“TRUMBO” (2015) Review

trumbo-tr_10824_r_rgbsmall_wide-6b897da6ba838b0d0d2435f72a0f1d59e53e0460-s900-c85

“TRUMBO” (2015) Review

I tried to think of a number of movies about the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC) and the Hollywood Blacklist I have seen. And to be honest, I can only think of two of which I have never finished and two of which I did. One of those movies I did finish was the 2015 biopic about Hollywood screenwriter, Dalton Trumbo.

Based upon Bruce Alexander Cook’s 1977 biography, the movie covered fourteen years of the screenwriter’s life – from being subpoenaed to testify before the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1947 to 1960, when he was able to openly write movies and receive screen credit after nine to ten years of being blacklisted by the Motion Picture Alliance for the Protection of American Ideals. Due to this time period, it was up to production designer Mark Rickler to visually convey fourteen years in Southern California – from the late 1940s to the early 1960s. I must say that he, along with cinematographer Jim Denault and art directors Lisa Marinaccio and Jesse Rosenthal did an excellent job by taking advantage of the New Orleans locations. That is correct. Certain areas around New Orleans, Louisiana stood for mid-century Los Angeles, California. But the movie also utilized a few locations in Southern California; including a residential house in northeastern Los Angeles, and the famous Roosevelt Hotel in the heart of Hollywood. And thanks to Denault’s cinematography, Rickler’s production designs not only made director Jay Roach’s “Southern California” look colorful, but nearly realistic. But one of my minor joys of “TRUMBO” came from the costume designs. Not only do I admire how designer Daniel Orlandi re-created mid-20th century fashion for the film industry figures in Southern California, as shown in the images below:

image5

566b26005248f-e1d2eq2ng8

I was especially impressed by Orlandi’s re-creation of . . . you guessed it! Columnist Hedda Hopper‘s famous hats, as shown in the following images:

image7 Women-of-Trumbo14-e1458032178821

I have read two reviews for “TRUMBO”. Both reviewers seemed to like the movie, yet both were not completely impressed by it. I probably liked it a lot more than the two. “TRUMBO” proved to be the second movie I actually paid attention to about the Blacklist. I think it has to do with the movie’s presentation. “TRUMBO” seemed to be divided into three acts. The first act introduced the characters and Trumbo’s problems with the House Committee on Un-American Activities, leading to his being imprisoned for eleven months on charges of contempt of Congress, for his refusal to answer questions from HUAC. The second act focused on those years in which Trumbo struggled to remain employed as a writer for the low-budget King Brothers Productions, despite being blacklisted by the major studios. And the last act focused upon Trumbo’s emergence from the long shadow of the blacklist, thanks to his work on “SPARTACUS” and “EXODUS”.

I have only one real complaint about “TRUMBO”. Someone once complained that the movie came off as uneven. And I must admit that the reviewer might have a point. I noticed that the film’s first act seemed to have a light tone – despite Trumbo’s clashes with Hollywood conservatives and HUAC. Even those eleven months he had spent in prison seemed to have an unusual light tone, despite the situation. But once the movie shifted toward Trumbo’s struggles trying to stay employed, despite the blacklist, the movie’s tone became somewhat bleaker. This was especially apparent in those scenes that featured the screenwriter’s clashes with his family over his self-absorbed and strident behavior towards them and his dealings with fellow (and fictional) screenwriter Arlen Hird. But once actor Kirk Douglas and director Otto Preminger expressed interest in ignoring the Blacklist and hiring Trumbo for their respective movies, the movie shifted toward a lighter, almost sugarcoated tone again. Now, there is nothing wrong with a movie shifting from one tone to another in accordance to the script. My problem with these shifts is that they struck me as rather extreme and jarring. There were moments when I found myself wondering if I was watching a movie directed by two different men.

