Cast: Jodie Whittaker, Mandip Gill, Bradley Walsh, Tosin Cole, Charlotte Ritchie, Nikesh Patel etc.
Produced by: Nikki Wilson
producer(s): Chris Chibnall, Matt Strevens, Sam Hoyle
composer: Segun Akinola
And so Jodie Whittaker’s first raft of television adventures as the Gallifreyan Time Lord / Lady came to an end with this New Year’s Day Special. Aptly entitled Resolution it offered lots of intrigue and action and invention and one of the worst kept TV trailer secrets of recent times.
Opening with an impressive battle sequence involving humans defeating some unknown and villainous beast in the 9th Century, we then flash forward to the present wondering whether the creature would be seen again. Of course it would! It’s a fine opening and very cinematic, creating both a sense of awe and suspense, while owing much to the Marvel, DC Universes and Lord of the Rings type fantasy genres. In the present we are then introduced to flirtatious archaeaologists Lin and Mitch, who suddenly unearth that which has been buried in the earth for centuries. So far: so Quatermass!
When the archaeologists’ find brings to life a slimy, tentacled and horrific monster from the darkness, the Doctor, Tardis and ubiquitous gang are not too far behind. The monster itself is an (SPOILER WARNING) unshelled Dalek who has been woken from centuries of slumber with anything but peace and goodwill on his or her mind. I’m not sure if Dalek’s are gender specific but probably best to keep within the politically correct rules the show rightly follows and projects.
With all the back-story and exposition out of the way, what follows is essentially a Terminator: Judgment Day (1991) type pursuit plot. The Dalek gains control of Lin and envelops her mind in order to carry out its’ evil bidding. Here Charlotte Ritchie is absolutely brilliant in her role as she valiantly battles the Dalek’s nefarious battle plans. Likewise I felt that Whittaker’s Doctor was on good form in Resolution; the Dalek threat really galvanises the Doctor’s mettle, as this episode felt more like some of the classic episodes of the past.
Overall, I really enjoyed this fast-paced narrative and Chris Chibnall’s script has a lot of fun with this solo Dalek as they re-shell, re-arm and attempts to exterminate everyone in its’ path. Not so successful is the sub-plotting resolution of Ryan’s relationship with his father. It worked out but it slowed the main action story down unnecessarily and there was some right old clunky dialogue in a cafe scene which really added nothing other than some mild emotional turmoil for Ryan. However, Yas suffered even more with very little to do character wise; while Bradley Walsh again really shone as the chirpy cockney Graham. Nonetheless, overall it was great bit of Dr Who entertainment to start the New Year.
Directed by: Trey Parker Produced by: South Park Studios Written by: Trey Parker No. of episodes: 10 Release Date: September 22 2018 – December 12 201 UK Release: Comedy Central
scandalous and scatological satire South
Park shows no sign of slowing down in its mission of targeting the various sacred
cows, media, celebrities, politicians and fads of society. The shenanigans of
the small Colorado town reach their 22nd season, as the likes of:
Cartman, Sharon, Randy, Kyle, Mr Mackey, PC Principal, Stan, Mr Hankey, Butters,
Mrs Cartman etc. continue to be used as Parker’s conduits for comedy and social
started slowly but ultimately proved a hit for me. Nonetheless the show is
arguably a victim of its own formula and success. There are few surprises left
as the show bases most episodes on satirising current events and the cultural zeitgeist.
Plus, the characters are so well formed that we are rarely shocked by what they
do. However, the writing, gag-rate and thought-provoking narratives prove the
show is as strong as ever.
Arguably not as memorable as the incredible Season 19 (review here); there is a lot to recommend in Season 22! Below, I will now look at each episode in turn and consider their various merits.
EPISODE 1 – DEAD KIDS – Mark: 8 out of 11.
School shootings and the lack of reaction to them force Sharon Marsh to become apoplectic in her outrage. A solid episode which didn’t quite catch fire but had its moments; as Sharon’s PMT is ridiculed by Randy unfairly with Parker clearly stating gun crime something must be done about this horrendous stain on United States society.
EPISODE 2 – A BOY AND A PRIEST – Mark 8 out of 11.
“befriends” Father Maxi as the Catholic Church once again try and cover up
historical paedophilia. I was shocked but how unshocked I was by the episode
yet it contains many great gags. Parker ensures we do not forget the horrific
crimes committed by priests down the age; highlighting the hypocrisy that
continues to be presented by the Catholic hierarchy.
