"Superman"

Clearly one of the blockbusters of the summer, it's good.  It deserves summer blockbuster status.  But it's not great.  It's not going to go down as a pillar of the canon.  It's not "the next new chapter" (although many in Hollywood may disagree ...)

SPOILERS AHEAD

It gets Superman right.  He's wholesome.  Legitimately.  And that alone makes this better than most of the Superman films which came after Christopher Reeve (that being said, I do have a soft spot for Brandon Routh).  It's dark, but not as dark as the last few films.  The politics, which were reported as "subtle" is anything but, and since it's my politics, I appreciated the digs.  Nathan Fillion makes a delightful turn as a corporate shill superhero.  Rachel Brosnahan, who I love, is rightly perky and determined as unstoppable Lois Lane.  The dog is adorable.

But.  

There is a lot of action.  Like, a lot.  Like every superhero film these days, it is battle after battle after battle.  Even my stepfather, who loves Superman and was the reason we entered a movie theatre for the first time in a very long time, said it was too much.  Perhaps at the expense of story.  

There are all the elements.  The characters we have come to love (including Cat Grant??? and a somewhat more world-wise Jimmy), the fortress (inexplicably set in Antarctica, not the Arctic, which creates a moment of disbelief which is hard to swallow ... do these people not realize that the Arctic is solid ice and Antarctica is a land mass???  I digress ...)  But few of the characters outside of the leads get more than a line or two of dialog.  There is no fleshing out of, well, anyone.  Including Lex Luthor.

And that's a problem.  I'm a fan of Nicholas Hoult, and first picked up on him in the brilliant and underrated series, "The Great".  But he's not ... "it".  The character is just a self-obsessed bully.  And not only is that hard to play, it doesn't make for a good foil.  Lex is best when actors bring humor to the role, add in levels.  Gene Hackman let Lex really enjoy it all.  John Shea played it with such a level of class that you ~~almost~~ could see the attraction.  This Lex is either not written, or the actor directed, to do much more than snarl and yell and direct his minions and his robot.  It's like a sad version of a dark Ironman.  And so, without a great enemy ... well, you get it.  

There are also minor irritations.  Ma and Pa Kent are played like country bumpkins, and this is the second time in a week I've seen rural people portrayed that way.  Also, does Supergirl really have to be a drunk social media influencer?  Of course, the female superhero is dismissed as a joke.  Not cool, Hollywood.

There will be a sequel.  There are a million unaddressed threads.  And, a possible enemy worth fighting.  Maria Gabriela de Fabria makes for a creepy-as-hell adversary and there are some real questions about a message left by Jor-El and Superman's Kryptonian mom.  We'll see.  Probably takes a couple of years for another film to be put together.  I'm mildly interested in where they go from here, but would love more story, more development of the characters.  It's okay to have big fights.  But maybe less???

"Where We Belong" by Hoda Kotb

Much like the other book I read of success stories, this one rang hollow.  Success stories are nice.  They can be inspiring.  The essential flaw I see when I read these, however, are they are books of 20/20 hindsight.  These are successful people.  They had a moment of clarity, changed their lives and did something different, and big, from what they did before.  Again, these are (mostly) white people, people of faith, people with means.  The story of Laila Ali was one such story.  She apparently pulled herself up by her own bootstraps because her famous father was a distant figure for most of her life.  But no one explains how she owned her own beauty salon by the time she was 20.  And that's the problem.  What about the people who also have dreams, who work hard, who fight to suceed ... who fail?  Where are their stories?  Are they unlucky?  Did they not hold the faith of those who made it?  Could they have worked 10% harder?  It's a mystery.  Making your dreams come true is great.  It's just not a reality for most.  And I have yet to read that book, the one about two people -- one who succeeds and one who doesn't, and what the difference was.

"Obi-Wan Kenobi"

"Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope ..."

And the problem is this.  Disney keeps grabbing fairly minor phrases or characters out of the original films and building whole mini-series out of them.  But we know what is going to happen.  It is not a spoiler to say that Vader survives, Obi-Wan survives, Leia, Luke, etc all survive.  Because this is a prequel.  It takes a lot of the edge, the "what's going to happen next" out of the equation.  Yes, we now understand why Leia loves Kenobi like a father.  But there isn't a lot of room for creativity.  The bad guys are the same bad guys, the good guys include some lovable droids.  There are a host of planets, various blaster and light saber battles.  Some of the dialog is actually lifted from Episode IV.  There is a kind of Star Wars playbook and this series sticks heavily to the canon.  It doesn't help much to see a 44 year old Hayden Christensen playing the young man he played 22 years ago.  Vivian Lyra Blair is engaging as the young Leia, and Moses Ingram knocks it out of the park not only by playing an impressive villain but by having levels upon levels of emotional depth.  Other than these little sparks, it is pretty much same old, same old.  I prefer "Mandalorian" and "Skeleton Crew", as they are new stories with new characters, and are far less predictable.

