the end, an additional motive for the murder that the detectives misunderstood or a connection between the suspects that they missed. This helps the show feel more special than just another chug-along “Murder, She Wrote” descendant, a little richer, a little more adorned. The show is conscious of its own predictability, so it makes the most of its surprises.Many detective shows center on an investigator who is so dang quirky that his or her quirk is the defining feature of the show. But “Art Detectives” is a little brighter and realer than that. Palmer is not some alienated, frigid genius, nor is Malik his trusty people-whisperer. Palmer is an occasionally awkward smart guy who loves art and history. He flirts with his curator romantic interest (Sarah Alexander) over 1,000-year-old Viking skeletons and impresses collectors with his knowledge of rare books. For a while there, a lot of cop shows were horny for murder; “Art Detectives” prefers culture. Ooo, talk Dutch masters to me.Four of the season’s six episodes are available now, with new installments arriving on Mondays. More

    • 150 Shares65 Views

      in Television

      ‘Squid Game’ Is Back for Its Final Season. Here’s What to Remember

      by

      Only six months have passed since the Season 2 premiere, but there was plenty to keep track of. Here’s a quick look at where things left off.When “Squid Game,” a dystopian drama from South Korea, debuted on Netflix in September 2021, few could have predicted its outsize success. It swiftly became the streamer’s most-watched show, snagged Emmy wins for its director and star and spawned a reality game series and countless Halloween costumes.And while fans had to wait three long years between Seasons 1 and 2, the third and final season — arriving on Friday in its entirety — comes just six months after viewers last checked in with the hapless contestants, who must compete for both cash and their lives. Filmed back to back, Season 3 picks up right where Season 2 left off — with the heroes’ would-be mutiny quashed and their futures precarious.For those with short memories, here’s a quick refresher on how we got here.It’s all fun and games until someone losesThe first season introduced the contest, in which down-on-their-luck contestants vie for riches on a remote, secret island by competing in children’s schoolyard games like “Red Light, Green Light” and “Tug of War.” The twist? Losers in each round are killed (typically, in a hail of gunfire), a wrinkle that is revealed only after the first game begins. Uber-rich spectators watch the proceedings for sport, and in a pointed commentary about the value of human life, each death adds to the overall pot awarded to the last person standing — as much as 45.6 billion South Korean won, or about $38 million.That winner, Gi-hun (Lee Jung-jae), an affable gambler estranged from his young daughter, emerged from the arena with heavy pockets and an even heavier heart. In the final moments of Season 1, haunted by what he had seen and done, he abandoned his plans to reunite with his daughter, choosing instead to put a stop to the game.Forging alliances outside the game …Among the many things we learned in Season 2 about Front Man (Lee Byung-hun) was that he is Jun-ho’s brother.No Ju-han/NetflixAt the beginning of Season 2, Gi-hun had been searching for two years for evidence of the game and its elusive Front Man (the contest’s puppet master, played by Lee Byung-hun), which he hoped to present to the authorities. He eventually teamed with Jun-ho (Wi Ha-jun), the resourceful cop who infiltrated the game to look for his missing brother, only to be shot and plunge off a cliff into the sea by the Front Man at the end of Season 1. In a plot twist, the Front Man is Jun-ho’s brother, In-ho, but Jun-ho has not shared this information with Gi-hun or the police force he works for.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares54 Views

      in Television

      Gailard Sartain, Character Actor and ‘Hee Haw’ Regular, Dies at 81

      by

      Though best known for comedy, he also played serious roles, including a sinister sheriff in “Mississippi Burning.” The director Alan Rudolph cast him in nine films.Gailard Sartain, a character actor who moved easily between comedy, as a cast member on the variety series “Hee Haw”; music, as the Big Bopper singing “Chantilly Lace” in “The Buddy Holly Story”; and drama, as a racist sheriff in “Mississippi Burning,” died on Thursday at his home in Tulsa, Okla. He was 81.His wife, Mary Jo (Regier) Sartain, confirmed the death but did not specify a cause.Mr. Sartain spent 20 years on “Hee Haw,” the country equivalent of “Laugh-In,” hosted by Buck Owens and Roy Clark, which combined cornpone sketches with music. The characters he played included a bumbling store employee, a chef at a truck stop and Officer Bull Moose. At the same time, he also developed a movie career that began with “Nashville” (1975), Robert Altman’s improvisational drama set against the background of the country music industry.In that film, Mr. Sartain played a man at an airport lunch counter talking to Keenan Wynn. “I just said, ‘Ask Keenan what he’s doing in Nashville,’ and he did,” Alan Rudolph, the assistant director of the film, said in an interview. But Mr. Rudolph saw something special in Mr. Sartain and went on to cast him in nine films he directed over the next two decades, including “Roadie” (1980) and “Endangered Species” (1982).“I only wish I could have fit him into another nine,” he said. “Gailard had a certain silly magic about him. Most of my films are serious and comedic at the same time. In ‘Roadie,’ he was opposite Meat Loaf, as beer truck drivers, and that was about 700 pounds in the front of a beer truck. That should be funny.”One of Mr. Sartain’s most notable roles was in “Mississippi Burning” (1988), Alan Parker’s film about the F.B.I.’s investigation into the murders in 1964 of the civil rights workers, James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, who were buried in an earthen dam. Mr. Sartain played Ray Stuckey, a county sheriff whose deputy was among the Ku Klux Klansmen who killed the men.Mr. Sartain played a racist Southern sheriff in the 1988 movie “Mississippi Burning.” “Nobody likes to be typecast as a barefooted hillbilly,” he said, “so when I had the opportunity to do other roles, I happily did it.”Orion PicturesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Television

      Why the Salary for Dakota Johnson’s Character in ‘Materialists’ Is Such a Game-Changer

      by

      By making the number explicit, Celine Song’s new film reflects modern dating realities in a way rom-coms rarely have before.Almost everyone who sees “Materialists,” the writer-director Celine Song’s new spin on the old romantic comedy formula, seems to want to talk about one number: $80,000. That’s how much Lucy (Dakota Johnson) says she makes in her job as a matchmaker. She brings it up to goad Harry (Pedro Pascal) into revealing his own salary, but he will only say that he makes “more” — which, as a finance guy working in private equity and owner of a $12 million bachelor pad, he certainly does.The viewer conversations are over whether Lucy’s salary is realistic for her lifestyle: she wears relatively nice clothing, and lives alone in what appears to be a peaceful and brightly lit apartment, though we don’t see much of the interior. The film’s production designer revealed in an interview that her home is a teeny-tiny studio on the edge of the affluent Brooklyn Heights neighborhood, with a rent that Lucy probably shouldn’t be paying relative to her salary. Yet this matches her character’s single-minded aspiration: to be surrounded by wealth.We could debate whether the rest of her lifestyle, like her clothing, is realistic on her salary; I tend to think it could be, but in a Carrie Bradshaw, leveraged-to-the-hilt way. After all, we live in a world where direct-to-consumer brands sell decent silk slip dresses, and everyone’s thrifting or renting outfits — not to mention that anything looks good on Dakota Johnson.Knowing the character’s salary, viewers have debated her lifestyle choices.Atsushi Nishijima/A24But the fact we’re even debating that specific number is remarkable, and hints at what makes “Materialists” feel so very 2025. At my screening, the salary detail provoked a collective gasp that briefly sucked the air out of the room. It wasn’t even the amount, really: It was the fact that someone had said a number at all.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More