"Bohemian Rhapsody"

I cried, a lot, when Freddie Mercury died.  I wasn't alone.  This film, which has been pretty ravaged by critics but adored by fans, has a lot of the music which made Queen a star.  And it's a good film.  It's just not great.  It's a rock star biopic.  We know the history, we know what happens in every rock star story.  From nothing to the big break to fame to drugs to relationships which implode to band breaking up to reconciliation (maybe) and reflection back on their golden years.  Yadda yadda yadda.  That being said, I sat through this because it was Queen and it was Freddie Mercury and there is that voice, that sound, that "imagining" he had for great music.  The tale clarifies a few things, like his family background and his relationship with Mary Austin (Lucy Boynton should have gotten more nods for her sensitive portrayal here) but leaves much of Freddie's real story, his inner life, his passions, alone.  It is the story of Queen with a broad watercolor brush, leaving darkness mostly to the side.  Rami Malek, whose work I like (I voted for him as Best Actor in "I, Robot") has gotten acclaim from his efforts here although I couldn't help but feel the actor was challenged by both the prosthetic teeth and being asked to do a British accent.  And no, it's not him singing.  A computerized blend of actual Queen and a Canadian singer named Marc Martel was used to replicate the amazingness of Freddie's gift.  The movie could have used editing.  Coming in at a weighty 134 minutes it could have been shorter given the lack of depth.  They do show the entire Live Aid performance, which lasted 20 minutes, so that is a part of it, but all it did was leave me craving the real show.  Somehow I don't think that's what the producers intended.  It's an "entertaining" film.  See it for the music.  See it and remember how truly great this group was, a brief moment of modern musical brilliance, before it all came crashing down.

"The Favourite"

Another film which is supposed to be a comedy that I didn't find very funny.  It's a very good film, and worth watching, but mostly I found it to just be sad.  There is Lady Sarah, a complicated woman navigating a difficult time period for women.  There is Queen Anne, a sad, sick woman who only wants to be loved.  And there is Abigail, a woman who has lost much and is determined to get it back.  The whole thing is very "Liaison Dangereuse," which, if you remember, had a certain number of peccadilloes but ended badly for pretty much everyone.  Dialogue is fast and furious and the jibes contained within is where you find the humor, but don't blink.  The setting is lush and the filming adds to the narrative in an interesting way.  Fish-eye lenses are used in several instances either to show how the world is closing in on a character or how a given character lives in their own little bubble.  It's a bit direct but it works.  Without giving away any of the plot I found this film to be quite satisfying although, in the end, it speaks to loss rather than laughs.  I was impressed by Rachel Weisz and found her to be a powerful presence.  Her key line, which resonated for me, was "We are playing entirely different games, you and I".  It was typical of the character, who evidenced power even when that power was usurped.  Olivia Colman was equally compelling as a woman who craves everything and yet still feels empty.  I look forward to seeing her work in "The Crown" later this year, as she has become the older version of Queen Elizabeth II after Claire Foy.  My only minor issue was with costuming, which appeared interesting at first only to resort to a kind of similarity from one outfit to the next.  The biggest change was when one character's dress went from the blue everyone was wearing to black, presumably to show her turn to the dark side.  Maybe they blew their budget on hair and wigs?  BTW, of all the "historical" films this year, this one appears to be the most accurate.  Yes, much of this (although not all of it) really did happen.  That's something.  Enjoy.  The Queen commands it.  (PS worst movie poster ever ...)