"The Batman" (2022)

Oh dear.  So this is where DC has gone.  No humor, no light, no joy.  Just violence and depression and depravity and overly thin women in teeny tiny, inappropriate clothing.  Watched it on a plane and quickly forgot I had seen it.  

"Personality Isn't Permanent" by Benjamin Hardy

I bought this on spec.  It was just mentioned somewhere and when I came across it, I was intrigued.  The first third is very interesting.  Mr. Hardy talks about how we limit ourselves with socially-accepted parameters.  He ditches the idea that there are set types of personalities and makes a compelling case that most of the personality tests we use to pigeon-hole people are completely bogus.  One of the most memorable arguments was a long-term study.  A group of people took a personality test in their 20s.  In their 60s, they took the same test and their scores were completely different.  Even something as simple as "extrovert" and "introvert" can be much more subtle than we might presume.  Introverts can learn to speak in front of crowds, extroverts sometimes like the quiet of down-time.  There are homework questions, of a sort.  Designed to take the learning of each section and make it personal.  I initially dove in, and enjoyed writing out responses to questions about how other's perceptions of me created a structure within which I operated.  After the first third or so of the book, however, it takes a turn.  Mr. Hardy goes all Tony Robbins.  He insists that people don't succeed because they are essentially lazy.  We should pick a single goal (not multiple goals) and go for it like running a race in the Olympics.  We need to get up early, eschew the foods which make us fat, and go-go-go.  The message got old, fast.  He gave a good number of examples of people who followed his advice and rose to great heights.  I couldn't pretend that this was all a result of effort.  Most were white, affluent, young, and well-educated.  Not to mention Christian.  I didn't like the tone that failing was your fault, not a factor of being poor, or a person of color, or up against overwhelming odds.  Yes, some of those people succeed.  But for every one who makes it out, there are a thousand who didn't.  Mr. Hardy also has his priorities, in my humble opinion, all messed up.  The goal, according to him, is money.  He asks -- how far up the ladder do you want to go?  How much money do you want to make?  When do you want to retire and how much money do you want to have then?  He becomes a modern-day Scrooge, counting his gold in the dark of night.  The paradigm he offers isn't a good fit for me.  If I were about money I wouldn't have gone into education, where I had a lot of personal satisfaction but not a lot of income.  If I really wanted to be an actor or a writer or whatever maybe I would have been more successful in those careers if I had been laser-focused, but I don't write to sell books and I act because I enjoy it and I think I'm good at it.  I've never believed I would be, or even wanted to be "Hollywood".  Mr. Hardy wrote this book when he was 27.  He became a parent after writing this book, and is now in his 30s.  I would love to hear his take on life some 30 years later.  I wonder if he will see the world in the same way.

"Nine Perfect Strangers"

Masha, Masha, Masha.  This anthology series, which is an odd mix of "White Lotus" + "Twin Peaks", is like many shows these days, "okay".  It's good, even engaging at moments, but not brilliant.  Based on the book by the amazing author Liane Moriarty, the first season (which encompasses the novel), is slightly stronger than the second round, which just came out.  The strengths:  Unlike "White Lotus" there are characters I give a damn about.  Characters I'm rooting for, characters I want to see succeed.  The premise is that broken people go to a retreat where psychedelic mushrooms are used to get them to face their demons.  The idea is to push these tortured souls to the edge, and then pull them back at the last minute.  It's supposed to be transformative.  And, in this world, these experiences can create unexpected transformations.  

This is where the series worked for me, even though I question the use of drugs to acheive anything.  Where things go off the rail, a little:  Nicole Kidman.  Her skeletal frame, her distracting accent, her creepy persona (~this~ is someone you want counseling you?  Doesn't really engender trust ...)

The first season focuses on one character after another while the second season focuses primarily on Kidman's character, "Masha".  To the detriment of character building of the other characters.  Which is a shame.  There are some great backstories, great actors.  I am happy to watch Christine Baranski and Lena Olin in anything (and have added Dolly de Leon to the list) but none of them (or some of the other gifted actors) had enough screen time to fill out their roles in the way they should have.  

