"Fleishman is in Trouble"

Not sure why it took so long for me to get around to watching this series.  I guess I kind of thought it was some dry humor thing set in New York City.  It's not.  Based on a novel, it's a limited series about a man getting a divorce.  It's also about a woman who's not sure she wants a divorce.  It's about raising children, facing middle life, being Jewish, finding happiness, making peace with the life you have chosen, figuring out what love is ... and so much more.  Actors are great (although Jesse Eisenberg's frenetic patter is beginning to feel a little old).  The story is compelling and identifiable and not too dark.  It's just very real.  There are some knowing smiles along the way.  It was a worthwhile weekend binge.

"Madame Web"

(Spoilers) I often like to watch films otherwise trashed by critics.  Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't.  In the case of "Madam Web" the critics are not wrong.  This film fails on pretty much every level.  Casting, concept, direction, script, you name it.  There is Dakota Johnson in the lead role as Cassandra Webb (could you hit us over the head more??)  Her character, with a typical difficult backstory, is emotionally supressed.  Which translates to emotionally flat.  Her whispery voice makes her seem like a drifting waif, not a superhero.  Her flashforwards are "Inception" level confusing and gave me a bit of a headache.  And she drowns.  A lot.  Then there is Sydney Sweeney, Isabela Merced and Celeste O'Connor who play the rambunctious teens Ms. Webb is supposed to save.  Let's start with the fact that these women are more parodies of teens than actual teens.  They each try to overcome the stereotypes they are given (good girl, bad girl, nerd) but have little success.  There is Jose Maria Yazpik, a Mexican national, who plays a Peruvian with real heart.  But looks nothing like a Peruvian native.  Which is typical for Hollywood, which clearly thinks all Hispanics are alike.  The greatest offense here, however, is Tahar Rahim, a villian who is just ... "huh"?  He starts out evil, he ends evil, and his entire motivation is to stop a future event which is continually built up throughout the film ... but NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENS.  It's just kind of a hot mess.  As an origin story, there is, of course, a lot of exposition.  The typical path of the character having a normal life, then getting the "gift", rejecting the gift, accepting the gift, then beating the crap out of the bad guy.  Squeeze in three more characters and keeping the film under two hours makes it feel choppy.  Events seem disconnected, characters can't develop.  Again, you have to love Hollywood, which clearly feels that a single female character can't carry a film on her own ("The Marvels").  It was also the first Marvel film in a long while without a cute cut-in during the credits.  Which sends the ultimate message:  The studio knew this was a bomb and didn't even bother to try.

"The Girls Who Went Away: The Hidden History of Women Who Surrendered Children for Adoption in the Decades Before Roe v. Wade" by Ann Fessler

Yes, I still read books.  But it takes a lot longer than digesting the constant flow of streaming media.  In any case, this book, which isn't new, was a revelation.  It made me think, a lot, about the hew and cry from the right that "all unwanted children can be adopted".  What these narratives show is that the issue is far, far more complicated than one might imagine.  There is the sense by the adopted child that their birth mother didn't want them, that somehow they, as children, were unworthy.  There is guilt and anger and shame from the mothers.  There are few women here who said, unequivocally, that this was the right thing to do.  But most felt pressured, lied to, manipulated.  They felt a profound loss of control.  Many turned to drugs or alchohol and dangerous pursuits.  They felt a sense of being inherently "bad" and that dictated their moods, their mental health, their choices, their lives.  This event, which they were told was momentary, colored their world, and their personalities, for decades to come.  With some facts but mostly stories, it is hard to read these very personal tales and not feel moved.  The role of women in society (then and now) underlays much of the fabric of this book and makes one sit back and wonder about the role of motherhood -- how it is portrayed, how it is in actuality.  A powerful read, this one appeared in my "Little Free Library" and I could not be more appreciative.  Not easy, but perhaps necessary.  Check it out.  

Say Goodbye ...

Much like last year, there is some blood on the floor with the summer cancellations.  Well, tears anyway.  There were the ones we knew about:  “Young Sheldon” (Waaaaahhhh!), “Bob Hearts Abishola”, “Station 19”, “Quantum Leap”, “Transplant”, “Umbrella Academy”, “A Discovery of Witches”,  “Star Trek:  Discovery” and “Sweet Tooth” (more Waaaaahhh!).  There were surprises, like “So Help Me Todd”, “Julia”,  “Not Dead Yet” and “Reginald the Vampire” (CLIFF-HANGAR!), not-surprises like “Extended Family”, “Lazarus Project” (ANOTHER CLIFF-HANGAR!) and “Spencer Sisters” and shows I had already quit on, like “La Brea”.

