Word count: 232<\/p>\n
There is an interesting critics review written\u00a0by Daniel Fienberg (The Hollywood Reporter<\/a>) that describes Shades of Blue<\/em> as a vanity project for Jennifer Lopez. \u00a0 I took this as\u00a0Fienberg saying Lopez has enough money she could retire,\u00a0\u00a0and enough accomplishments to keep worked for fame afloat. Lopez has a not of money and fame on her hands, and some could argue that taking on this project does not necessarily do anything for her. This review talks about how “vanity project” has a negative connotation attached to it and how with a name like Lopez attached to the new television show, NBC is getting some major exposure. Having Lopez on board also allowed for a full season to be guaranteed, giving the writers time to develop her character.<\/p>\n “The downside is that Shades of Blue<\/em> is, as a whole, not a very good show,” Fienberg said. “Still, it’s at least a bad show in a way that’s compatible with a lot of Lopez’s bad movies, so it should satisfy its intended audience.”<\/p>\n He goes on to note that the series creator, Adi Hasak<\/a>, must have looked at Lopez’s previous work to understand that viewers like seeing her playing an authoritative role, “who get victimized or victims who right back, and consequently crafted a hybrid of\u00a0Angel Eyes<\/em>\u00a0and Enough.\u00a0<\/em>Lopez’s role of Harlee Santos fits just that.<\/p>\n Twitter Following: 18.2 K<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Word count: 232 There is an interesting critics review written\u00a0by Daniel Fienberg (The Hollywood Reporter) that describes Shades of Blue as a vanity project for Jennifer Lopez. \u00a0 I took this as\u00a0Fienberg saying Lopez has enough money she could retire,\u00a0\u00a0and … Continue reading