Cassandra
Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.
Phillida
Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.
Allissa
.Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.
adamspector
Many people said that this time around, it was much darker and downright dreary. Yes, it was darker, but the times were darker, too. Yes, AIDS was starting to rear its very ugly head (with an even uglier president freshly elected who practically promoted AIDS as something beneficial to the population at large...but I digress). But other things were happening, too.For instance, Mary Ann Singleton started to discover love in her own backyard. She's also found a hot story, that she holds (to good effect) onto, waiting to spring it upon the public, even if her GSR's (now called "Q" ratings) are miserable. Through a series of only-can- written-by-Armistead-Maupin twists and turns, she and her new-again friend DeDe Halcyon-Day go through a wrenching comedy of errors. That's not to say that Michael Mouse and Mrs. Madrigal don't have their own series of twists and turns to go through, which of course, only makes them grow even further as characters in the series, but this time around, they play second banana to Mary Ann.In the end, perhaps things turn out glib, but remember that this is merely a continuation in a long chain of stories. It's not meant to be the climax of the series. It is meant as entertainment, and that's precisely what it accomplishes: what can be more fun than a chase leading to the very borders of the Cold War, a kidnapping (not what you think!), and a gun- wielding born-again Christian blowing someone away! Altogether, a faithful rendition of the third installment of the Tales of the City saga.Let's hope Showtime (or HBO or someone in Canada...they've got such better programming!) makes the last three books into the well-depicted realities that Channel 4 and Showtime have already accomplished.
raze-1
You have to start at the beginning, so I'd suggest watching Tales of the City and More Tales of the City first. These mini-series are based on a six part series of books by Armistead Maupin. Maupin began writing these stories for a San Francisco newspaper in the 1970's. They became the Tales of the City book series. And in the early 1990's, he started serializing them for the small (TV) screen. I've watched all three of these films over and over again. They are (like the books) like getting a really juicy letter from an old friend you've been aching to hear from. This third installment is shorter than the previous, but packs in a great storyline and lots of fun. All of the actors from the 2nd Tales are back for more mystery and romance. The best thing about Maupin's stories for the new millennium is that he was the first author to integrate gay and straight characters into a novel and then watch them grow and age together as a family throughout the six books. For the cinema, this is still a HUGE leap. For those of us who've been living in reality, it's our world come to life. I'm anxiously awaiting the fourth book, Babycakes to be made into a mini-series, but in the meantime I watch Mrs. Madigal, Michael, MaryAnn, Brian and all their extended family look for love and excitement in late 1970's San Francisco.
Mort & Spunky the awesome cat
Another enjoyable installment, from Mr Maupin, about normal fun people who do find themselves tangled in many webs.For anyone to whom the pacing seems a bit odd. Please remember that this was originally written for a newspaper. Each installment had to move quickly and leave the reader interested. It's good to see that Showtime has remained true to the articles (which were turned into books) again.
lynchnut-2
Being a huge fan of Mr. Maupin's previous two series as well as the books, I knew there was no need to worry about being disappointed...once again the "Gang" delivers...Pierre Gang, that is; he also directed "More Tales" a few years back and returns to helm this installment as well. The primary cast is back, however, noticeably absent is Mona Ramsey, who's gone off to Seattle, presumably to find herself. Laura Linney once again dives in displaying "further" sides (not to mention views) of Mary Ann. In fact, that can pretty much be said about every character this time around. Everyone gets to explore sides of themselves that before went untouched.
And that's as it should be, considering "Further" picks up four years after "More" as opposed to the few month gap between the first two series. It's 1981 and the feel of the seventies is dwindling, making room for the "me" decade to come. For this writer, one of the coolest aspects was the return of Mary Kay Place to the role of Prue Giroux, which she originated in a mere couple of scenes in the first "Tales" back in '92. This time around she is a main character with some very real problems, most of which center around a peculiar man named Luke, whom she finds living in the park. Luke, as played by Henry Czerny, is the character you will be hard pressed to forget. Olympia, as always, gives just the right balance necessary to keep everyone else in line. Bruce McCulloch (Kids in the Hall) is a riot as Father Paddy. Joel Grey shows up in a role that (if one didn't know better) seems tailor-made. Barbara Garrick goes round three with a new and improved DeDe; she gets my vote as the most underrated character and actress of the saga.
Armistead Maupin has always said that his primary influence when writing is Alfred Hitchcock - as you view, you'll see why he says that. As usual, the stories and characters overlap one another, going seemingly unnoticed by the participants. Maupin himself gives perhaps his most clever Hitchcockian cameo yet (big laugh).My only complaint is that the we're treated to less screentime with this series. It's about a third shorter than the previous two. As I haven't read the book in some time, I don't know what had to be sacrificed to make this possible. One of the great strengths of the first two series was the near seamless adaptations of the books upon which they were based. Was it a budgetary decision? Or just simple storytelling? It does indeed move faster than the last series. In any case, some "Tales" are better than no "Tales". Let's hope they do the next three as well.