I wouldn’t be so sad but every year the newbie list gets thinner and the quality more iffy.  For the past five years or so I’ve said goodbye to a lot more shows than I am adding.  So far, all we have for the fall is:

CBS – “Georgie and Mandy’s First Marriage”, “Matlock”, “NCIS:  Origins”, “Poppa’s House” and “Watson”. 

ABC – “High Potential”, “Doctor Odyssey”

FOX – “Rescue:  HI-Surf”, “Murder in a Small Town”, “Universal Basic Guys”

NBC – “Brilliant Minds”, “Happy’s Place”, “St. Denis Medical”

I’m betting that this time next year fewer than three of these are keepers.  And my DVR will be even lighter than it is now.

Farewell "Manifest"

As with other things, I took a while to get around to the final episodes of this series.  It was always good.  It was never great.  But the premise was kind of fun and the characters really grew on me.  I mourned the passing of a number of them.  The show always bordered on the whole Christian thing (which it leaned into more in the end), but never went full-on preachy.  The lessons here were more about community and forgiveness and choosing good.  With a twist of L. Ron Hubbard weirdness.  I enjoyed it, particularly as the series progressed.  The weaknesses ... drawing things out too much to keep the premise going, adding in romance after romance after romance, creating circular storylines where you kind of yelled "move it ALONG" ... pretty much went away in the last ten episodes.  But the issue was ... the show went the other way.  Plotpoints were rushed or skipped altogether.  It made the flow a little bumpy.  Characters appeared and disappeared and I got a confused because information was left out.  It was like reading CliffsNotes.  I guess what I don't understand is why they didn't just lengthen the episodes to cover the needed scenes.  That's what you do in streaming.  And yet the episodes were all tailored to broadcast specs, running 42 or 43 minutes.  In any case, this is a bit picky.  The wrap-up was good.  There was a real effort to honor the characters, the storyline and to complete the mission.  In the final episode I feared a "Lost" moment -- a few times.  But they swerved.  And it was all happy-shiny time for the most part (despite one really bad attempt to use special effects to age a character down).  Loves made and lost.  99% of the characters were squared away (two weren't, but that was kind of an oversight, I think).  The resolutions were satisfying and made sense.  Final take -- it's worth the binge.

"The Curious Case of Natalia Grace"

Typically, I don't watch this kind of stuff.  I don't watch real-life crime shows, docu-dramas, etc.  I find them exploitative and watching them feels dirty.  Like tragedy porn.  But when children are involved, I'm sometimes drawn to these kinds of programs.  I guess a part of me wants to know if the kids came out of it okay.  If they got their lives back together.  I'm usually disappointed.  Rarely, if ever, is there a happy ending when abuse is involved.  And so it goes.  This two season series reveals a lot of ugly.  So much so that I kept putting it aside.  I would watch an episode or two, then stop.  It was just too sad.  There are lies upon lies.  Manipulations and fabricated tales.  When all is said and done, however, I came to a few "truths" I will hold onto.  (Perhaps the draw of these things is to play judge and jury?  To feel empowered to judge others?)  Is Natalia Grace a sociopath?  No.  Was she an adult masquerading as a child?  Absolutely no.  She was a child.  And from birth she was saddled with health issues, abused and passed along.  To more abuse.  She was ten, and had suffered a LOT, by the time she finally found herself in a situation where she was treated with decency.  Where she was finally hugged and valued.  Where she was treated as a child and truly cared for.  Does she have issues?  Oh my, yes.  She is angry.  Defensive.  Perhaps abusive in some ways.  It was all she ever knew.  But here's another bottom line for me.  She was surrounded by adults.  Were some abusive?  Absolutely.  But others, like her stepfather, say they couldn't stop the abuse.  Couldn't help.  And that, my friends, is just bull****.  There were adults and a child.  Blaming the child for her behavior as a result of her abuse, refusing, as the adults, to step in, is criminal.  Period. 

