Full House

There’s a reason Full House, a show no one admitted watching, is everywhere.

Jaime Weinman on the lasting appeal of a traditional family sitcom—based on a non-traditional idea of what makes a family

I sometimes defend the idea of the TWoP-style snarky TV recap, but I have to admit I’ve lost interest in snarky recaps to a certain extent. The reason is that anything can be discussed in a snarkily dismissive tone: it doesn’t even matter how good or bad something is, all you have to do is refuse to engage with it, and recap the plot in a disbelieving or nit-picky way. Any story sounds ridiculous if you want to make it sound ridiculous. So for snark-caps to get my attention, they have to have a point of view that goes beyond a detached cataloguing of plot holes and bad hair.

As actors, they’re notoriously obstreperous, but babies are television’s hottest stars

Today the popular shows, like ‘Parent­hood,’ are sweet and mushy, not mean like ‘Damages’

The new review from “That Guy With the Glasses,” who angrily reviews bad movies and TV shows (“I’m the Nostalgia Critic; I remember it so you don’t have to”) is of Full House. It’s not nearly as good as his review of Saved By the Bell, because he seemed to be more familiar with that show than he is with Full House. To really hate a show like Full House, you have to sort of like it. But there are some good moments, like the Aladdin reference, the montage of sappy music moments, and his explanation that the Full House characters life “the life of people in picture frames.”

Want to get to Hollywood? Start writing, start shooting, and don’t ever stop networking