Another problem I had with “TRUMBO” centered around one particular scene that featured Hedda Hopper and MGM studio boss Louis B. Mayer. In this scene, Hopper forces Mayer to fire any of his employees who are suspected Communists, including Trumbo. The columnist did this by bringing up Mayer’s Jewish ancestry and status as an immigrant from Eastern Europe. This scene struck me as a blatant copy of one featured in the 1999 HBO movie, “RKO 281”. In that movie, Hopper’s rival, Louella Parsons (portrayed by Brenda Blethyn) utilized the same method to coerce – you guess it – Mayer (portrayed by David Suchet) to convince other studio bosses to withhold their support of the 1941 movie, “CITIZEN KANE”. Perhaps the filmmakers for “TRUMBO” felt that no one would remember the HBO film. I did. Watching that scene made me wonder if I had just witnessed a case of plagiarism. And I felt rather disappointed.

Despite these jarring shifts in tone, I still ended up enjoying “TRUMBO” very much. Instead of making an attempt to cover Dalton Trumbo’s life from childhood to death, the movie focused upon a very important part in the screenwriter’s life – the period in which his career in Hollywood suffered a major decline, due to his political beliefs. And thanks to Jay Roach’s direction and John McNamara’s screenplay, the movie did so with a straightforward narrative. Some of the film’s critics had complained about its sympathetic portrayal of Trumbo, complaining that the movie had failed to touch upon Trumbo’s admiration of the Soviet Union. Personally, what would be the point of that? A lot of American Communists did the same, rather naively and stupidly in my opinion. But considering that this movie mainly focused upon Trumbo’s experiences as a blacklisted writer, what would have been the point? Trumbo was not professionally and politically condemned for regarding the Soviet Union as the epitome of Communism at work. He was blacklisted for failing to cooperate with the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

Also, the movie did not completely whitewash Trumbo. McNamara’s screenplay did not hesitate to condemn how Trumbo’s obsession with continuing his profession as a screenwriter had a negative impact upon his relationship with his family – especially his children. It also had a negative impact with his relationship with fellow screenwriter (the fictional) Arlen Hird, who wanted Trumbo to use his work for the King Brothers to express their liberal politics. Trumbo seemed more interested in staying employed and eventually ending the Blacklist. I came away with the feeling that the movie was criticizing the screenwriter for being more interested in regaining his successful Hollywood career than in maintaining his politics.

“TRUMBO” also scared me. The movie scared me in a way that the 2010 movie, “THE CONSPIRATOR” did. It reminded me that I may disagree with the political or social beliefs of another individual; society’s power over individuals – whether that society came in the form of a government (national, state or local) or any kind of corporation or business industry – can be a frightening thing to behold. It can be not only frightening, but also corruptive. Watching the U.S. government ignore the constitutional rights of this country’s citizens (including Trumbo) via the House Committee on Un-American Activities scared the hell out of me. Watching HUAC coerce and frighten actor Edward G. Robinson into exposing people that he knew as Communists scared me. What frightened me the most is that it can happen again. Especially when I consider how increasingly rigid the world’s political climate has become.

I cannot talk about “TRUMBO” without focusing on the performances. Bryan Cranston earned a slew of acting nominations for his portrayal of Dalton Trumbo. I have heard that the screenwriter was known for being a very colorful personality. What is great about Cranston’s performance is that he captured this trait of Trumbo’s without resorting to hammy acting. Actually, I could say the same about the rest of the cast. Helen Mirren portrayed the movie’s villain, Hollywood columnist Hedda Hopper with a charm and charisma that I personally found both subtle and very scary. Diane Lane gave a subtle and very convincing performance as Trumbo’s wife Cleo, who not only stood by her husband throughout his travails, but also proved to be strong-willed when his self-absorption threatened to upset the family dynamics. Louis C.K., the comic actor gave a poignant and emotional performance as the fictional and tragic screenwriter, Arden Hird.

