I didn't enjoy watching 'Schitt's Creek'.

So when it comes it to the current situation with comedy on television, it's not exactly a secret that things aren't going particularly well. Even though critics keep constantly telling us that we're living in the golden age of television, this is something that is simply not true. 

After all, even though there are a couple of watchable shows at the moment like 'The Mandalorian', especially when it comes to comedy shows, things are awful. Pretty much all the shows are unwatchable - with the exception of 'South Park' and 'Curb Your Enthusiasm'.

Nevertheless, when I checked that a comedy show called 'Schitt's Creek' had won tons of awards at this year's Emmys, I had to give the show a chance. I had to check it out, even though I was pretty sure that it wouldn't be even remotely funny.

Having now watched a couple of episodes from each season 'Schitt's Creek', I have to say that I wasn't impressed by the series. There isn't much going on in here comedy-wise, even though critics liked the show (the series ended this year after season 6).

Premise-wise, 'Schitt's Creek' is about a super rich family that loses all its fortunes thanks to their deceitful manager. The only remaining asset that they have is a raggedy town that they bought decades ago, so that's where they're headed together.

On a paper this kind of premise isn't necessarily that bad or hopeless, as long as the rest of the elements in the series work. As long you'll deliver characters that are relatable and storylines that are well written, then this kind of show might perhaps work in theory.

However, when it comes to 'Schitt's Creek', even though not all the elements are completely awful, there are way too many weak links here. The superficiality and the one-dimensional aspects of the show are pretty much what sink the ship here.

Character-wise, these flaws are especially obvious when it comes to Eugene Levy's son Dan, (the co-creator and the writer of the show) and Catherine 'Home Alone' O'Hara's character. They are just way too over the top and not likable or relatable in a meaningful way.

Indeed, Dan is a fashion obsessed super queer with a squinty face and O'Hara is a former soap actress that acts even more theatrically than the most outrageous diva. These are not the types that exist at least in my universe of believable characters.

Story-wise, the series has scripts that are filled with lazy writing (weak storylines and story beats in episodes) that make the stuff seem vapid and empty. The writers don't seem to know what to do with the characters and what the show is supposed to be about.

Indeed, as I kept watching the episodes, too many of the situations are just re-takes from other tv shows that already did them before way better. There's some fairly obvious references to shows like '30 Rock' and 'Arrested Development' based on what I managed to see.

Joke-wise (don't forget the show's title), it has to be also mentioned that the series wastes way too much of its energy on over the top potty humour and pee pee jokes. This approach is not engaging and tells us how immature and out of touch the writers are.

After all, especially when it comes to 'squinty' Dan's overreactions to anything that might have to do with bodily fluids they try to extract as many scenes as possible from them. This is not funny or relatable to a normal (non Hollywood gay) audience member.

In that sense, when I look at 'Schitt's Creek' as a whole, it's pretty clear to me, based on what I've seen, that we're not dealing with a great show here. It's fairly obvious that this isn't a funny series and that there just isn't enough solid material to make the show comedic enough.

After all, even though there are some redeeming qualities here (Eugene Levy etc.) for a supposed comedy series you'd need to have more good stuff to make things click. You'd need have way better ingredients than what the writers have managed to come up with here.

Unfortunately for us, that's not what the writers managed to come up with here. They didn't come up with stuff that could make us laugh and even though there are some heartfelt moments here and there, as a whole, those things weren't enough to make 'Schitt's Creek' funny.

Movies that I've seen lately (sequels & threequels).

So when it comes to my movie watching habits, it's not exactly a secret that lately there hasn't been that many films to watch. Ever since the covid-19 interrupted our daily lives, there haven't been that many new films out there to watch and to review. 

Nevertheless, since there haven't been new films that have been released, that's not a reason not watch movies. In my case I've tried to check some of the earlier movies that I have missed and see whether they would be worth watching.

When it comes to the films I've seen this time we have three movies (all sequels or threequels) to review. We have an animated film called the 'Angry Birds 2', a '24 / Jack Bauer' type film called 'Angel has Fallen' and a fantasy / adventure film called 'Jumanji: The Next Level'. 

So the first film that I watched is 'Angry Birds 2', a sequel to the first 'Angry Birds' movie. This is a film series based on a popular cell phone game, where you as a player control 'angry birds' characters and try your best to beat the 'bad piggies'.

Premise-wise, it shouldn't come as a surprise that making movies out of this concept was a bit of a challenge. Since we're dealing with a franchise where the characters had zero depth, making a film out of them didn't seem 'organic'. 