"Vice"

At any other time I would have found this film hysterical.  Shot in a similar way as "The Big Short" this is an in-your-face romp which explores the path, and power, of Dick Cheney.  It has enough facts to bolster the narrative and enough good performances to drive the story although at times it does seem a bit choppy.  In a bit of a twist, I'm betting most viewers will not guess the identity of the narrator until it is revealed.  The problem isn't with the film.  The problem is with the era we are living in.  When I can scan headlines and see ten times more obnoxious behavior by our current baby-in-chief I find it hard to get motivated by the sins shown in this story.  I should be outraged. The movie shows a complete and total corruption of the American institution.  The fact that President Ding Dong has normalized unacceptable behavior is perhaps the saddest thing of all.  Which made laughing at this film difficult.  Added to that is the performance of Christian Bale, nominated for numerous awards as part of his work here.  Yes, he's good.  He's also an unqualified bastard who has temper tantrums on set and is estranged from many after threatening violence against family members during arguments.  What does it say that Hollywood is as guilty of promoting this guy as the government forces were of promoting a man like Dick Cheney?  I'm just saying.  Maybe the producers didn't fully get the point.  In any case, good film, wrong time to see it, won't vote for Bale as Best Actor.  I'm past the point where I can look at the work and not the person behind it.

"BlackKkKlansman"

Much like "Green Book" this is a so-called comedy is set in a historical past depicting America's struggle with racism.  While I still took issue with a few things (like calling this a comedy) it was better than "Green Book".  Unlike "Green Book" the film is directed by black virtuoso director Spike Lee and focuses on the black experience through black eyes.  This is the presentational version of Spike Lee, who has a wide range of styles.  This particular film makes points through visuals and messaging rather than through characters.  During a Kwame Ture rally the scene melds into faces of the crowd, a kind of living tableau of beautiful blacks, echoing words of the speech, encouraging the audience to love themselves.  Recounting the story of Ron Stallworth, the first black police officer in Colorado Springs, this is supposedly a "true" tale.  Mr. Stallworth suffered through pretty overt racism in his department but eventually came across a case he could sink his teeth into -- monitoring the actions of the local Klan.  He did this by creating a phone relationship with the leaders of the group and sent a white officer in his place for face-to-face meetings (Adam Driver as Flip Zimmerman).  The laughs are meant to come from the behavior of the ridiculous, stupid Klansmen.  Again, like "Green Book" I found it hard to laugh.  After viewing the film, I wondered if Spike Lee was doing the same as Jordan Peele did last year with "Get Out" and using a non-dramatic format to make a point.  Getting folks to laugh at racism then showing the ugliness of racism may create in the viewer a paradoxical reflection, an inner dialogue.  Is this ever funny?  Right when you might be tempted to think these idiots can't get their act together on anything there is Harry Belafonte playing Jerome Turner, telling an achingly sad story of Jesse Washington, a man who was castrated, tortured and burned over the death of a white woman.  The movie is not subtle. It begins with a faux Alex Jones character and ends with actual footage of Charlottesville, right down to showing different angles of the assault that killed Heather Heyer, all of which is a way of yelling, rather than saying "GET IT?"  I don't disagree with the points but I struggled with the insistence that this is a TRUE story when, in fact, almost every major part of the narrative has been manipulated to make a point.  When books do that I really jump all over them.  I can't help but think there is so much overt racism in the U.S. that you really don't have to manipulate reality to see it, but then I look at President Ding Dong's response to Charlottesville (also in the film) and think, okay, yeah, people don't get it.  SPOILER ALERTS!!!!  Bottom line:  Truth.  Ron Stallworth was the first black police officer in Colorado Springs, he did face incredible racism, he did infiltrate the Klan and he did talk with David Duke on the phone.  Nearly everything else in the film (the time period, Dr. Kennebrew Beauregard, Patrice, Felix and Connie Hendrickson, Flip Zimmerman being Jewish, the Klan guys blowing anything up, calling David Duke to say "ha-ha you bastard") is all fiction.  What isn't fiction is that the investigation was shut down and covered up and that high-ranking military and government types were a part of the local Klan and didn't face repercussions for that until years later.  One of the final shots in the film, that of maybe (???) Adam Driver's character joining the Klan has become a big debate, leading to further examination of the film's meaning and racism.  Are we all racists, even those who are targeted by the Klan?  The movie made me think and in that sense it succeeded but this year's crop of socially relevant films shot wide, in my humble opinion, rather than directly at an easily defined target.