EPISODE 3 – THE PROBLEM WITH A POO – Mark 8.5 out of 11.
Talking turd Mr Hankey was never my favourite character, but the show literally gets loads of “shit” jokes out of him. Here, Parker satirises celebrity Twitter scandals but more interestingly focusses on Vice Principal Strong Woman giving birth to five PC Babies! This precipitates a fantastic running joke throughout the series involving PC Babies crying persistently at mention of something that does not fit their progressive agenda.
EPISODE 4 – TEGRIDY FARM – Mark: 9 out of 11
really started hitting its stride as Parker snipes at the vaping craze and the
legalisation of marijuana in Colorado. Typically, Randy Marsh driven episodes
are almost often classics and here he becomes a hemp farmer. Similarly, Cartman
has become a vape dealer and the two narrative strands combine to delightful
EPISODE 5 – THE SCOOTS – Mark: 9 out of 11
This was another brilliant and funny episode. It combines elements of Hitchcock’s The Birds, with satirising of human beings’ obsession with smartphones and Halloween. I loved the way the episode built from Mr Mackey’s panic with the E-Scooters as they threaten to take over the town. As this is South Park it all soon descends into disaster and brilliant anarchic humour.
EPISODES 6 & 7 – TIME TO GET CEREAL / NO ONE GOT CEREAL – Mark: 9 out of 11
In this hilarious two-parter the kids’ old “friend” Al Gore comes out of retirement due to a monster killing citizens of South Park. It turns out it’s the analogous beast ‘ManBearPig’; a demonic animal part-pig-part-man-part-bear. If you didn’t know ‘ManBearPig’ is an absurd symbol for the Environment, and here Parker depicts Gore as not just a figure of fun but actually smugly correct in his global predictions. Meanwhile, the authorities – including the police – reject the existence of ‘ManBearPig’ and blame the kids for the murders. Satan makes an appearance too as the two-parter amusingly critiques: Climate Change deniers, inept policing and addiction to video-games such as Red Dead Redemption 2.
EPISODE 8 – BUDDHA BOX – Mark: 8 out of 11
anxiety leads him to wear a cardboard ‘Buddha Box’ over his head to isolate
himself from society. Sending up further our obsession with mobile phones by
eschewing meaningful human contact is always going to get laughs and Parker
achieves that here. However, the PC Babies gags win the episode as taking the
piss out of snowflake millennials continues to be hilarious.
EPISODES 9 & 10 – UNFULFILLED / BIKE PARADE – Mark: 10 out of 11
The highlight of the season was undoubtedly the episode called Unfulfilled. Here South Park pokes its parodic tentacles at Amazon, never losing its grasp. Amazon open a warehouse in South Park, and after an accident, the employees go on strike. This industrial action leads to Jeff Bezos himself coming to South Park; with Parker depicting him as a cold telekinetic alien. The episode and the follow-up Bike Parade show the various ways the people of South Park deal with the lack of fulfilment from the Amazon non-deliveries. Here Parker combines Marxist doctrine and consumer culture satire with absurd comedy and horror parody to amazing effect. These episodes once again show that South Park retains the balls and strength to make us laugh and think in equal measures.
I love television and watched a lot of it last year on
most terrestrial and streaming services; especially the BBC, ITV, SKY and
NETFLIX channels. I must admit I am way
behind on many AMAZON and ALL 4/CHANNEL 4 programmes so will be rectifying that
this year. Indeed, there are probably some glaring omissions because of this.
For comparison I include last year’s favourite TV shows. This year I have not included South Park (Season 22) as it was not as good as prior years, despite clearly being one of the funniest shows around. Also, Doctor Who does not make my list as there were too many average episodes. Lastly, a special mention to The Walking Dead (Season 9), which at the mid-season break had somehow pulled itself out of the torpid decline that occurred around Season 6. It may make my 2019 list once the latest season has finished screening this year.
