Showing posts with label fox. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fox. Show all posts

Sunday, April 12, 2026

Catholiccontriversy's Review of The Faithful on FOX

 This is a series I have complex feelings on. Hello catholiccontriversy here and this lent FOX made a mini-series called "The Faithful," a 3 part series that tells the story of Abraham fathering Ishmael and Isaac, the rivalry between Esau and Jacob, and Jacob's marriage to Leah and Rachel, all told from the perspective of Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachel. Episode 3 aired on Easter Sunday, episode 2 aired on Palm Sunday, and episode 1 aired the week prior. Since this was coming from secular FOX Network under the management of Disney, I went in cautious, but I was hopeful because it'd be nice to have more adaptations of the bible. Plus, Hallo was advertizing on it, and they tend to be good judges of character. Before I get into the religious analyses, I'll just go over some technical elements. The set design is great, as is the costuming. I'm not the most knowledgeable about how things were back in genesis times, but it sure felt period accurate. The acting is also really good, I believed the emotions everyone had, which was accented with the lighting and cinematography. A lot of people like to complain about conservative media being poor technical quality, but this was high technical quality. OK, now for the religious analysis.

One thing that I like is this covers passages and stories that are not very commonly told (at least in the Catholic church). I know the binding of Isaac really well since it's part of the readings every year, but we never talk about Ishmael or Esau or Jacob, so that's pretty cool. On that note, they don't go into great detail of the binding of Isaac, probably because it is so well known. They also do a really good job with "portraying God" by making Him a force that is felt but not seen. They also "reasonably expand"  on the passages, like with showing how Rachel is a shepherdess and what that would mean, and what 7 years of service to Jacob is, and what the strong emotions were like and what would draw them to have those emotions (instead of a single line of "but Leah was hated" it expanded on why Leah was hated). In a way, it kind of reminds me of Veggie Tales and how they would expand on stories. It's also not super graphic, a strong TV-PG, which makes it approachable.

Now for what makes me hesitant to say "this is great," and that is how it handles Abraham and Jacob fathering children. Prior to this my general knowledge of Abraham's children was "Sarah was infertile, and it was after much prayer and faith was Sarah able to bear Isaac." I had read all of Genesis so I know I heard about Hagar and Ishmael at least once, but it wasn't something that "got a lot of attention" and I kind of forgot about. Same thing with Jacob and his marriage to Leah and Rachel, I read it with a full reading of Genesis but I kind of forgot about it. When the show was talking about Sarah having Abraham father his child with Hagar, and how they "kept trying to Sarah's jealous displeasure," I'm like "what? I need to verify this because this feels kind of wrong." I look it up and yeah, I had just forgotten about Hagar and Ishmael. The same thing with Jacob and the deception into consummating Leah instead of Rachel and so being married to her first, and then the jealous rivalry between Leah and Rachel in their competition for Jacob's love, with arguing over who Jacob will "have relations with" that night. So the complexity comes from how "highly implicit" it is, especially when compared to how the translation I reread handled it. In the ESV copy I reread when it covers Abraham fathering Ishmael with Hagar, it basically just says "and so Abraham went into Hagar and she bore a son," it wasn't "and so for months Abraham went to Hagar's tent to lay with her for months until she was with child. Even though it was Sarah's idea it made her upset and jealous." It's not necessarily implausible since this is how children come into the world except for that one time, and it would give reason for Sarah's frustration with Hagar, but it just felt a little off. Same thing with Jacob accidentally marrying Leah and fathering many children with Leah even though his heart is for Rachel. Again, the ESV basically translates the passage as "but there was a plot and Jacob went into Leah that night, and when he awoke he was with Leah," not "and there was a great plot to have Jacob bed Leah, the deception was so strong that he didn't realize he was bedding Rachel's sister" as was shown in The Faithful. Likewise, when covering Jacob fathering children with Leah, it just says "Jacob went into Leah, and she bore [this son], which made Rachel jealous," not the "and after lying with Leah and bearing a son, he promised Rachel he would lay with her again since his heat was for Rachel, but then with the birth of Reuben he became closer to Leah, and they had a bitter rivalry over who Jacob would lay with" as was shown in the series. It's not like this is implausible either, it kind of is "what needs to happen to father children" and would explain what went on and why Joseph is Jacob's favorite son, but it seemed to "linger more than what was really necessary" and just felt off.