"Renfield"

Listed as a comedy, I expected something along the lines of "Reginald the Vampire" or even "What We Do in the Shadows" (both are truly fabulous, by the way).  What I got, instead, was a gorefest which made "Deadpool" look like kiddy fare.  Great actors (honestly, I would watch Awkwafina read a dictionary, not to mention the delightfully bereft Nicolas Hoult with his puppy dog expressions) can't save a film which is just ... graphic.  I mean, there's some dialog.  But nothing clever.  Nothing to grab and hold your attention.  Twenty minutes in, I was checking email and shopping online as the bodies piled up.  Oh well.  

Goodbye to "Good Trouble"

Disliking having to wait from week to week for the next episode (what happened to streaming???), I didn't take the time to binge the final episodes of "Good Trouble" until now.  It got to me ... more than I expected.  And it was perfect.  The drama (oh, so. much. drama) continued right up until the final scene.  As a gift to the viewers there was a nice wrap-up for each character, bringing them to a place of hope, of promise.  After five seasons, it was really nice to see this group of (mostly) young folk finally get the hang of adulting.  Started as a show about Callie and Mariana from "The Fosters" it quickly grew into an ensemble show ... and what an ensemble!  Every character, including the offbeat "Kelly" really added to something which became a very rich stew.  The angsty nature of their screw-ups and perpetually miserable love-lives was hard to take at times but I always came back.  I came to care about these characters, and rooted for them to find meaning and peace in their lives.  The reward for hanging in there was rewarded in the form of a finale with promise.  And I realized that between "The Fosters" and this show, I've been watching this storyline since 2013.  ELEVEN YEARS!  I can't even begin to list all the chapters I've lived in my own life in this period of time.  To the residents of the Coterie -- bonne chance!  And to these amazing actors ... thank you.  I hope to see you soon in other projects.

"Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story"

This documentary is older than I thought, but quite powerful.  I was drawn to it after being reminded, again, that this was a woman who was known for her movie star status, but sadly forgotten for her brilliant inventions.  It's well-done.  The interviews, clips, structure are all solid.  For a documentary it hits the right notes with information but doesn't bore.  The pacing is good, the viewpoint is as unbiased as is possible.  It's good.  Really shines a light on one of many women whose impactful life has been lost to the shadows of memory.  This production shines a light into the dark and reminds us of the importance of the foundation which came before.

"The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar"

The brilliance of this really surprised me.  Familiar with Roald Dahl, I had not read this particular book.  The production did a terrific job of capturing the kind of quirky, oddball style of Dahl's works.  A short film (40 minutes) with an amazing cast (start with Ben Kingsley, add in Benedict Cumberbatch, Dev Patel and more) and you have something very (very, very) watchable.  It has meaning, message, humor.  It is fresh.  It is surprising.  It is totally worthwhile (and it won an Oscar).  Watch it.  And then, maybe, watch it again ...

"All the Light We Cannot See"

This is one of those situations where I really wish I had read the book.  Anthony Doerr is a gifted author and I may have liked this better in book form???  Unlike "A Small Light", which I very much liked for its fresh qualities, this one hit a lot of familiar notes.  There is clear delineation between good and bad.  The Nazis come off like the ones from any given Indiana Jones film.  There are good actors here.  Each brings a lot more depth to roles which seem to be a bit two-dimensional, but it doesn't help.  It's sad but I felt a difficulty connecting.  The accents are distracting.  Most are British, some are vaguely European, and Mark Ruffalo, who has impressed with the wide variety of characters he has played (including identical twin brothers, where one is differently-abled), seems a little lost here.  His accent seems more like an affect than anything else.  Young Aria Mia Loberti is engaging but it is not enough.  There just isn't enough "something" to carry the story through.  Again, I have to wonder if Doerr's prose in print form would have been more engaging and would have drawn me in.  This production sadly didn't.  Maybe I'm ODing on all the Holocaust dramas out right now.  Who knows?  It's watchable.  It's just not "outstanding".  And, given the cast and the source material, I expected better.