"Green Book"

This has to be the most white movie about black struggles I have ever seen.  Written and directed by white men the lead character is ... a white man.  This is not to say that white people can't create material covering the black plight but this film ain't it.  Called a comedy, the premise is pretty simple.  Black music prodigy Dr. Don Shirley has chosen to do a tour in the deep south in the early 1960s.  He needs a driver and selects the loutish Tony "Lip", who is conveniently a club bouncer, as well.  Tony is not a fan of black people and his opinion of them stands only one step to the left of stereotype images of fried-chicken eating black-face entertainers.  In a kind of twisted Pygmalion the well-educated Shirley attempts to refine the borderline gangster.  We are supposed to laugh.  Dr. Shirley experiences some gross kind of racism, Tony observes it and feels badly, then does something loutish.  Cue the laughter.  But I couldn't.  I'm thinking the reality of this film is just too close.  It would be one thing if it was truly history, but less than a month ago I watched a video of a man kicked out of his hotel for ... wait for it ... daring to call his mother from the lobby.  Security was called.  The video shows a man devastated by what occurred.  He is shocked, angry, sad.  The tears are clearly there under the surface.  It's hard to watch and, I imagine, impossible to experience.  Before that I watched a video of a woman waiting with a friend for a car repairman.  They were verbally assaulted by a drunken white woman who insisted, in every racist way possible, that she was better than these two black women.  It made me embarrassed for my entire race.  So no, I wasn't able to laugh at the dumb white guy in this film.  It was just too real.  And it makes me sick.

"All in the Timing" by David Ives

I read a book!  Finally.  Of course, it is theatre related.  Fourteen short plays.  As previously mentioned, I like reading short plays as a way of finding monologues.  Unlike the Humana Festival collection these plays started out light and humorous, a delightful change.  I failed in my quest to find a funny monologue but enjoyed the works, which included laugh-out-loud humorous pieces, profane pieces (the Mamet piece is both profane and hysterical) and thoughtful pieces.  Many of the plays revolve around the challenges of relationships and the book ends with a particularly short piece written in an almost absurdist form which evokes a poetic form, echoing the death of a relationship.  Worth the read, or performance.  Well-done.

"The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel"

Thank God for this show.  Really.  During awards season I often slog through one really dark, depressing film after another.  This show has been an incredibly delightful palate-cleanser each night as I work to pull out of the grey fog which descends after watching all the "meaningful" art films.  Which is not to say this isn't meaningful, it is hugely so.  Set in the late 1950s New York there are tremendous ripples about women's roles and a changing society but it is explored through the lens of a cheerful, super-smart, upbeat woman known as Midge Maisel.  No, her life doesn't go as she planned.  That seems to be a theme for all of the characters.  But she has a can-do attitude and time and time again, makes lemonade out of life's lemons.  This is one of those cases where the entire cast, the entire production, is magnificently brilliant.  Every character adds something unique to the narrative and no expense seems to be spared in presenting the world of upper west side New York life.  It creates a colorful shell within which the story feels very real, has significant depth, but is not depressing.  Another huge part of the success of this series has to be the writing.  It is not only funny but delivered at a mad clip.  I dare you to try and do anything while watching this show ... you would miss a dozen plot-points.  Rachel Brosnahan has received due credit for her portrayal of this feisty, feminine woman but my vote will be going to Alex Borstein whose "Susie Myerson" is unforgettable.  They say that a supporting actor award should go to someone who fills a role so completely you can't imagine anyone else doing the role.  Such is the case with Ms. Borstein, whose facial expressions alone have sent me into laughing fits.  Well-imagined, perfectly executed, definitely one of the smartest new series to come along in a good long while.  This is a show I look forward to watching, time and time again.

