Tag Archives: Children’s TV Reviews

Blue’s Clues Commentary: Sponsored by Viewers Like You

Back In Blue Alright!

Back in Blue, Alright!

This post is dedicated to Marie, and viewers like her. Thank you!

I haven’t been the most prolific blogger lately, but I recently got a comment on the post “Condiment Sex Ed: Revisiting Blue’s Clues” in which Neil Degrasse Tyson, my readers, and I speculated about sex with condiments. Not people having sex with condiments, but condiments having sex with each other, just to clear that up. I’m not that foul-minded. Anyhoo, famous Astrophysicist Neil asked a Blue’s Clue’s creator how Mr. Salt and Mrs. Pepper had a baby that talked. That was him, not me, but of course I thought about it too because I think about everything.

This post was a sequel to a post I made as part of a series of reviews of children’s television shows that annoyed me as parent watching with my child. I also feel the need to point out that this post was written in 2014, and that I was not then nor am I now affiliated with any children’s T.V. stations, though I think I could come up with plenty of great preschool show ideas considering a show about talking fingers was successful. “Condiment Sex Ed” was a quite popular post, with amazing thought-provoking ideas in the comments. People still read it today. Like Marie. Marie is not the first person to comment negatively on one on my posts. In fact, I earlier detailed the bizarre number of people who were incredibly upset about my “Dragon Tales” review. I am leaving links for viewers like you (and Marie) to check out if you want to, and not just because I like link dropping.

On to Marie’s Concerned Comment:

It’s a show made for little kids. The aim is not to entertain adults. So I think it’s Wrong for Adults to find details and start turning it into adult material. I guarantee these toddlers aren’t trying to think about how salt and pepper make babies. Or Steve, Joe, and now Josh using slippery soap to wash themselves.

This is a great show that not only entertains little ones, but also educates.

– Marie

Steve and Joe professing their innocence.

There are so many clues to decipher in this comment that I can hardly put my paw print on it. I will, though, because I Learned So Much. Such as:

  • It is Wrong for Adults to make fun of children’s programming no matter how fun it is.
  • Toddlers do not think about how salt and pepper make babies
  • Steve and Joe have yet another brother (I guess?) who is stuck in the Blue house because the others somehow escaped. They better put “Mr. Lock” and “Mrs. Security System” on the job pronto.
  • The soap is called “Slippery Soap”. I repeat “Slippery Soap”, guys.
  • The show is entertaining and educating.

These new facts make me curious, and since this is a show about answering questions, I have several. First, how did Marie find my post? Just googling “Blue’s Clues” or “Blue’s Clues review” gives me nothing. Typing the entire title “Condiment Sex Ed: Revisiting Blue’s Clues” does bring up my name, first thing! I’m proud. I would advise you not to look up “condiment sex ed.” on its own. I wish I hadn’t. My point here, is that the only way I could think of Marie finding my post was either by researching condiments and sex ed. (shame on you, Marie) or by stumbling upon it on a Pinterest board or something, which was how many “concerned citizens” found my Dragon Tales’ post. It’s always good to read something before referencing it. At least read the title. It’s in the title.

“Now you know. And knowing is half the battle.”

Okay, here’s another question. How does she know what toddlers think about salt and pepper and baby making? I raised two toddlers, and I can safely vouch that toddlers have a lot of bizarre ideas. Sesame Street taught my brother that he “could never go down the drain” and then he was afraid of drains. Yay! If toddlers are afraid of drains sucking them down, why wouldn’t they be concerned about living soap? Or wonder about how salt and pepper got paprika? I mention in my post that a friend of Thing Two’s (my youngest child’s name – I am a Good Parent) buried a salt shaker after exposure to Blue’s Clues. So yay for education! A child thought a salt shaker had to be buried! The more you know!

This must be our new guy. Blink twice if you need help, Josh.

I’m not knocking children’s T.V. I was thrilled to have it for my children, especially those shows on P.B.S. that were free. I knew that they might learn something (hopefully not that salt is alive) and that if nothing else, it was safe. New parents do get exposed to this repetitive stuff just like toddlers, at a time when they are already in a repetitive Ground Hog Day of juice delivery and potty-training done often in isolation. They cope however they can. Considering the times we live in now, Marie, maybe you should relax and not get so uptight over someone’s thought on a children’s show. Maybe find a little humor. Or just don’t read my blog.

It’s far too educating and entertaining.

~ Alice

Powertools Are My Friends

It’s an oldie but a goodie (I think?) from last year. This is called recycling, folks – it’s a good thing. Anyhoo, tomorrow I’ll be back with updates on my Epic Quest, but today I give you Bob the Builder and Handy Manny. Whee!