FAVOURITE 12 TV SHOWS OF 2017
BIG LITTLE LIES (2017) – HBO CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM – SEASON 9 (2017) – HBO FARGO (2017)– SEASON 3 – FOX / CHANNEL 4 GAME OF THRONES (2017) – SEASON 7 – HBO THE HANDMAID’S TALE (2017) – HULU/CHANNEL 4 IT’S ALWAYS SUNNY IN PHILADELPHIA (2017) – SEASON 12 – NETFLIX LEAGUE OF GENTLEMEN – 20TH YEAR ANNIVERSARY (2017) – BBC LEGION (2017) – FOX MINDHUNTER (2017) – NETFLIX SOUTH PARK – SEASON 21 – SOUTH PARK STUDIOS STRANGER THINGS 2 (2017) – NETFLIX THE YOUNG POPE (2016) – HBO
BIRD BOX (2018) & ROMA (2018) – NETFLIX “CINEMA” REVIEWS
Firstly, may I wish you all a happy holiday season and
thank all the people who have visited and read my reviews and articles this
year. There are a lot of film review sites out there so it’s great so get so
many visitors in a saturated online market.
For my final reviews of the year I have decided to
double-up two Netflix releases. I watched them pretty much back-to-back in the
hope, on top of enjoying them for entertainment purposes; I may be able to add
them to my 2018 favourites.
So, here are my quick and concise reviews of Birdbox (2018) and Roma (2018) with the usual marks out of eleven. By the way, if you’re
interested my favourite films and TV show lists of 2018 will appear early in
January. Happy 2019 in advance!
BIRD BOX (2018)
Directed by: Susanne Bier
Produced by: Chris Morgan, Scott Stuber, Dylan Clark, Clayton Townsend
Screenplay by: Eric Heisserer / Based on: Bird Box by Josh Malerman
Starring: Sandra Bullock, Trevante Rhodes, John Malkovich, Danielle Macdonald etc.
It’s the end of the world as we know it: AGAIN! I’d say that many of us may be getting apocalypse fatigue by now. So much so that if the end of the world does happen we’ll be mentally ready. Thus, any genre film about the end of the world must fight against the tide of similar films and TV shows released in the last decade or so to gain our attention or praise. Bird Box, for me, was a very entertaining and thrilling addition to the sub-genre. It benefits from an excellent ensemble cast and sterling lead performances from Sandra Bullock and Trevante Rhodes. Moreover, John Malkovich steals every scene he’s in as a cynical and obnoxious lawyer.
The story involves an invisible alien or natural force which infects the world’s population once they look; seeing it is deadly. It grips an individuals’ mind and then forces them to do horrific acts of violence to themselves. The film establishes Bullock’s character, blindfolded, with her two children just about surviving in the wilderness. After which we flash back five years and find Bullock’s pregnant character thrown into a memorably gripping set-piece. After which anyone familiar with George A. Romero’s zombie-film template will recognise many of the twists and turns in the story. Indeed, Bird Box is not that original because the superior, A Quiet Place (2018), also had a very similar premise but used sound rather than vision as the danger. Nonetheless, as a genre film Bird box rips along compellingly and Suzanne Bier has created some intense horror moments throughout.
Mark: 8 out of 11
Directed by: Alfonso Cuarón
Produced by: Alfonso Cuarón, Gabriela Rodriguez, Nicolas Celis
Written by: Alfonso Cuarón
Starring: Yalitza Aparicio, Marina de Tavira
Alfonso Cuarón writes, directs, edits and shoots a clear
love and hate letter to his Mexican childhood. It contains the love he feels
for his mother and the maid who helped raise him; and ire towards the men that
negatively affected his young life and his country of birth. Set in the 1970s
it covers around a year in the life of one middle-class family living in Mexico
City; the main focus being the young help, Cleo. We follow her as she carries
out her mundane tasks on a daily basis in an Upstairs Downstairs thematic structure. She is committed to her
work and it is clear that she dotes and loves the children as if they are her
own. As a historical film the era aesthetics are incredibly realistic and
Cuaron’s cinematography, presented in crisp black and white imagery, is
virtually perfect. You feel like you are there with the characters in 1970s
Mexico. Historically too, the film evokes between the lines the politically charged
danger of the era; however, Roma is
more of a personal film than determinedly socio-political.
Cuarón is an auteur at the height of his powers. His
direction on both Children of Men (2006)
and Gravity (2013) was phenomenal;
utilising technological brilliance with fierce storytelling acumen. Likewise,
in Roma his stylistic choices are
fascinating, although I think it actually works against the themes and content
at times. The long take pans and tracking shots, while expertly done, slow the
pace of the story and in my humble opinion are repetitive and overdone.