Other memorable performances caught my attention as well. Elle Fanning did an excellent job portraying Trumbo’s politically passionate daughter, who grew to occasionally resent her father’s pre-occupation with maintaining his career. Michael Stuhlbarg did a superb job in conveying the political and emotional trap that legendary actor Edward G. Robinson found himself, thanks to HUAC. Both John Goodman and Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje gave colorful and entertaining performances as studio head Frank King and Trumbo’s fellow convict Virgil Brooks, respectively. Stephen Root was equally effective as the cautious and occasionally paranoid studio boss, Hymie King. Roger Bart gave an excellent performance as fictional Hollywood producer Buddy Ross, a venal personality who seemed to lack Robinson’s sense of guilt for turning his back on the blacklisted Trumbo and other writers. David James Elliot gave a very interesting performance as Hollywood icon John Wayne, conveying the actor’s fervent anti-Communist beliefs and willingness to protect Robinson from Hedda Hopper’s continuing hostility toward the latter. And in their different ways, both Dean O’Gorman and Christian Berkel gave very entertaining performances as the two men interested in employing Trumbo by the end of the 1950s – Kirk Douglas and Otto Preminger.

I noticed that “TRUMBO” managed to garner only acting nominations for the 2015-2016 award season. Considering that the Academy Award tends to nominate at least 10 movies for Best Picture, I found it odd that the organization was willing to nominate the likes of “THE MARTIAN” (an unoriginal, yet entertaining feel-good movie) and “MAD MAX: FURY ROAD” (for which I honestly do not have a high regard) in that category. “TRUMBO” was not perfect. But I do not see why it was ignored for the Best Picture category, if movies like “THE MARTIAN” can be nominated. I think director Jay Roach, screenwriter John McNamara and a cast led by the always talented Bryan Cranston did an excellent job in conveying a poisonous period in both the histories of Hollywood and this country.

“POLITICAL ANIMALS” (2012): Episode Ranking

003

Below is my ranking of USA Network’s 2012 six-episode limited series called “POLITICAL ANIMALS”. Created by Greg Berlanti, the series starred Sigourney Weaver, Carla Gugino and Ciarán Hinds:

 

“POLITICAL ANIMALS” (2012): Episode Ranking

1- 1.05 16 Hours

1. (1.05) “16 Hours” – Secretary of State Elaine Barrish instructs one of her twin sons, Douglas “Doug” Hammond, to keep an eye on journalist Susan Berg during a trip to San Diego regarding a sunken Chinese submarine, in order to keep her distracted from any news regarding the drug overdose of her other son, T.J. Unexpected sparks results. And Elaine’s mother, Margaret Barrish, discovers that Doug’s fiancee, Anne Ogami, is bulimic.

 

 

2- 1.01 Pilot

2. (1.02) “Pilot” – After a failed attempt to win the Democratic nomination for President, Elaine asks her husband, former President Donald “Bud” Hammond, for a divorce and becomes Secretary of State for election winner Paul Garcetti in this episode that introduces the series.

 

 

3- 1.04 Lost Boys

3. (1.04) “Lost Boys” – This episode featured flashbacks that revealed the origins of an earlier suicide attempt of T.J. Hammond, while he struggles to open a new nightclub. Meanwhile, Elaine and President Garcetti deal with a Chinese submarine that nearly sunk off the U.S. West Coast.

 

 

4- 1.06 Resignation Day

4. (1.06) “Resignation Day” – While the Garcetti Administration deal with the tragic crash of Air Force One and President Garcetti, Doug decides to elope with Anne; and both Elaine and Bud contemplate her running for president again in the near future.

 

 

5- 1.02 Second Time Around

5. (1.02) “Second Time Around” – Elaine convinces President Garcetti to appoint Bud as a negotiator to release three journalists held hostage in Iran. Susan serves as a member of the journalist corps, appointed to cover the story. And Doug leaks to Susan that Elaine will make another bid for president.

 

 

6- 1.03 The Woman Problem

6. (1.03) “The Woman Problem” – To prevent Elaine from running for President again; President Garcetti asks her mentor, Justice Diane Nash, to retire from the Supreme Court, so that he can appoint Elaine to replace her. And Elaine’s announcement of her decision to run for President draws negative reactions from Margaret, Doug and T.J.