I know that men can become attached to their tools and machines.  When you start having conversations with your equipment, though, you might have a bit of a problem.  Next up: two children’s shows feature talking tools and machines.  (What is it with these talking inanimate object shows?  Are there not enough animate objects to make shows about?  Like, say, giant mutant dogs?  Nevermind.)  Our first contestant is:
Bob the Builder
                Bob is a likable enough guy.  He is a builder – hence the name of the show.  But he doesn’t do the job alone.  He also works with Wendy (they’re just friends) and a lot of different vroom-vroom machines, making him a natural favorite for boys.  These machines of his, though, are not ordinary machines.  They are living machines, which technically means they are both Bob’s equipment AND employees.  I’m not sure how you would figure out…

View original post 960 more words

Maggie and the Fab-u-lous Beast

For my latest Children’s TV review I took a frequent request from my children. The show’s actual title is “Maggie and the Ferocious Beast” which I guess is supposed to be ironic, because this beast is anything but ferocious.  I’d say “fab-u-lous!” was much more apt.  What do you think?

The beast is the one on the far left

Yeah, so this show is about a little girl named Maggie (surprise) who either has very vivid hallucinations or happens to live right next to a rather dangerous portal universe.  A yellow . . . thing with orange spots that look like giant pepperoni kidnaps her from her bedroom window every night.  She’s quite willing – I’m guessing Stockholm Syndrome? – to go with him, and her parents never seem to notice her absence.  So like I said, either delusions or portal universes where time doesn’t pass. Take your pick.

She calls him “beast” because either that’s his name or she’s just too rude to remember anything but that.  If I got to name him, I’d go with Elton.  I just think the similarities are uncanny.

Elton and Beast: Equally fabulous!

Anyway, so Maggie and Elton have another friend, a pig named Hamilton.  Get it?  Ham-il . . . nevermind.  Apparently he’s homeless, because he lives in a box.  Yet he’s the most uppity homeless pig I’ve ever seen because he’s always wearing that preppy sweater (with an H so he remembers his initial) and matching chinos, probably bought from the Gap.  Observe.

Yeah – this has got to be a parallel universe. Who would imagine that?

He’s also incredibly obnoxious.  Sometimes I wish they would make “Ham” out of Hamilton.  I am not the only one.  While she was at church, Thing One created this  for me to use on my blog post.  It’s called “The End of Hamilton from Maggie and the Ferocious Beast.”

By Thing One
I am such a good influence

In case you can’t read that, Maggie says “Who knew Hamilton would make such good bacon?”  I’m especially impressed with the set of preppy clothes laid out beside them while they knosh on their former friend.  I have a feeling children’s show cartoonists will be knocking on our door any minute to beg Thing One to work for them.

This show had some fab-u-lous plots.  One time the wind blew so hard that Elton lost his spots.  They blew off and one landed in Hamilton’s face.  That would have to be pretty gross.  Imagine if part of someone’s skin blew off and hit you in the face?  Yikes.  Elton felt very naked without his spots, even though he’s always naked.  And what’s up with that?  How come Hamilton wears an entire set of clothes and Elton Beast doesn’t?  I mean, Hamilton lives in a freaking box.  The least Elton could do is put some pants on, especially with a little kid around.  Jeez.

Maggie’s not a lot better.  She has a whiny little voice and if not for her, this show wouldn’t exist since it’s from her viewpoint.  Otherwise it would just be Beast and Ham, the Odd Couple for children.  We wouldn’t be having all these whimsical freaking adventures either.  I’m so sick of whimsical I could throw up in Hamilton’s box.  Will Elton Beast get his spots back?  Who cares?  I’m pretty sure they found them and stuck them back on, though they never did explain how they fell off in the first place.  Could you imagine if that could really happen?  You’d have to hide your Dalmatians every time the wind blew. 

On the plus side, I do not have to watch this show anymore, at least not without the alternately hilarious and disturbing commentary from my children.  That makes any show worthwhile.

Final Analysis:

Irritating plots and characters: Yes

Elton John look-a-like Beast with Removable Spots: Yes

Preppy Homeless Pig in a Box: Yes

Delusions and/or alternate dimensions: Yes


Stupid Hand Tricks

Some content on this page was disabled on December 1, 2019.