"Wish"

It's okay.  Not bad, but not memorable.  The issue, much like "Damsel", seems to be a lack of plot.  Young Asha lives in a Utopia.  She thinks.  Early on, she discovers a dark secret, and spends the next hour and a half trying to make things right.  It's not enough to pin your hat on.  There is also a surprising flat quality to the animation.  Hands have no fingerprints.  Faces, with the exception of Asha's freckles, are uniformly smooth.  Like mannequins.  That being said, it's typical Disney fare.  There is a perky and beguiling young woman -- Asha (played by Ariana DeBose).  A notably unconflicted bad guy.  An upbeat group of friends.  A loving family.  A talking animal or two.  Quite a number of songs.  Unlike the last few Disney movies, the tunes seem to be catchier, and the lyrics worse.  They haven't found the right mix of late (in my humble opinion).  There are the messages.  A snap-back at immigration policy you might miss if you blink.  The importance of hopes and dreams, and not letting anything hold you back.  How we need community and connection.  Standard stuff.  It just didn't "stick".

"Spider-Man: No Way Home"

Time flies.  Three years after it debuted, I finally saw "Spider-Man:  No Way Home".  It's amazing.  It's devastating.  If not for the next movie in the series coming out, this would have been a perfect, if not very very sad, way to wrap things up.  Unfortunately, there is the almighty dollar to deal with.  So there will be a sequel.  A shame.  This one hit every right note.  Engaging, hysterical dialog.  Good pacing for a (really) long movie.  Terrific way of pulling the threads together (pun intended).  And the predictable but incredibly moving sacrifices the hero must always endure.  It's just lovely.  But keep the kleenex close.

"Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story"

I actually liked this so much more than "Bridgerton".  Kinda-sorta based on real history, this has more gravitas, more meat.  It's a significantly more serious tale than the marshmallow fluff which is the original series (that being said, the connections and back-story to the Bridgerton characters is quite delightful).  The cast, of course, is fabulous.  A huge shout-out to India Amartiefio, who plays the eponymous lead.  She hits the right note each and every time.  And there are a lot of notes.  It creates a symphony of struggle, of feminism, of the times, of love.  I tore through the six episodes quickly and my only regret is that it's a limited series and there will be no more.  And yes, for those who like the bedroom antics in Bridgerton, there are more here.  But they are, in my humble opinion, fairly secondary to the core issues.  It's powerful.  It's memorable.  It's worth the watch.

"Glamorous"

Oh.  Dear.  This had so much saccharine it makes me jittery.  It was like Disney meeting R-rated content.  Listed as a comedy-drama it was pretty much all broad comedy for the first six episodes.  Very, very broad.  Took me almost all of the first season to buy into these characters being anything beyond two-dimensional.  Scenes were bathed in light so bright, with so much pink and yellow, that I felt like I was having a Miami Beach hallucination.  The cast had potential.  Lead Marco Mejia is interesting and earnest.  Supporting player Jade Payton is charming.  Ayesha Harris brings needed groundedness.  But vets like Diana Maria Riva and Kim Cattrall seemed constrained.  And they are amazing ... usually.  The young folk were presented as hyper, teeny-tiny clothes wearing, very occasionally drug using drifters consumed with romances and drama over doing their jobs.  Just didn't appeal.  Took until episode seven (of ten) before it finally clicked in.  Too little, too late.  By the time they dropped some of the nonsense the train had left the station.  It was cancelled.  One season and done.  The sad thing is that it could have been so much more.

"Wonka"

Honestly, this is as close to perfect as a movie can get.  As a sequel (or prequel, more specifically) to a nearly perfect film, it's kind of a gift.  Somehow, beyond all expectations, they play homage and yet find new territory.  They wrap in beloved characters and songs but add something new, making it fresh.  There isn't a bad egg in the group (easter egg intended) and it didn't, in any way, disappoint.  Honestly wonderful.  Really should have gotten more attention around award time.  Why is it that stories which just make us feel good don't get the same attention as gut-wrenching epics?  Grab some chocolate (you really must), settle in, and enjoy.

"Damsel"

The quality of mercy is not "Damsel".  A terrific cast and high production values can't hide the fact that this is an out-and-out revenge tale.  It's also a bit thin from a storytelling persepective.  Which is to say that if you see the trailer you pretty much get what happens in the whole movie.  It's not bad.  An enjoyable way to spend an hour plus.  It's heavy-handed with the digital enhancements but again, a strong cast does make it watchable.  There just isn't a lot of there there.  We have a half hour of fairytale, an hour of retribution (think fairytale meets the upside down of "Stranger Things") and that's pretty much it.  Good and bad are pretty heavily delineated.  Characters don't have a lot of room to change and grow and make retribution.  This movie is about blood.  And squishy killing.  In other words, not a story for the kids.  I sense a sequel.  We'll see.