In any case.  It's a way to spend some slow days of summer, if you don't want to think too hard.

"Circe" by Madeline Miller

This book, by very young Madeline Miller, is a wonder.  Beautifully lyric and literary, it is still accessible.  And it does for the Greek myths what Marion Zimmer Bradley did for the Arthurian legend with "Mists of Avalon".  "Circe" takes the feminine point of view and an epic tale and make them human and relatable.  Circe is a child, a young woman, a girlfriend, an outcast, a lover, a parent.  Her life spans centuries but the ache she feels, the distance and loneliness, is real.  She becomes a fully fledged woman by the end but we travel the road with her, seeing the growing pains and the sacrifices.  She is not perfect but she is like us.  We celebrate each step towards her self actualization.  It is one of those books I didn't mind reading slowly because I didn't want it to end.  When it did end, I cried.  Just a bit.  It was the only ending which would bring peace.  Brava.

Oh, Canada

Very few network shows, and a growing number of streaming shows, are filmed in the United States.  More than 60% of what you watch these days is filmed in ... Canada.  Which explains a lot.  But first, the list of projects filmed in Canada.

On ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX

High Potential
Watson
Tracker
Fire Country
The Hunting Party
Found
The Irrational
Brilliant Minds
Doc
Murder in a Small Town

Almost all Hallmark and CW shows are filmed in Canada, as well as streaming shows like Handmaid’s Tale, The Boys, all of the new Star Treks.  Shows on AMC, TNT and others, like the recently departed (pun intended) “What We Do in the Shadows” are also filmed there.  It’s a long list.

So, why?

1.        It’s cheaper.

2.        Canada is wide open – fewer roads to shut down, more places to film with a lot less people.

3.        Canada is diverse.  It can look like places in the US.

4.        It’s not that far away.  Toronto to NYC is only an hour and a half by air, Vancouver to LA is 3 hours. 

5.        Seasons.  Canada is suffering from climate change a tad less than we are.  If you need snow, they have it.  If you need a real Spring, as opposed to a couple of cool weeks, you are good.  And in the Summer, you have a LOT of daylight.

Does it lower the quality of the shows? 

Depends on your tastes.  Lead actors (some of whom are from the US) are just as good, if not better.  They are just a little less famous.  The actors generally look more human and less like runway models and semaglutide addicts.  Diversity with the actors is just like here, but you see more Asians and fewer Hispanics.  My issue (and it is just my issue) – some of the “day player” actors (those who appear in a single scene, for instance) – can be a tad weak.  Canada just doesn't have as deep a pool of actors to draw from, and it shows.  There is also a subtle thing about storytelling.  The Canada “vibe” comes out now and then … a little lower key, a little darker … than in US produced shows.  That’s not a bad thing, but it is palpable (to me anyway). 

So grab your poutine and your remotes and settle in.  This trend, tariffs or not, is likely to stick around.

And the Award Goes to ...

And here we are again.  SAG Awards, 2025.  Below, my thoughts and my votes.

FILMS:  “Meh”.  Beautiful filming but few, if any, films which raised the bar.  Favorites included women-forward films like “Emilia Perez” and “The Last Showgirl”.  There were tired themes done well – cognitive decline in “The Great Lillian Hall” and another musician biopic where the women are set pieces in “A Complete Unknown”.  There were creepy-as-hell films, “The Substance” and “The Piano Lesson”.  Clever films which made you think, like “The Brutalist”, “Conclave” and “A Real Pain”.  “Sing Sing” brought tears aplenty.  At least one film I loathed, “Anora” (it ran rampant on my feminist sensibilities) and the sparkly fun of “Wicked”.  But nothing which rocked the boat.  Films which made an impact but nothing that said, “Wow”.  A so-so year for so-so times.