Hey, it’s been a while since I’ve thought about awful children’s television.  But the other day someone mentioned this show that I had just gotten out of my brain, so I figured I would vomit it up so you could enjoy it as well.  You’ve got to like my imagery, right?  Anyway, today we are covering:



Oh, the wonder of Wonder Pets.  The wonder I didn’t throw blunt objects at the T.V. screen.  This was another of Noggin’s (later called Nick Jr. because their noggins didn’t make the connection to Nick, I guess?) creations, made to especially torture parents.

What was special about this show?  Well first it used something called “photo-puppetry”, or taking pictures of real animals and animating them along with cartoony stuff.  I learned the word “photo-puppetry” from Wikipedia, the source of all knowledge.  Anyway, that wasn’t the worst part by far.  They also had the bright idea of having these adorable little animals sing their lines at an impossibly high pitch through  the entire show.  An operetta, if you will, only with baby animals.

And it’s just as fabulous as you’re imagining, if by fabulous you mean “want to plug your ears up and scream”.  There are three main characters.  Linny is a guinea pig, Tuck is a turtle, and Ming-Ming is a duckling.  Whenever I saw Ming-Ming I thought of that Chinese dish, Peking Duck.   I bet she’d have been tasty in a nice orange sauce.

But I’m getting off topic.  These three animals are classroom pets during the day, but when the kids go home, they bust out of the cages and go on rabies inspired homicidal rampages.  Um, okay, that didn’t actually happen, but it would have been cool, right?  I’d have totally watched that show.  But no, the trio instead rescued baby animals.  Every day they’d get a call on the pencil holder about some baby animal that needed rescuing.  I’m not sure why these baby animals were getting in trouble so often.  After a while, I started to suspect sabotage on the part of the Triumphant Trio.  I mean, we’re talking job security here, right?

Got another call from Commissioner Gordon, guys!

Anyhoo, the same thing happened every episode.  They’d get the call, wake up, and stop pretending to be normal pets sitting around in their own poop and become super annoying pets that sing!  The same song, every time.  “We’re Wonder Pets and we’re on our way . . .”  Scream, er, sing with me!  They’d change into outfits in the scrap box, so they could, you know, blend in with the locals. Then they’d hop in the flyboat, composed of various objects from around the classroom, and take off to wherever the animal was in trouble. 

They visited all sorts of exciting new places.  One time they entered a Chinese painting and helped out a baby crane that was too dumb to get away from a volcano, I think.  It was a moving experience.  After the trio freed the baby, the parent would show up out of nowhere (about time) to thank them and the Wonder Pets would reward themselves with a thrilling snack of celery.

Most Annoying Character: That award would have to go to Ming-Ming, the Chinese duckling that speaks with a cute little lisp.  I hate cute little lisps on cartoon characters.  If it’s on your own child, it’s sweet, because hey you spent 9 months making the kid, so you’ve got something invested there.  But on a cartoon character, it’s forced, fakey, and grates on your nerves.  I often thought that if Ming-Ming said, “This is sewious” one more time, I was going to eat my Peking Duck right in front of her.

This is sewius, guys . . . hey, why does that lady have a knife and fowk?

Speaking of investments, it is unbelievable how much time and effort is invested in each show.  According to the Wikipedia entry prepared by people who know way too much about this show, a ten member live orchestra performed the music.  Can you imagine spending your entire life learning an instrument, only to grow up and have to play for a children’s cartoon show?   That would be a fun thing to put on your resume for the Phil Harmonic. 

Also, each episode supposedly took 33 weeks from start to finish to complete.  33 weeks?  We’re talking (hold on, math is hard) a little over eight months here.  That’s almost enough time to gestate another kid.  What could possibly have taken so long?  The beginning and ending are almost totally the same every episode.  Is it the annoying sing-song dialogue?  The songs?  The animation?  Because I think they’re going to way too much work here, especially considering there have been other shows on the same station like Oobie, a show that consisted totally of people doing stupid things with their hands.  I haven’t covered that one yet, have I?  Oh, wow, are you in for a treat.

But back to Wonder Pets.  Sure there were some redeeming factors.  Kids got to learn about opera early, because it’s never too early to learn to hate opera.  The art was at least bearable, unlike some of the freaked out creatures you’d see in other shows like the dolls with button eyes two different sizes.  And kids got to learn that you no matter what country you’re in, you absolutely cannot trust parents to take care of their children.  Great lessons.

This show is still on, folks, so you should be sure and watch.  Just invest in some ear plugs while junior zones out.  Trust me on this.  You’ll thank me later.

Final Analysis:

Annoying lisping character: Yes

Operatic dialogue: Yes

Deadbeat animal parents: Yes

Best watched with ear plugs: Yes