Moreover, Cuaron the editor has fallen in love with own work and to me would
have been a masterpiece if trimmed to two hours. There are at least four
incredible standout cinematic scenes – that I won’t spoil – which all linger
long in the memory. Furthermore, the characters, led by the humble Cleo are
empathetic and at times tragically formed against the backdrop of political
unrest. Yet, despite evoking the Italian neo-realist era of post-war filmmaking,
Cuaron’s film feels padded at times, lacking the economy of Rossellini’s and De
Sica’s work. Overall, it’s a touching work of cinema about birth, life and
death, which arguably did not need the stylistic flourishes to tell such a
simple, slice-of-life story.
Produced by: James D. Stern, Dawn
Ostroff, Jeremy Steckler, Anthony Mastromauro, Bill Holderman, Toby Halbrooks,
James M. Johnston, Robert Redford
Based on: The Old Man and the Gun (article) by David Grann
Starring: Robert Redford, Casey
Affleck, Danny Glover, Tika Sumpter, Tom Waits, Sissy Spacek
Music by: Daniel Hart
Cinematography: Joe Anderson
Forrest Tucker was a career criminal destined to die in jail. His life in between was one of many bank robberies, incarcerations and successful and unsuccessful prison breakouts. The morality of his actions must be condemned as the man was a recidivist addicted to the thrill of crime, making money and also the chase. While I’m not a fan of banks, who themselves are bigger criminals than the robbers, I rarely find myself rooting for such characters, unless there are mitigating circumstances for their actions.
Indeed, Tucker’s illegal acts would have left the authorities drained chasing him across America, and prevent them from protecting other people. Moreover, by holding a gun in people’s faces and demanding money Tucker would have most likely scared a good number too. Tucker would go on to rob banks well into his late seventies but he never fired his gun; and was often described as a gentleman by his victims. Yet, despite his wrong-doings, the film of his life in the hands of acting legend Robert Redford and director David Lowery is well worth a watch.
It’s a pretty simple story based on a New Yorker article by David Grann and Lowery adapts with warmth and empathy towards Tucker’s aging bank robber. The casting of Redford is also a masterstroke. As he has throughout his career he exudes a mercurial class and poise. There’s some wonderful usage of stock photos of Redford from earlier in his career, supplanted to the character of Tucker. This nostalgic trip down memory lane both serves the story and reminds us what a great movie star Redford has always been. It’s a shame that Redford has decided to retire from acting, as reported in August 2018, but this is a fine film to bow out on.
Lowery, whose last film was the amazing A Ghost Story (2017), changes tack with a more conventional character study here; however, he invests lots of imaginative touches in the presentation. He also gets a memorable performance from Sissy Spacek who sparkles as Redford’s romantic interest. It’s beautifully and hazily shot by Joe Anderson on Super 16mm and contains a misty-eyed halcyonic feel to it. I felt like I was watching a film from the 1970s even though it was set in or around the 1990s. So, despite my inherent dislike of the man and the crimes he committed, I very much enjoyed this excellent drama about a fascinating, if misguided, character.
Based on: Vanity Fair by William Makepeace Thackeray
Executive producer(s): Damien Timmer,
Tom Mullens, Gwyneth Hughes, James Strong
Directed by: James Strong
Starring: Olivia Cooke, Claudia Jessie, Tom Bateman, Johnny Flynn, Charlie Rowe, Simon Russell Beale, Anthony Head, Martin Clunes, Frances de la Tour, Michael Palin
Composer(s): Isobel Waller-Bridge
Distributor: ITV, Amazon Studios
**MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**
It’s an interesting anomaly in my later years that having previously boycotted period dramas which illustrate the lives of the wealthy and privileged, I now find myself being less partisan and actually watching more. This change doesn’t derive from a mellowing of my socialist working class roots but more an intelligent inquisitiveness as ignorant dismissal of the genre, be they on television or film, means one is possibly missing out on some fine drama or comedy. Indeed, many historical periods’ works of literature or theatre are in fact satirising or damning the upper classes.