This year’s nominees in the STREAMING/TELEVISION category were … bleak.  But not bleak like in past years, where themes of death and loss have prevailed.  Bleak as in film noir.  Dark.  Violent.  Depraved.  Ugly.  I swear, if I heard “psychological thriller” or “true crime” one more time, I was going to hurl.  There is a morose malaise which filters through nearly every project.  Can’t say I enjoyed many of them, including the comedies. Even some of the so-called funny stuff had an “edge” (although “Nobody Wants This” was charming).  There was just a prevailing sense of hopelessness and few characters you really wanted to succeed.  Not my speed.  I will say, however, that almost universally, the “filmmaking” aspect of the shows was extremely high.  “Ripley”, “True Detective:  Night Country”, “The Penguin”, “Baby Reindeer”, “Disclaimer” and “Under the Bridge” were nothing if not artful and beautifully brought to screen.  In the end there was only one drama which truly drew me in.  “Shogun”.  It is a cinematic masterpiece with Shakespearean overtones.  A showcase for brilliant actors.  A sensitive and layered script.  I had put off watching it because I knew there were lengthy subtitles, but once I started in, I could not turn away.  Paradoxically, it is large screen in concept and yet humbling and very real in execution.  These aren’t characters, they are people.  Are there bad guys?  Sure.  But every single role is multi-dimensional.  There are no simple reasons for anyone’s behavior.  There are even laughs now and then, as there are in real life.  Colonialism is dealt with realistically while the Japanese culture is respected and put at the forefront.  I would hesitate to say that this treatment of the famous Clavell novel is about the conqueror.  It is about the nation he stumbles into and the people trying to make the best of bad hands.  Worth the time.  And the tears.

Deciding on my votes was difficult.  In some cases, there was an overabundance of choices, in other cases no choices at all.  Below are the ones I settled on.

The Motion Picture Nominees are:

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role
ADRIEN BRODY / László Tóth - "THE BRUTALIST"
TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET / Bob Dylan - "A COMPLETE UNKNOWN"
DANIEL CRAIG / William Lee - "QUEER"
COLMAN DOMINGO / Divine G - "SING SING"
RALPH FIENNES / Lawrence - "CONCLAVE"

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role
PAMELA ANDERSON / Shelly - "THE LAST SHOWGIRL"
CYNTHIA ERIVO / Elphaba - "WICKED"
KARLA SOFÍA GASCÓN / Emilia/Manitas - "EMILIA PÉREZ"
MIKEY MADISON / Ani - "ANORA"
DEMI MOORE / Elisabeth - "THE SUBSTANCE" 

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role
JONATHAN BAILEY / Fiyero - "WICKED"
YURA BORISOV / Igor - "ANORA"
KIERAN CULKIN / Benji Kaplan - "A REAL PAIN"
EDWARD NORTON / Pete Seeger - "A COMPLETE UNKNOWN"
JEREMY STRONG / Roy Cohn - "THE APPRENTICE"

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role
MONICA BARBARO / Joan Baez - "A COMPLETE UNKNOWN"
JAMIE LEE CURTIS / Annette - "THE LAST SHOWGIRL"
DANIELLE DEADWYLER / Berniece - "THE PIANO LESSON"
ARIANA GRANDE / Galinda/Glinda - "WICKED"
ZOE SALDAÑA / Rita - "EMILIA PÉREZ"

Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture

A COMPLETE UNKNOWN
ANORA
CONCLAVE
EMILIA PÉREZ
WICKED

Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture
DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE
DUNE: PART TWO
THE FALL GUY
GLADIATOR II
WICKED

The Television Program Nominees are:

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Television Movie or Limited Series
JAVIER BARDEM / Jose Menendez - "MONSTERS: THE LYLE AND ERIK MENENDEZ STORY"
COLIN FARRELL / Oz Cobb - "THE PENGUIN"
RICHARD GADD / Donny - "BABY REINDEER"
KEVIN KLINE / Stephen Brigstocke - "DISCLAIMER"
ANDREW SCOTT / Tom Ripley - "RIPLEY"

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Television Movie or Limited Series
KATHY BATES / Edith Wilson - "THE GREAT LILLIAN HALL"
CATE BLANCHETT / Catherine Ravenscroft - "DISCLAIMER"
JODIE FOSTER / Det. Elizabeth Danvers - "TRUE DETECTIVE: NIGHT COUNTRY"
LILY GLADSTONE / Cam Bentland - "UNDER THE BRIDGE"
JESSICA GUNNING / Martha - "BABY REINDEER"
CRISTIN MILIOTI / Sofia Falcone - "THE PENGUIN"

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Drama Series
TADANOBU ASANO / Kashigi Yabushige - "SHŌGUN"
JEFF BRIDGES / Dan Chase - "THE OLD MAN"
GARY OLDMAN / Jackson Lamb - "SLOW HORSES"
EDDIE REDMAYNE / The Jackal - "THE DAY OF THE JACKAL"
HIROYUKI SANADA / Yoshii Toranaga - "SHŌGUN"