Top Ten Favorite “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” (2005-2014) Episodes

HIMYM-Stills-how-i-met-your-mother-301154_1920_1281

Below is a list of my top ten (10) favorite episodes of the CBS series, “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” (2005-2014). Created by Craig Thomas and Carter Bays, the series starred Josh Radnor, Jason Segel, Cobie Smulders, Neil Patrick Harris and Alyson Hannigan:

 

TOP TEN FAVORITE “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” (2005-2014) EPISODES

1- 5.22 Robots vs. Wrestlers

1. (5.22) “Robots vs. Wrestlers” – This hilarious episode features Ted Mosby at his most pretentious, when he and his friends crash a high-society party. Later, the others attend a Robots vs. Wrestlers event.

 

 

2 - 2.09 Slap Bet

2. (2.09) “Slap Bet” – Barney Stinson discovers Robin Scherbatsky’s secret behind her aversion to malls. His discovery leads to the infamous slap bet between him and Marshall Eriksen.

 

 

3 - 4.09 The Naked Man

3. (4.09) “The Naked Man” – Ted walks into the apartment he shares with Robin and finds her date naked on the couch. The date reveals a new dating technique that may revolutionize dating for the group.

 

 

4 - 2.05 The Greatest Couple

4. (2.05) “The Greatest Couple” – Lily Aldrin moves into Barney’s apartment, when he uses her to drive away needy dates.

 

 

5 - 7.03 Ducky Tie

5. (7.03) “Ducky Tie” – Ted encounters his old girlfriend Victoria and tries to make amends with her. Meanwhile, Marshall and Lily make a bet with Barney that could force him to wear Marshall’s ducky tie.

 

 

6- 3.08 Spoiler Alert

6. (3.08) “Spoiler Alert” – An annoying habit in Ted’s new girlfriend causes the group to point out their own bad habits, previously unnoticed by them.

 

 

7 - 2.21 Something Borrowed

7. (2.21) “Something Borrowed” – Nothing goes as planned when Lily and Marshall’s wedding day finally arrives.

 

 

8 - 1.22 Come On

8. (1.22) “Come On” – Ted decides to seriously pursue Robin, instead of a date arranged for him by a matchmaking service. Meanwhile, Marshall is stunned by Lily’s decision to leave him for an art fellowship in San Francisco.

 

 

9 - 6.04 Subway Wars

9. (6.04) “Subway Wars” – The group race each other through the streets of New York to a restaurant where Woody Allen was spotted by a friend.

 

 

10 - 8.23 Something Old

10. (8.23) “Something Old” – Robin desperately tries to locate the antique locket that she had buried in Central Park at the age of 15, to wear as her “Something Old” for her wedding to Barney.

 

 

HM - 9.16 How Your Mother Met Me

Honorable Mentioned: (9.16) “How Your Mother Met Me” – This poignant episode recounted the eight years in the life of Tracy McConnell aka “The Mother”, before she met Ted at Farhampton.

“LAST VEGAS” (2013) Review

tumblr_muw5ey9UWU1r3ndd2o1_1280

 

“LAST VEGAS” (2013) Review

When I first saw the trailer for “LAST VEGAS”, my first impression was that it was some kind of senior version of “THE HANGOVER” or one of those comedy road trip movies featuring four friends. It did not strike me as an original movie, but it looked entertaining and I decided to go see it anyway. 

Directed by Jon Turteltaub and written by Dan Fogelman, “LAST VEGAS” is a story about a quartet of long time friends in their late sixties who gather in Las Vegas to attend a wedding. While giving an eulogy at the funeral of a friend, Billy spontaneously proposes marriage to his 32 year-old girlfriend. Several weeks later, he announces his engagement to at least two of his friends – Archie and Sam. Archie, who feels like a prisoner of his son’s following a mild stroke, sneaks away. Sam, who has become slightly embittered over his Florida retirement, is encouraged by his wife to go on the trip and even consider one night of adultery to get his mojo back. Both Archie and Sam meet in their old Brooklyn neighborhood to convince the last member of the old quartet – Paddy – to join them on the trip to Vegas. There is a difficult. Paddy is angry over Billy’s failure to attend his wife’s funeral, but Archie manages to convince him to accompany them.