Dickens for example dealt with the lower, middle and upper classes, shining a critical light at the many degradations of the era. Likewise, William Makepeace Thackeray also critiqued the folly of war, greed and narcissistic pursuits of the privileged. Stanley Kubrick demonstrated this brilliantly in his classic adaptation of Barry Lyndon (1975); while in ITV’s most recent adaptation Vanity Fair (2018), Thackeray’s adroit study of ambition and upward mobility shows the strengths, weaknesses and foibles of the women and men at the time of the Napoleonic wars.
Vanity Fair is widely considered a classic and considered the founder of the Victorian domestic drama. Originally serialised between 1847 and 1848 it was at the time a massive hit and one could argue the equivalent of what we would call a soap opera today. There have been, since the novel’s release, a plethora of screen, radio and television adaptations. Did we need another one? Probably not; but over seven compelling episodes Gwyneth Hughes’ screenplay does great justice to bring to life an army of: well-to-dos, country lords and ladies, soldiers, clergy, businessmen, plus the sparkling scheming of anti-heroine Rebecca or Becky Sharp.
Indeed, the effervescent, nuanced and outstanding performance of Olivia Cooke as Becky drives the narrative forward with absolute purpose. Cooke owns every scene as Becky attempts, from lowly beginnings, to rise through the ranks of society. It is both her strength of character and confidence which is her biggest asset and greatest enemy, because, always pushing for more, she doesn’t quit when she’s ahead. In stark reflection to Becky, Claudia Jessie as Amelia, is characterised as a romantic and desirous not of wealth or position, but rather love and romance. She is a pure spirit and her personality contrasts perfectly with Becky’s. While we admire Becky’s ambitious drive we remain suspicious of her motives, yet Amelia we warm to due to her big and gracious heart.
The men in the piece are a mixture of romantics, noble soldiers, treacherous or haphazard patriarchs, foppish fools, gamblers or all of the above. Tom Bateman gives a solid performance as Rawdon Crawley, Becky’s gambling military husband, as does Charlie Rowe as the more conflicted romantic, George Osborne. Furthermore, the adaptation contains sterling support from the cream of English character acting royalty including: Martin Clunes, Frances De La Tour, Claire Skinner, Anthony Head and Simon Russell Beale to name a few. However, the standout performance for me was Johnny Flynn as William Dobbin. This is such an empathetic and selfless character that, while holding a torch for Amelia, was prepared to sacrifice his love to make everyone happy. Potentially seen as a weakness, this for me was a real strength in a story which was full of selfish narcissists out for what they could get.
Aside from slightly dodgy green-screen CGI for the later scenes in India this was beautifully shot and lit, with the vistas of the English and French countryside wonderfully rendered. The interiors were eloquently designed as the stately and city homes of the characters, likewise the colourful costumes, were expertly brought to life. James Strong is a prolific television director and he gets brilliant performances and marshals the pace and machinations of the narrative precisely. With Olivia Cooke and Johnny Flynn delivering star turns in their roles I was consistently surprised by this adaptation of Thackeray’s masterpiece. Ultimately, I’ve learned that whether something is a period drama or not one must give it a chance as it could have qualities which continue to stand the test of time.
Producer(s): Jessica Levin, Maggie
Gyllenhaal, Mark Henry Johnson
Writers: George Pelecanos, David Simon, Richard Price, Lisa Lutz, Anya Epstein and more.
Directors: Michelle McClaren, James Franco, Ernest Dickerson, Alex Hall, Roxann Hall, Uta Briesewitz and more.
Starring: James Franco, MaggieGyllenhaal, Gbenga Akinnagbe, Chris Bauer, Gary Carr, Chris Coy, Dominique Fishback, Lawrence Gilliard Jr., Margarita Levieva, Emily Meade, Natalie Paul, Michael Rispoli, Luke Kirby, Jamie Neumann
**MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**
Pornography is a strange stain and paradoxical phenomenon within humanity and society. Most of us are born from the natural act of sexual intercourse and as such lust and passion and love are catalysts for this. For some though conventional relationships do not satisfy desires and of course there are those without a romantic or sexual partner who will need an outlet for their desires. Because deep down whatever you say we are animals and the basest instinct is to pro-create. But what happens if we are denied that opportunity? A person may seek satisfaction elsewhere and one such avenue is pornography.