"A Quiet Place"

NOT a fan of horror but as a SAG voter I will watch whatever is sent to me, particularly if I have to vote on it.  If I choose to watch it at 10am on a sunny day, however, that is entirely my choice.  With real diversity of genres finally invading the award world horror has begun to make it into the annual film-binging.  Last year was "Get Out" which was scary as hell but quite brilliant.  This year it is "A Quiet Place" which is equally scary as hell and perhaps even more brilliant.  The premise and execution of this idea, that humans have to remain completely silent or get eaten by the big bad aliens, is just inspired.  Produced, directed and starring John Krasinski and his wife, Emily Blunt, the film had me on the edge of my seat for every single one of the 90 minutes, much of it covering my mouth.  You know the premise is well-done when you buy in so completely that you don't dare scream in places where, quite frankly, you need to scream.  I did jump a good deal but very very quietly.  Even after the film was over I felt I had to be quiet, tip-toeing down the stairs for a snack.  The kids, of course, are left out of actor nominations but should be given huge credit for their work.  Millicent Simmonds does a truly amazing job of communicating her conflicting emotions after an unimaginable loss and Noah Jupe's sense of horror ripples across his face time and time again, looking like an Edvard Munch still-life.  The film is exquisitely made and allows the silence to swallow you whole, only occasionally using underscoring.  It is this focus on the actors and action which makes the film truly good and not just one of a given genre.  Krasinski, like his wife, is having a good year, being honored for his work in Tom Clancy's "Jack Ryan".  How he managed to make and star in this film as well as that series is beyond me.  In any case, this story is outstanding and really made an impression, "sticking with me".  Just don't watch it alone.  Or at night. 

"King Lear"

Amazon's new "King Lear" is a direct hit at current politics, portraying a King with a desperate need to have fawning sycophants surround him at every turn, bolstering up his bottomless pit of ego and feeding a brain clearly on the decline.  The film is set in modern day, sort-of, with a nod to its Renaissance roots.  Anthony Hopkins, nominated for an award in this film, does an excellent job of veering from one mood swing to another while backed up by a host of outstanding performances by a cadre of well-known and lesser-known British actors.  There is Jim Carter, who gives one of the most touching depictions of the Earl of Kent I have ever seen.  It helps that his transformation from banished Earl to wandering old man is done with a haircut rather than a bulky costume.  Karl Johnson and Andrew Scott also turn in touching performances, with Scott making some really remarkable turns from science nerd to madman to hero.  Emma Thompson and Emily Watson are given the chance to make Goneril and Regan human before they become monsters and the young John Macmillan makes for a fine villain as Edmund, the bastard son of Gloucester.  Beware the eye-gouging scene and the final showdown between Edmund and Edgar as both have gut-turning moments.  My one big complaint is that the producers felt the need to take this play, one of the longest in the Shakespearean canon, and bring it in under two hours.  To do that huge parts of the play were excised and the scene changes sometimes jump in ways that would make someone unfamiliar with the plot extremely confused.  It breaks the flow of the narrative and there were a few times that even I had to spend some time catching up mentally.  Other than that it is well directed and well played and a worthy addition to the world of Shakespeare films.

"The Wife"

Based on a book by Meg Wolitzer, this should have been better.  Clearly, Ms. Wolitzer didn't write the screenplay, which was flat.  That, coupled with some bizarre directorial choices (one important scene was overshadowed by a background extra) made this movie pretty ho-hum.  It shouldn't have been.  Glenn Close turns in another star performance, marked by her trademark subtlety, of a woman with a calm surface and inner turmoil.  She is paired with Jonathan Pryce who does a nice job balancing sweetness, aging addle-mindedness, a leering womanizer and a self-involved egoist.  Christian Slater also adds a good note in his somewhat slimy role as an avaricious biographer.  The rest of the cast is sadly forgettable but given the filming and the script choices were perhaps not given a chance to shine.  There is an odd timeline issue which bugged me.  The story is set mostly in 1992 with the characters at a college in 1958.  Assuming Joan is in her early 20s at the time and Joe is perhaps 30, that would make the characters 50s to 60s at the time portrayed in the film.  Both Glenn Close and Jonathan Pryce are 71.  It was a small thing but it bugged me.  This kind of "casting who we want" regardless of the age of the character is the kind of Hollywood stunt which always irritates.  Bottom line:  this is a simple tale which could have been rich with underpinnings but the blatant way the tale unfolds left me guessing not at all.  Worth it for the lead performances, that's about it.