"Capote vs the Swans"

Tom Hollander is terrific as Capote but the production, as a whole, put me to sleep.  It's not a story about scandal.  It's just about the times.  The sixties.  Elegant women.  Cafe life.  But nothing really happens.  Not really.  Tons of atmosphere, lots of porn-like shots of food.  But the secrets?  The destruction Capote supposedly created on these superficially perfect lives?  We don't see it.  Not really.  The cameras linger.  The women are limpid and languid.  And exchangeable.  Big deal actors are left to do very little but sit and stare.  We do see a tiny and sanitized snapshot of Capote's life.  But the audience is never allowed to pull back the curtain and see the reasons behind the manipulations.  We don't see any of the big bad events Truman exposes.  They are simply talked about.  Whispered about, really, over roast duck en glace.  Even the rage, unlike in the previous season of Duel, is muted.  I'd watch Hollander again, but overall, this one left me with a big yawn.  If you are going to do a story of privilege, at least give us some real emotion.  

"Queen Cleopatra" (2023)

Calling this a "documentary" is a reach.  "Inspired by" might be better.  Here's the thing.  "The Crown" is fiction.  We accept this because no one knows what is said behind closed doors.  We don't know the state of mind of the various players, we only know, for sure, the events.  And so it is with Cleopatra.  The true answer is "we don't know".  "The Crown" takes place over much of the 20th Century.  Cleopatra's story took place more than 2,000 years ago.  Thanks to the nearly pathological need for the Romans to record everything, we know a lot.  But the dramatizations here?  Complete fiction.  When the historians start saying things like, "One might imagine ..." or "It does seem like ...", you know you are in trouble.  When one of the experts says something about how a figure in the tale was feeling, I cringed.  The actors are strong, the narrative engaging, but the insistence that this is history, and not made-up history, is distracting.  As is the makeup, dialog and costuming.  Okay, documentary budget.  But there didn't seem to be a lot of effort.  No, there was no "glitter makeup".  No, we didn't say "okay" and "yeah" back then and the hip-hop underscoring inserted a couple times pulled me right out of the narrative.  No, Mark Antony most likely did not have a beard and a Bieber-esque hairstyle.  And the costuming.  Oh, the costuming.  The guards look like they are wearing vests made of bathroom mats and the pleather you buy at the craft store.  Cleo spends half the series wearing an ensemble which looks like something from a boho music festival (and never mind the fact that 21 years pass or that she supposedly ages from 18 to 39 ???)  It was also way the heck weird when the footage of the crowds from Caesar's walkabout in Rome is identical to the scenes we see as Cleopatra takes a drive through the countryside of Egypt.  I know, I know, this was done on the fly, but if you are going to tell a story, tell a story.  And be up front about what you are doing.  And, as to the color controversy, it's kind of moot for me.  Back then, there was no "Black" or "White".  Do I believe that Cleopatra was a fair-skinned woman with European features?  No.  And I never have (sorry Elizabeth Taylor).  It just doesn't make sense.  I've always envisioned her skin as being copper or caramel colored, with dark, thick black hair.  That makes sense.  The reason it matters?  Because of the world we live in now.  Back then, well, it was back then.  I return to my original statement.  "We don't know".  Period.  In any case, I did learn a lot of things which surprised me.  I just wish that, as a production, it had been better.

"Elsbeth"

Columbo is finally back.  It took decades.  People have been trying, and trying, and copying the Columbo model for years.  With little success.  The trick wasn't to copy the idea.  Even if it was original.  The idea that we know the killer, the motive, the method in the first 20 minutes was unique.  Making this a "how are they going to get caught?" rather than a "Whodunit?" was brilliant.  But the key to it all was Peter Falk.  And he couldn't be replicated.  With Carrie Preston, however, we finally have an honorable character to pass the baton to.  Ms. Preston infuses her character, Elsbeth, with the perfect balance.  She seems innocent and simple yet has that determined annoying quality which drives killers insane.  The writing supports this and the New York setting gives it verve.  The supporting cast may take a while to gel, but overall, I say home run.