When the four friends meet in Vegas, they try to check into an old hotel on Fremont Street. Unfortunately, the hotel has been transformed into an unsuccessful nightclub, where they meet a sexy, aging singer named Diana. Both Paddy and Billy, who is awaiting his young fiancée, become attracted to her. Thanks to Archie’s successful spell at a hotel casino on the Strip, the four friends are comped by the hotel to stay in one of their suites. While Archie and Sam set out to enjoy themselves, Billy and Paddy deal with their conflict over the latter’s late wife and Diana.

I might as well be frank. “LAST VEGAS” is not exactly a comedy classic. Nor does it have an original script. A lot of the movie is spent with the four seniors musing over aging and trying to pretend that they can still party hard. Not only would I never consider “LAST VEGAS” as one of the best films for any of the four leads, I would never consider it one of their best works during the later stages of their career. But I knew that coming in. One look at the movie’s trailer pretty much told me what kind of movie this would be.

But you know what? Despite the lack of originality and hardcore partying (PG-rated), “LAST VEGAS” turned out to be a very entertaining film. Hell, it was a lot of fun to watch. Thanks to Fogelman’s script, the movie was filled with some sharp wit and funny moments. Among the latter was Archie’s “difficult” escape from his New Jersey home, the four friends acting as judges at a swimsuit contest around the hotel’s swimming pool, Billy and Diana’s ride on what I believe was the Stratosphere. I could be wrong about the latter. Fogelman’s script was slightly elevated by a few scenes of pathos involving Billy and Paddy’s conflict over the latter’s wife, thanks to the actors involved.

Speaking of the actors, it is quite apparent that this movie owed a lot to the five leads. Mind you, Fogelman wrote an entertaining, yet unoriginal script. And Jon Turteltaub infused a great deal of energy into his direction. A great deal. The movie also benefited from solid performances from supporting players like Romany Malco, Jerry Ferrara, Weronika Rosati, Joanna Gleason and Michael Ealy. But one might as well face it. Without the four male leads and the sole female lead, I doubt that I would have ever found this movie amusing, let alone funny. Both Turteltaub and Fogelman owed a great deal to Michael Douglas, Robert De Niro, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Kline and Mary Steenburgen. Not only did the four men proved to have strong chemistry with each other, Steenburgen added a good deal of her own chemistry with the team. She especially managed to click with Douglas and De Niro.

As I had earlier stated, “LAST VEGAS” is not a comedy classic. Nor did I find it particularly original. I would never list it as one of the best movies of 2013. But I cannot deny that I found it both witty and funny, thanks to Dan Fogelman’s script. Jon Turteltaub’s direction injected a great deal of energy into the story. And the movie overall really benefited from a strong cast lead by Michael Douglas, Robert De Niro, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Kline and Mary Steenburgen. “LAST VEGAS” may not have been great, but I found it very entertaining.

“HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER: Ending on Controversy”

how-i-met-your-mother-season-9-cast


“HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER: ENDING ON CONTROVERSY”

The CBS television series, “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” (2005-2014), ended its nine season run on March 31, 2014. Television audiences usually greet television finales either with great satisfaction or with equal contempt. Instead of one or the other, the television series created by Carter Bays and Craig Thomas proved to be not only divisive, but also controversial. And romance for the series’ main character, Ted Mosby, ended up being the center of that controversy. 