"Mary Queen of Scots"

I like my historical dramas, particularly on this period.  You have two female rulers who struggled a great deal on many fronts, the biggest of which was their gender.  Not unheard of given America's struggle to envision a female leader.  In any case the tale of Mary and Elizabeth is a powerful and sad one.  Knowing a great deal about the actual history and having seen multiple portrayals of this story I found this film to be quite good.  It met, but did not exceed, other versions of a well-known history.  There are definite "takes" in terms of character.  Elizabeth appears weaker than expected, given her general paranoia of Mary, and Mary seems somewhat more innocent in the consequences of her actions than she may have been (one has to remember that her mother-in-law in France was Catherine de Medici).  Played well by Margot Robbie and Saoirse Ronan, respectively, these women come alive with depth and power.  Filmed in a way which added to the narrative without detracting, the two women are backed up by a standard set of British actors who have the chops.  Dialogue is frequently cribbed from actual exchanges between the two monarchs so a real authenticity rings throughout.  With no complaints this one is a good addition to a canon of films on the topic.  The young Saoirse Ronan continues to impress with a growing list of admirable credits and the amazingly flexible Ms. Robbie shows that she can stretch herself far beyond the Barbie/Harley Quinn roles which seem to require a W Magazine figure.  This is the Margot Robbie of "I, Tonya" fame.  Both women delve deep into a well of emotions as they portray women who sacrificed lives for crowns.

"Killing Eve"

A fan of Sandra Oh I was initially intrigued by a tale of an MI5 analyst tracking down a serial killer and liked that the producers saw fit to cast outside of the box.  I was further drawn in by the brilliance of the Villanelle character, particularly as portrayed by Jodie Comer.  Based on a series of books by Luke Jennings this is an incredibly twisted tale of, quite frankly, pretty twisted people.  Seemingly filmed in the many European locales it takes place in the story is visually engaging and draws you in ... to a point.  I have to say, I don't mind black comedy or dark themes, but there were a good number of episodes where I walked away saying "I'm out" ... only to come back.  I came back in part because Ms. Oh is nominated for a SAG award (and recently won the Golden Globe) but it was a little like watching a train wreck.  It's very well-done, very very well-done, but not my cup of tea, I think.  I don't want to give away plots but there was just one too many turns for me, particularly in the last moments of the final episode in season one.  Dark laughs followed by shocking circumstances make this a compelling series which is likely to run for a while but as for me, I think I will need a break before (or if) I delve into season two.  Oh, and Ms. Comer should have totally been nominated for an acting award, as well.

"Mary Poppins Returns"

Ben Whishaw and Emily Blunt are having a very good year.  Both appear in multiple projects getting a lot of attention and strong critical reviews.  Disney goes old-school in this continuation of the Mary Poppins series and it positively sparkles.  There is a overture at the beginning, 2-D cartoon animation and a true homage to characters and style of the original film.  Big dance numbers, often started by Lin Manuel-Miranda's character, Jack, really evoke the grandeur of the first movie and a sense of time gone by.  It is a stunning production which lives up to the quality of the first film and makes for a true family film that can be enjoyed by all.  Ms. Blunt strikes the right note as the odd Mrs. Poppins and adult Bates children Michael and Jane are perfectly cast.  The wonderment of Michael's children, of course, is what really sells it.  Again, the child actors rise up to the very high bar with skill.  A cheery, bright and engaging film, this one is something we can look forward to on dark days.  The escape is worth it and the awards being piled on the movie are well-earned.  Take a little break from reality and delve into the joy of the possible.