Not surprisingly, when it comes to the story in the second film, it has to be said that 'Angry Birds 2' - like the first one  - isn't a particularly well written movie. The second film in the series isn't great, even though there are some redeeming qualities here. 

Story-wise, the biggest problem in the film by far is that there isn't enough solid story beats & quality material in the screenplay. The beats that the writers came up don't justify the film's 1h 30 min plus length, even though there are some laughs here and there.

Indeed, especially when it comes to the completely pointless and unconnected side-story and the hit songs that the movie played every five minutes or so were pretty obvious. They got old very fast and were there only to add to the film's running time.

On a plus-side, there's no question that the production values in the film are really solid. The animation in the film is really good (the movie had a meager 70 million dollar budget) and there's no question that the voice acting is really solid and enjoyable too.

Still, when you look at the problems in the story of the film (the villain's motivation is especially weak), these flaws in the story are just too much. They're too serious and at least in my case, prevented me from enjoying the movie.

The second film that I managed to watch this week is 'Angel Has Fallen'. This the third movie in the 'Olympus / London / Angel Has Fallen' series where Gerard Butler's secret service agent does his best to save the president and the world.

The reason that I watched this is because I thought that I could use some 'Jack Bauer / 24' stuff now that show has been over for years. I thought that 'the Fallen' franchise would likely be entertaining enough, even though I didn't expect anything awesome.

So when it comes to the story in the film, it doesn't take long before '24' things start happening in the movie. Once we're done with the introduction stuff that involves a 'token' training session disguised as a real action scene, things get going.

Indeed, the 'incident' in the movie happens -  during the president's (Morgan Freeman) fishing trip - when the terrorists attack the potus. He and his security detail (that includes our protagonist) are attacked by terrorists with a swarm of bomb carrying drones.

A bit later, when our protagonist manages to save the president by going underwater (potus falls into coma), things get more complicated. The FBI suspects that it's Butler's character who is behind the whole thing (they have the 'evidence' too) and he's arrested. 

Naturally, in order to prove that he's innocent and that he's being framed, our protagonist escapes from his captors. He escapes during a transportation ride and starts his quest to find out what really happened - while the bad guys & the cops are chasing him. 

Plot-wise, I have to say that 'Angel has Fallen' is not even a remotely well written movie. The screenplay is incredibly contrived and there are so many convoluted moments where you can only shake your head in disbelief with how stupid the movie is. 

On a plus-side, perhaps the 'only' saving grace about the film has to do with some of the action scenes and the two leads. Both Gerald Butler's character and his dad (Nick Nolte) are really good (especially Nolte steals every scene that he's in).

Still, when it comes to the movie as a whole, unless you have a huge craving for a '24esque' stuff, this film is not for you. 'Angel has fallen' is not a good movie and despite its box office success, I wouldn't recommend it to almost anyone. 

So the third and the last movie that I've seen lately is 'Jumanji: The Next Level'. This a movie that is a sequel to the 'Jumanji' reboot - a film about people that get sucked into an 80s video game as the game's various characters.

So when it comes to this movie, the biggest reason that I watched it was because I was genuinely curious about the quality of the movie. I was curious because I had seen seen the trailer last year in a movie theater with my dear friend and wasn't that impressed.

After all, the trailer had a lot of 'silly' things that seemed kinda 'hip' desperate to me. There was stuff like 3d character cards on the screen, the characters being in the wrong bodies / the banter and those attacking baboons - among other things.  

Fortunately, having now seen the film (I haven't seen the first reboot yet), I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the movie. Against my expectations, 'Jumanji: The Next Level' turned out to be a pretty watchable and an entertaining film.

Indeed, as a movie one of the very best things if not the best thing about 'Jumanji' is that it doesn't take itself too seriously. There's a lot of silly fun going on in here and it feels like everyone in the cast is genuinely having a good time. 

Story-wise, the film manages to be fairly well written and logical. Once the gang joins the game and is taken to the 'Jumanji' adventure, the internal logic in the story / game kicks in and stays pretty consistent throughout the movie.

Plot-wise, even though most of the story works, it has to be said that the inciting incident in the movie is weak. There wasn't really much of an explanation why our hero decides to - again - enter the game (the girlfriend stuff was really weak and made no sense).

Still, when I think of 'Jumanji: The Next Level' as a whole, this flaw in the story isn't that critical. It wasn't enough to make the audience not like the film and not want for more (the fourth one is going to be made later based on Dwayne Johnson's schedule). 

In that sense, if you haven't seen 'Jumanji: The Next Level' yet, I think you should give it a chance. You should give it a chance, because even though the movie isn't great per se, it's still be pretty entertaining and manages to put you on a good mood.