As fans of “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” know, the series is more or less one major flashback in which one Ted Mosby decides to tell his two children about how he had met their mother, one Tracy McConnell. Or was it? For nine seasons, fans expected the series to end with Ted meeting the future mother of his children. The final episode, (9.23-9.24) “Last Forever”, featured Ted’s first meeting with Tracy. However, Bays and Thomas allowed television viewers to meet Tracy before Ted, when she made her first appearance in the Season Eight finale, (8.24) “Something New”. That particular episode featured Tracy purchasing a Long Island Railway ticket that would take her to Farhampton, the site of Barney Stinson and Robin Scherbatsky’s wedding, where she would perform a bass guitar at the wedding reception. In “Last Forever, Part I”, Ted had left Barney and Robin’s wedding reception and ended up at the rail station. He planned to return to New York City and prepare for his journey to Chicago and a new job. At the Farhampton station, he finally meets Tracy, thanks to the intervention of an elderly woman.

One is led to wonder . . . what exactly was the controversy about? Why did the finale resulted in a divisive fandom for“HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER”? Well . . . Ted’s story continued following his first meeting with Tracy. Two years after their wedding, Barney admitted to Ted that his marriage to Robin was suffering, due to her profession forcing them to become constant travelers. Within a year, they announced their divorce to their friends. Barney resumed his womanizing, until he became a father, following a one-night stand with a date. Robin found it difficult to face Ted and Tracy’s happiness and drifted away from the group. Ted and Tracy spend five years engaged and have two children, before they finally get married in 2019. In 2024, Tracy dies. Ted spends six years grieving her, until Penny and Luke (his children) realize the story was really about Robin, whom Ted contemplates dating again. The Mosby children give Ted their blessing and the series ends with Ted standing outside Robin’s apartment window, holding the blue French horn he had originally stolen for her, when they first met.

This finale caused a major storm within the “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” fandom. Many fans cried foul that the series was really about Ted’s tumultuous relationship with Robin, instead of how he first met Tracy. Others sighed with a collective relief over Robin and Barney’s breakup and later, Ted’s reconciliation with Robin. How did I feel? If I must be honest, I was one of those who sighed at the ending presented by Bays and Thomas. Why? One, I have always found Ted and Robin’s relationship rather fascinating. This was probably due to my feeling that Josh Radnor and Cobie Smulders had a great screen chemistry. And two, I have never been a fan of the Robin/Barney relationship. When I first heard that Robin and Barney were being considered as a couple, I cheered at the thought. I liked the idea of the two friends becoming lovers. Smulders also had great chemistry with Neil Patrick Harris in scenes that featured Robin and Barney’s friendship. But once the romance began . . . the chemistry fizzled and an odd hollow feeling would swell within my gut.

Unlike many other fans of the series, I never viewed “Last Forever” as terrible. Actually, I thought it was pretty decent. Believe or not, this feeling did not stem from my feelings toward the resolution of Ted and Robin’s relationship. Mind you, it was a more than pleasant surprise, but there was more to the relationship that I liked. One, I was glad that Barney realized that he was not the marrying kind. Most people, even the Ted/Robin shippers, saw this as a regression of Barney’s character. I did not. I do not believe that marriage matures a person . . . especially since many people get married for the wrong reasons. Both actors George Clooney and Charlie Sheen had marriages that ended in disaster. Like Barney, Clooney never married again after his failed marriage. Well . . . so far. Sheen has gone through three marriages and still managed to prove that he was not the marrying kind. Lana Turner experienced eight marriages before she finally admitted to herself that she was not the marrying kind. When a person finally confronts a reality about him or herself, he or she achieves some kind of maturity. And as far as I am concerned, Barney did exactly that. His maturity increased, when he became a devoted father (following a one-night stand).

And two, I thought “Last Forever” did an excellent job in portraying the friends’ shifting dynamics, following Robin and Barney’s wedding. The episode began with Ted contemplating leaving New York City for a job in Chicago, following the wedding. But after meeting Tracy, he changed his mind. However, Robin and Barney’s travels made it difficult for the group to stay together. This difficulty grew after their divorce, and Robin decided to distance herself from the group in order to avoid witnessing Ted’s growing relationship with Tracy. In one emotional scene that I found particularly satisfying, Lily confronted Robin over the latter’s absence. This scene reminded me that despite any romantic dynamics, the friendship between the five characters was a very important element of the series.