"A Very English Scandal"

This very (very very) British miniseries is based on actual events in the 1960s and 1970s.  It is well-done and has a few sad laughs but didn't really rock my world.  In talking with a UK resident I realized that the challenge is context.  This was a big deal in England but as an outsider who barely understands their current politics I didn't have a lot of understanding of time and place.  That's not to say it wasn't good.  It was entertaining and thoughtful.  Questions about homosexuality and politics intertwine to make for a rather nice debate about power and its abuse, as well as how society reacts to their leaders.  Hugh Grant does an excellent job sinking into the role of Jeremy Thorpe and Ben Whishaw makes for a appropriately irritating foil.  The bizarre events in their decades-long fight is real, making the tale even that more darkly humorous and slightly twisted.  There were minor concerns about ages.  Hugh Grant is a bit long in the tooth to be playing a character 30 years his junior and Mr. Whishaw is not, in my humble opinion, aged up well enough in the latter scenes, but the overall story is told and does make a mark.  Worth it if you are a fan of Downtown Abbey and the like.  Those crazy Brits!

Tom Clancy's "Jack Ryan"

I don't dislike these kinds of action/adventure tales but I have quite frankly never taken them too seriously.  There are good guys, bad guys, things blowing up, etc.  This series pleasantly surprised me.  Yes, there are things blowing up, frequently, but there is tremendous subtlety not typically seen in work of this kind.  Instead of black and whites there are greys.  The CIA officer is conflicted about his work, the soldier is guilty about the lives he takes, the terrorist plays Monopoly with his kids, a Muslim man gives tea to the man who killed his son.  And the women, oh, the women.  With spines of steel the women in this series were light-years beyond Bond bimbettes.  They aren't a size two and they fight to do the right thing, often at their peril.  I've never cried in an action film before but I cried several times during this series, including a moment on a beach, looking into the faces of refugees desperate to find safety.  I don't think this story would have been told this way a few years back but I am thankful for its relevance and the powerful points it makes in the current day.  Bravo Tom Clancy and Amazon.  This was a thinking person's action tale.  Absolutely worth the time.

"Escape at Dannemora"

You wouldn't think that a sensational prison escape which happened not-so-long ago could make such a compelling miniseries but it truly does.  Creators get credit for telling multiple stories of all those involved.  The most striking, of course, is that of Tilly Mitchell, played brilliantly by Patricia Arquette.  A tremendously complicated character, Arquette finds all the levels in this woman, communicated by a look, a grunt, a terse word.  With the arguable exception of Lyle Mitchell no character here is portrayed in a simple way and one sees the sides, as it were, of people who are pretty a-moralistic to begin with.  It was engaging in the same way as a page-turning book is.  You know what's going to happen but you have to watch, racing to get to the next episode.  Directed by Ben Stiller, there was a good deal of consternation by the people of upstate New York who were most impacted by the escape and thought that Stiller's involvement meant that the tale was being turned into a comedy.  They couldn't have been more wrong.  This is a quiet, thoughtful, well-done piece of work (with a nice soundtrack, to boot).  Not for the kids, the sexual activity is clear from the very beginning and episode six detailed in graphic violence.  Episode six is retrospect, showing how these two men ended up with life sentences.  For the very squeamish it could theoretically be skipped and not destroy the overall narrative.  That being said, watch it.  Really, really good.

"Beautiful Boy"

This seems to be the season of good performances in so-so films.  Such is the case of "Beautiful Boy", a painful tale set in the midst of the modern opioid crisis.  Timothee Chalamet has again gained a good bit of attention for his work as a troubled young man but I was impressed by Steve Carrell as the father who would do anything for his child but can't stop his son from falling off the cliff of drug addiction.  Sadly, Mr. Carell is not nominated in the SAG awards.  If he was, I would vote for him.  There is something unique about a parent's pain, and a parent's struggle, watching their kid suffering.  Mr. Carrell does it brilliantly.  Outside a a few good performances the film is otherwise a bit of a scramble and didn't really hit the emotional notes I expected it to.  The gifted Maura Tierney isn't given much to do and the editing bounces back and forth along the timeline, layering vocal tracks from the current period over visions of the past and vice versa.  It can be jarring and confusing.  Characters, such as the boy's NA sponsor, look interesting but barely make an impact as they come in and out of the narrative.  The younger siblings appear in several scenes but always seem to be the same age, despite the good number of years which are most likely covered.  Lastly, this film makes the same sin as many others these days -- it keeps the dialogue quiet and soft, then blares music, requiring the viewer to ride the volume button on the remote.  The opioid crisis is important and a host of new films coming out are addressing it.  I can only hope that some of them are better put together than this film, which comes across as Ladybird filming with the heavy-handed moralism of an after-school special.  At one point "Sunrise, Sunset" from "Fiddler on the Roof" swells underneath a parental pacing, which left me groaning, not crying.  The film is based on a book.  Read the book, you are more likely to get authenticity. 