Pornography sounds dirty. It’s a dirty word. Yet, since way before the internet, photography, video and film were invented humans have always found a means either through literature, theatre, poetry or art to represent sex. As technology has progressed the rise of pornography has reached epidemic proportions. It is massive business and billionaires have been made by the sex industry. In my opinion pornography is like war. It happens every day and while most of us are not involved in it, one feels powerless to stop it. Ultimately, you can argue it’s empowering to the men and women and contributes to our capitalist economy. However, one cannot escape the fact that it, like war, pornography would have left many, many people exploited and damaged.
Eschewing any socio-political criticism of pornography, HBO’s big budget television show The Deuce presents a massive American slice-of-gritty-mean-street-porn-life in 1970s New York. It is created by David Simon and George Pelacanos, who as writer-producers possess a great track record for creating acclaimed shows such as: The Wire, The Pacific, Treme, Generation Kill etc. Here they have created another ensemble period drama which show-cases a cavalcade of colourful characters including: pimps, prostitutes, police, bar flies, gangsters, dealers, gigolos, film producers, actors and politicians. The show essentially reflects the lives of those at ‘the Deuce’; an intersection of 42nd Street between Seventh Avenue and Eighth Avenue. It accepts that, for good or for worse, the sex industry is part of our existence andpeople basically are just trying to survive or escape anyway they can.
The first season starts in 1971. Main characters include: Maggie Gyllenhaal’s fiercely independent prostitute ‘Candy’; James Franco as twin brothers feckless Frankie and bar manager Vincent; Gbenga Akinnagbe as Larry Brown, an intense pimp; Chris Bauer as Bobby Dwyer, a construction foreman who is dragged into the sex industry; Gary Carr as C.C., a stylish but ruthless pimp; Dominique Fishback as Darlene, a sweet-natured sex worker striving for educational betterment; Lawrence GilliardJr. as Chris Alston, an incorruptible NYPD patrolman; Margarita Levieva as Abby Parker, a college student who rejects her wealthy upbringing by striking up a relationship with Vincent; and Emily Meade as Lori Madison, an impressionable young woman who C.C. entangles in his pimp web. Plus, there are a whole slew of characters that appear within each season; so many in fact in does get a bit crowded in the complex drama.
There is a lot of sex in both seasons; straight and gay. It’s presented not simply as titillation but also humorously and realistically as part of the life the characters lead. Sex sells but it also has a dark, violent side and the programme often shows this. The sex worker’s customers and pimps regularly commit acts of violence as the danger of working the streets is palpable. The exploitation by the mob bosses too who front the money for the sex parlours and peep shows is sad to witness and much empathy is gained for those trapped by poverty and drug addiction. Aside from a few good cops many of the NYPD are happy to take bribes to line their pockets.
Season 2, which moves forward to 1977 is a lot more political. The rise of feminism, activism and protest is reflected in the character Abby who works with others to provide a safe space for the women on the street. Moreover, City Hall is trying to clear up ‘The Deuce’ in an attempt to welcome rich corporate businesses to the area. Candy meanwhile has worked to get off the street and is now pornographic film director with artistic designs. Frankie is still gambling and ducking and diving while his brother Vincent begins having doubts about his involvement with the mob and sex industry. The second season, for me, was more focussed narratively;especially where Candy’s porn adaptation of ‘Red Riding Hood’ called Red Hot is concerned. Mirroring the reality of masculinity exploiting humanity, the predatory wolf chasing women and ravaging them is a thematic strongpoint of the season. But Candy is striving to turn the tables and female empowerment is a key driving force for her work.
The Deuce is ultimately a glorious production which is not for the faint-hearted. It holds up a dark mirror to a flawed society; and does it with humour, wit, compassion, lashings of sex and smatterings of sudden, brutal violence. I for one believe the world should do without pornography but The Deuce demonstrates that human beings are drawn to it like moths round a flame. It’s money, drugs, vice and sex that seems to excite many people and because of this exploiters will make money out of them.
Finally, as this is a HBO production the acting, direction, cinematography, editing, soundtrack, costume and period design are flawless. The writing is exceptional as the dialogue stings from the exceptional ensemble cast like written bullets. Season One was slightly slow building the characters but Season Two really found its’ feet dramatically and emotionally. On occasions I felt like some episodes lacked pace due to the sheer number of characters presented; but Season Two had real dramatic momentum. The final season is due for release next year and I highly recommend it if you are a drawn to the corrupted elements of humanity on screen; and characters just trying to make it with odds stacked against them. On ‘the Deuce’, like in life, sadly not everyone makes it out alive or in one piece.