I don't really know about this one. This definitely isn't The Star where it rewrites major biblical stories and motivations. The 2nd episode when it was just Esau and Jacob and there isn't any "who is lying with who" is completely unobjectionable and fully covers the stories with respect, as does everything else in the other episodes, so it definitely seems like the creators have reverence for the source material and wanted to tell those stories. It also inspired me to reread these passages of Genesis to "fact check" it, and it's hard to make "it inspired me to read my bible" a bad thing. Then while these passages are "bad actions," I had to remind myself "this is before God gave Moses all the rules, these guys were trying their best but still fell to bad things of the era, and the fact that they had problems after doing these things was foreshadowing to the laws of Moses." Also, even though they do "linger on things," this is still a PG show and doesn't get too crazy. However, it just feels kind of off. I recommend reading Genesis 16 and 29-30 as a companion to episode 1 and 3, respectively. It is a pretty good series, just prepare yourself that this is not necessarily "squeaky clean." This has been catholiccontriversy, signing off, and may God bless you.

Sunday, February 12, 2017

Pokematic's The Mick Logs

Season 1

Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8


Episode 9


Episode 10


Episode 11


Episode 12


Episode 13


Episode 14


Episdoe 15


Episode 16


Episode 17


Season 1 Recap


Season 2


Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episoe 8


Episode 9


Episode 10


Episode 11


Episode 12


Episode 13


Episode 14


Episode 15


Episode 16


Episode 17


Episode 18


Episode 19


Episode 20


Season 2 Recap (and Series Finale)

Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Pokematic's Last Man On Earth Logs

Here is the new home for all the Last Man on Earth Logs.

Season 1
Episode 0 (Pilot)


Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Season Recap



Season 2
Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8


Episode 9


Episode 10


Season 2 Recap


Season 3
Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8 (Season Finale)


Season 3 Recap


Season 3.5

Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8


Episode 9


Mid-season Recap



Season 3C
Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8



Episode 9


Season 3C Recap




Season 4A

Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8



Season 4B

Episode 1


Episode 2


Episode 3


Episode 4


Episode 5


Episode 6


Episode 7


Episode 8


Episode 9


Episode 10


Recap


Season 5, What Could Have Been

Sunday, January 31, 2016

Pokematic Reviews Grease Live on FOX



If it’s not a good game or catholic...who do you call?...why Pokematic “hi.”

Grease Live, the 3 hour television extravaganza on FOX Sunday, replacing regularly scheduled programming like Simpsons and Bob’s Burgers. I want to go on record saying I don’t hate musicals or Grease; I was in the pit in High School for 42nd Street, I have Grease on VHS, and I enjoy “We Go Together.” I am a little salty this happened on the one day a week I watch FOX, and since there was a football game last Sunday I haven’t been able to watch my FOX shows 2 weeks in a row, but I’m going to do my best to review the small amount of Grease Live on its own. I’m not going to review “the musical Grease,” so no story or song analysis, but instead I’m going to review airing a live stage production on prime time network television.

I’m going to start out by saying I didn’t watch the entire 3 hour event. Honestly I wasn’t planning on watching it at all. It’s been advertised for like 3 months now, probably more. Even with the advertising, I’m like “woopee, I get the chance to watch a stage production of Grease on TV without the original cast from the iconic movie, that’s exactly how I want to spend an evening, NOT!” Yeah, I had zero interest in watching this. Sure, I’m not a fan of Grease (I don’t hate it but I don’t exactly like it either), or musicals for that matter, so I’m not exactly the target audience, so I don’t really fault it for that. However, I was disappointed to find out that it was happening during my normal FOX Sunday, so I had even more disinterest. But a lack of anything else on and morbid curiosity got me to watch the final 30 minutes. So, what did I think of this “Television Extravaganza?”