"The Handmaid's Tale"

"The Handmaid's Tale" by Margaret Atwood is one of my top ten books of all time.  Because of this, I was eager to watch the Hulu series but am essentially too cheap to pay for every streaming service out there.  Fortunately, as a member of SAG-Aftra I am given the opportunity to preview films and series where actors have been nominated for an award.  In retrospect, the cost of a Hulu membership would have been worth it.  This series is truly brilliant and will be getting my vote for best female actor and possibly for best ensemble.  Season one (borrowed from my public library -- thank you!) echoes the book both in tone and style.  The novel was written in the early 1980s however, so there are some updates.  There are also changes in plot which were discussed between the creator of the series and Ms. Atwood.  Great respect is given to her vision and the changes made are those which represent the difference between pages of a book and a story told on a screen.  Readers of the book will not be disappointed and those who haven't read it will find real substance in the series.  Elisabeth Moss gets a special shout-out as the series is not dialogue heavy.  Much must be communicated through a look, a posture, a small gesture.  Ms. Moss surpasses expectations by showing her tremendously complex emotional world through the tiniest actions.  I did worry about season two.  The first season ends as the book ends.  How do the producers move on without the brilliant prose provided by Margaret Atwood?  They do, although it took until episode four in the second season to fully win me over (prepare for emotional turbulence after that episode).  There is a good deal of going deeper, exploring the various Handmaids, Wives and history leading up to the current timeline.  What I particularly like about this series is how female centered it is.  Yes, there are male characters who drive some of the action but the focus is on the women and nothing about their roles is simple.  The complexity, the struggle with who they are, what they are asked to do and how they interact with each other is the essence of this story.  It is a powerful manifesto which is sadly ironic in our current climate.  I'm not saying it is easy viewing.  It's not.  There were times that I had to step away, the tale haunting me.  But it should.  It should haunt, it should challenge, it should make us think.  The producer has said they could go "for another ten seasons."  I hope not.  This show is amazing.  It is also palpably painful.  I want an end, and a happy one at that.  I'm not likely to get it but if this tale has taught me anything it is that hope and resilience not only can survive, but that they must.

"A Star Is Born" (2018)

If my calculations are correct, this is the fourth version of this tale to make it to film.  This one, starring Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper, continues the high bar set by its predecessors.  The acting, writing and directing are all superior and the film has an ambience, a watchable quality which makes it hard to turn away from, even in the hard (very very hard) parts to watch.  Lady Gaga has received a good deal of praise for her first film role and she is commendable for being very open, very vulnerable, very real.  Her work, however, overshadows the fact that Bradley Cooper not only acts in the film but directed and produced it.  As an actor he blends into the role far more completely than I have ever seen him.  His Jackson Mayne is a walking disaster with a gravelly voice who is constantly high.  He is a man who is clearly falling off a cliff in slow motion.  I mean, I knew it was Bradley Cooper but I have never seen him like this and had to look twice in the early scenes.  The romance guy he often portrays, even as a broken character in "Silver Linings Playbook", is entirely absent here.  His love for Abby is not that of a smooth player but an act of a starving man finding water.  The love aspect is played well by both actors throughout and is the strong core which holds this destructive path together.  While one might ask why rising star Abby sticks around it becomes so undefinable, yet so obvious, in their scenes with one another.  Near the end, Jackson's final scene is wordless yet immensely powerful and gripping.  I stopped breathing, then I cried for the rest of the film.  Shot with the eye of a painter of the everyday, the film somehow strips away the glamour of fame to find the humans beneath.  Really compelling and worth an afternoon sob.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

