There's the occasional grand guignol aspect, which is fun, but the
writing isn't great compared, for instance, to CSI, another show
built around eccentric leads. These seem to be
proliferating--suddenly odd is sexy, which is certainly to my
benefit. The chief pleasure, and the reason I never miss it, is
Laurie's acting--I'd only seen him in clown roles before. He seems to
be able to do anything.
The downside--I could use a doctor that dedicated to problem-solving,
but I don't think he/she exists.
Mark
At 11:02 AM 6/8/2007, you wrote:
>In terms of contemporary TV, House is great fun, with Laurie
>playing, very well, a brilliant diagnostic doctor with the id of a 4
>year old. We enjoy it, I must say, although the plotlines have
>become a little too obvious lately. But Laurie is very good in it,
>&, actually, the other players are good in their roles, too....
>
>but hey, it is 'chacun a son gout' for sure....
>
>Doug
>On 8-Jun-07, at 12:26 AM, Jennifer Compton wrote:
>
>>I have got to call you on that one, Candice.
>>I have glanced at House, more in fascinated horror than in any
>>other sort of mood.
>>I kinda liked Laurie as a campy light comedian - sort of sub Noel
>>Coward - and was amused by his books when on a long train journey -
>>but this House thing! What is it? Melodrama slash horror? Camp
>>gothic medical conspiracy theory? Dunno what it is. And poor Hugh
>>seems equally confused.
>>Tell us why you like it, how you rate it, where you slot it?
>Douglas Barbour
>11655 - 72 Avenue NW
>Edmonton Ab T6G 0B9
>(780) 436 3320
>http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
>
>Latest book: Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
>http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
>
>
>Art has to be forgotten: Beauty must be realized.
>
> Piet Mondrian
|