In the end, Tracy’s fate did not take me by surprise. Many fans, including myself, have been predicting her demise ever since the Season Eight episode, (5.20) “The Time Travelers”, featured a scene in which Future Ted talked about meeting Tracy 45 days before the wedding at Farhampton. As I had earlier pointed out, Tracy was finally shown in “Something New”. More importantly, she appeared not only in flashforward segments throughout Season Nine, but also in a few present scenes in which she met the other major characters – aside from Ted. This final season also featured a very charming episode called (9.16) “How Your Mother Met Me”, which featured the events in Tracy’s life during those same eight years before she met Ted. 

I can understand why so many fans were upset that the series ended with Tracy’s death. They had spent eight years anticipating the moment when she and Ted would finally meet. But they did get to know her during Season Nine. Also, Tracy came off as a somewhat ideal character, despite Cristin Milioti’s charming portrayal. And she ended in an ideal relationship/marriage with Ted. Quite frankly, she and Ted seemed just a little too perfect for each other. Bays and Thomas allowed audiences to get to know Tracy before the finale. If they had introduced her . . . and killed her off in the same episode, I would have accused the showrunners of poor writing. More importantly, the script made it clear that Ted spent six years mourning Tracy, before he resumed his romance with Robin. Many fans seemed to have this idea that Ted sought out Robin not long after Tracy’s death. Go figure.

As much as I liked “Last Forever”, I believe it did have problems. Well . . . I believe it had one major problem. And that problem originated back in Season Five – namely the Barney Stinson and Robin Scherbatsky relationship. I thought it was badly written. Not only did I considered it badly written in this episode, but I feel it has been mishandled as far back as Season Five. If Bays and Thomas had intended for Robin and Barney to get married and divorced, they could have achieved this before Season Nine. Instead, audiences were subjected to nearly two years of Barney struggling to hide his attraction to Robin, ever since their one-night stand in Season Three’s (3.16) “Sandcastles in the Sand”. They finally began dating in Season Five premiere, (5.01) “Definitions” and broke up by the seventh episode, (5.07) “The Rough Patch”

Two seasons later, they cheated on their respective dates in the Season Seven episode, (7.09) “Disaster Averted”. By the end of Season Eight, they were engaged. To make matters worse, the entire ninth season was set during the weekend for Barney and Robin’s wedding. They finally got married in one of the final scenes of (9.22) “The End of the Aisle”. In a 2016 flashback for the next episode, “Last Forever, Part 1”, they had announced their divorce to their friends. I suspect that Robin and Barney’s second breakup in the series, along with Barney’s return to his bachelor activities, really upset a lot of fans . . . even more so than Ted and Robin’s second turn at romance. If only Bays and Thomas had tightened the writing for Robin and Barney’s relationship, I would not have found their divorce so abrupt. And perhaps they could have achieved this by allowing Ted and Tracy’s first meeting to happen on a day other than the one for Barney and Robin’s wedding.

I found it rather odd that a series called “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER” would turn out to be a lot more. As viewers eventually learned in the finale, a lot of it was about Ted’s relationship with Robin . . . from the moment when they first met, to the moment some twenty-five years later, when they decided to renew their romance. The series was also about Ted’s relationship with his other four friends – Marshall Erickson, Lily Aldrin and Barney Stinson – and about their own personal lives. Ironically, Robin and Barney proved to be instrumental in Ted meeting Tracy. Due to their wedding, and Ted’s attempt to avoid his own feelings about their nuptials, he ended up leaving the wedding reception earlier than usual . . . and meeting Tracy.

It is ironic that many fans and critics ended up being disappointed with the finale for “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER”. Granted, I believe it may have been tainted by some flaws that originated several years ago. But considering how it ended, it proved to be a lot more satisfying to me than the past two to three seasons that preceded it. Goody-bye “HOW I MET YOUR MOTHER”. I will miss you.


-How-I-Met-Your-Mother-promo-Season-1-how-i-met-your-mother-24638549-2560-1920