Well right off the bat I noticed that the production value was SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the movie. This is to be expected because it’s a live stage production with stage sets. Now I like stage productions; they immerse you in the story in ways that the screen cannot; mainly that the actors are in the same room as you and the action is happening literally hundreds of feet in front of you live. You can’t get that with movies or TV shows. However, the sets don’t look nearly as good as they do on movies and TV shows because they have to fit on a stage. However, one accepts that because of the limitations of a live production happing right in front of you. TV and movies have more realistic sets at the expense of the action not literally happening hundreds of feet in front of you. With this however, you get both of the drawbacks with none of the benefits; the sets look fake and the action is not happening in the same room as you. It’s REALLY distracting, especially with the race scene. It was obvious that it was just lighting and fog being blown on the cars. That looks fine live in person because it’s a 100 square foot stage, but it just looks cheap on TV. Like, I get that the point is to have a live production professionally recorded and broadcasted live, so everyone that isn’t there to watch it still can, but it just doesn’t feel right.

Next, the actors. I don’t know about you, but when I watch Grease on a screen (not live in person but on TV or a movie screen), I want Travolta and the other iconic cast members. I don’t want these other guys. Maybe it’s just me, but it was the movie cast that made Grease a household musical recognized by everyone, and that’s who I want to see portray Danny, Sandy, Riz, and everyone else. I heard that Vanessa Huggens was in this, but I still don’t really care. If I was watching this live in theater I would be able to look beyond the fact that those people aren’t the movie actors (because that’s now stage productions are), but since I’m watching this in my living room, I’m left asking “where’s the real cast?” From the small amount I watched they did a pretty good job of portraying these characters, but it still didn’t feel right because of the medium I was watching it on.

Next, the whole “3 hour event” thing. The movie has a run time of 1 hour and 50 minutes, and that’s with edits and multiple takes, so lets assume the play would run 2 hours. This means that there was an hour of ads, and also asks a rather long time to keep our attention. It just doesn’t sit right for me, especially when there was some acting that was a little hokey.

I should mention a major positive, and that’s the cinematography and camera work. This happened live, and there was a lot of dynamic camera work. I was really impressed with how little the camera shook, how fluid the transitions were, and how it didn’t interfere with all the live action happening on screen. Having done camera work before, I can really appreciate this.

But now comes the million dollar question, why does this exist? Who was asking for “Grease Live on Fox?” This kind of feels like “Peter Pan Live 2.0” (that’s a reference to NBC’s 2014 television extravaganza Peter Pan Live) in that it’s the networks trying to be different and make a big live performance to drum up ratings but no one really cares. I just looked on Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB, and Peter Pan Live is rated between 50% and 60%. I get that Grease is cooler than Peter Pan, and it’s a bit early to get aggregated review scores (look at me being on the front line), but I’m still left wondering if this really did bring in all the ratings that FOX was hoping for. Honestly, I kind of doubt it. Peter Pan Live was a bust for NBC, and an entertainment commentator I follow said “when we have cable channels give us shows like Breaking Bad and we have network channels give us Peter Pan Live it’s no wonder that cable is more popular than network.” And really that’s what I felt like with Grease Live; “why watch this when I can watch cable programing?” The answer for that being “there’s nothing on cable, so that’s why I’m watching the last 30 minutes.” While twitter seemed to be rather impressed with it, and we’ll find out what the aggregate reviews say in the coming days, but this one critic’s opinion is not impressed, and would rather have his regularly scheduled FOX Sunday content. I don't want to watch live stage productions on TV. That kind of defeats the purpose of watching a live production.

Well, this has been Pokematic, signing off, and bu-bye.