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Drama Series
KATHY BATES / Madeline Matlock - "MATLOCK"
NICOLA COUGHLAN / Penelope Featherington - "BRIDGERTON"
ALLISON JANNEY / Vice President Grace Penn - "THE DIPLOMAT"
KERI RUSSELL / Kate Wyler - "THE DIPLOMAT"
ANNA SAWAI / Toda Mariko - "SHŌGUN"

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Comedy Series
ADAM BRODY / Noah Roklov - "NOBODY WANTS THIS"
TED DANSON / Charles Nieuwendyk - "A MAN ON THE INSIDE"
HARRISON FORD / Paul - "SHRINKING"
MARTIN SHORT / Oliver Putnam - "ONLY MURDERS IN THE BUILDING"
JEREMY ALLEN WHITE / Carmen "Carmy" Berzatto - "THE BEAR"

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Comedy Series
KRISTEN BELL / Joanne - "NOBODY WANTS THIS"
QUINTA BRUNSON / Janine Teagues - "ABBOTT ELEMENTARY"
LIZA COLÓN-ZAYAS / Tina - "THE BEAR"
AYO EDEBIRI / Sydney Adamu - "THE BEAR"
JEAN SMART / Deborah Vance - "HACKS"

Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Drama Series

BRIDGERTONTHE DAY OF THE JACKAL
THE DIPLOMAT
SHŌGUN
SLOW HORSES

Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble in a Comedy Series

ABBOTT ELEMENTARY
THE BEAR
HACKS
ONLY MURDERS IN THE BUILDING
SHRINKING

Outstanding Action Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Television Series
THE BOYS
FALLOUT
HOUSE OF THE DRAGON
THE PENGUIN
SHŌGUN

 

"Leave the World Behind" by Rumaan Alam

Soon to be a Netflix series coming to you.  (Spoilers) I've read way (way, way, way) too many post-apocalyptic books.  This one was different.  It was the beginning of the apocalypse -- which isn't completely defined.  When the reality of the event becomes clear, the book is done.  In the meantime, we have explored racism, culture, privilege, family dynamics and ... a lot more.  It's a literary novel (finalist for the National Book Award) which is meandering, cerebral, maybe even a touch lazy in pacing.  It examines very normal people in extraordinary times.  There are few heroes here, but there aren't clear-cut villains, either..  Most of the reponses are ... well ... real.  The result, for me, was a tinge of sadness.  That when the worst comes, people don't rise above.  That's the lesson we always try to tell to children, that the good people run towards the fire.  This book makes it clear that such a take might be a fairytale.  The truth of calamity is complex and layered, and often not something which brings out our better natures.  Which left me feeling ... ?  I will be very interested in how a nuanced story like this translates onto the screen.

"Go Set a Watchman" by Harper Lee

(Spoilers) For lovers of "To Kill a Mockingbird" this is a hard pill to swallow.  Written before Mockingbird, which acts as a prequel to this tale, we see here an adult "Scout" returning to her hometown.  She has the experience so many of us have -- seeing our heroes with new eyes when nostalgia meets hard reality.  She (and the readers) see the flaws glossed over in Mockingbird.  It is a more nuanced tale.  Scout is trying to find her place in the world, and finding herself in the process.  She turns to her father, Atticus, only to find an aging man who is more racist than she ever imagined.  He believes in the law, but not in equality for Blacks.  The man she looked up to spouts replacement theory, talking about the "invasion" of mongrels. the book starts slowly but quickly becomes rich with the prose which made Harper Lee such a good writer.  Scout's internal dialog ebbs and flows with bits of conversation around her, weaving the story together like a tapestry.  There are lots of memorable and noteworthy quotes, many which are very applicable to today's America.  The book ends more with intellectualism than heart, however, and there are no clear answers.  "To Kill a Mockingbird" was a terrific lesson on our nation's dark history, but this book is a balancing note of where we went from there.

"Descendants"

This film was so innocuous I actually watched it twice, unaware of having seen it before when I watched it the second time.  While sweet and cute, it is also absolutely unmemorable.  It's a typical Disney film of late.  Decent, if not outstanding actors lost in a watercolor haze.  Songs are nice but not catchy.  Dialog is inoffensive, plotlines are gentle, the climax doesn't ... climax.  While the ingredients are there the end product is like a bread that doesn't rise.  It's okay.  Just not fabulous.  And not memorable.