With the sequel coming out it was convenient that I was able to catch up on the latest franchise from Lady Rowling on a plane ride from the west coast.  The film was sufficiently well-paced to keep me going and the very talented talented Eddie Redmayne does a great job playing the kooky, off-beat animal lover, Newt.  Katherine Waterston won  the coveted role of Tina and pulls off a somewhat dour, lost soul who (spoiler alert) gets woke before the film ends.  In one of the better supporting acting duos I have seen in a while Dan Fogler and Alison Sudol are scene stealers with their portrayals of a hopeless dreamer and his true love, a telepathic bombshell witch.  Ezra Miller and Faith Wood-Blagrove make for compelling troubled children but most of the other characters, including the talented Colin Farrell and Carmen Ejogo come off as two-dimensional.  It was a little difficult to keep up with the stream of information at the top of the film (which could have also been the anti-motion pills I took on the plane) but try to stay tuned, as one major plot point unfolds at the end (and is the beginning of the current sequel.)  There are enough threads and interesting characters that the tale is not predictable and there is a rich visual quality which definitely kept me watching (even on a teeny tiny back-of-seat screen.)  If not for the Johnny Depp drama, I would be running to see the new film.  Worth it for the set-up if you want to see the one out now.

Mulan I & II

Mulan was a big hit with pre-teen girl crowd when this came out and it is easy to see why.  As voiced by Ming-Na Wen this is a young girl with spunk.  She has a strong spirit and an engaging personality.  It is interesting, however, that this came out some seven years after "Beauty and the Beast" with animation and songs which were somewhat less impressive than those in Beast.  The music can be forgiven.  After the tragic loss of Howard Ashman Disney struggled a bit to fill the void.  It's very evident here where the songs are mostly forgettable repeats of the same chorus, over and over.  The flatness of the images, though, is perplexing.  The only depth one sees is in an avalanche which takes place about half-way through the film.  Effort is made from the opening credits through to the end to honor Chinese culture and history but the cast is nearly fifty-percent white, something which would never happen today.  The sequel, made in 2004, worked to correct this a bit by casting more of the major roles with Asian actors, including more Chinese.  One surprise in the original film was Eddie Murphy playing a very "Donkey-like" character some three years before he did the first Shrek film.  It was an unnecessary character, in my opinion, and a less irritating sidekick could have been created.  The major difference between the two films is that the first is about a search for self, the second is about the search for love.  Something to think about that the search for self is more compelling and interesting than the search for love.  In film, anyway.  Perfectly good fare for younger kids without the nice depth which parents might enjoy.  A live-action version comes out in 2020.  I'm hoping for something with a few more layers.

Suicide Squad

As is my custom, I caught this one a good long while after it had exited theatres.  I can see why it was a hit but not a critic's darling.  There is enough action and skin for the average comic book fan but depth was sorely lacking for 90% of the film.  The one scene with some dialog meat took place late in the film, at a bar just before the big finale.  Margot Robbie was talked about a good deal and I'll give her props for fully committing to the crazy but I have to think that the buzz was as much about her lack of a clothing as about her acting.  Clearly, this thing was written and directed by a man and came off as a bit of a throwback in an era of kick-ass female power-houses.  The biggest sadness was that the attention on Margot Robbie took away from Will Smith, whose subtle, sad, angry Deadshot was understated and brilliant.  Mr. Smith was so immersed in the character that it took a couple of scenes before I realized it was him.  Jay Hernandez, as Diablo, gets a great monologue near the end of the film and does it with skill and grace.  Other than that the rest of the squad, and every other character, comes off as fairly flat and unmotivated.  This is even true of the luminaries Viola Davis and Jared Leto (seriously, Gotham's Cameron Monaghan is a better Joker).  I have to blame it on the writing and directing.  The film is dark, of course, but as the recent Deadpool films have shown, one can have dark without being bleak.  In this case, I didn't mind watching it on the small screen.  While there is talk of a sequel I won't be running out to see it.

Humana Festival, The Complete Plays

When looking for new monologues there really is nothing greater than short plays.  You can find a wide range of styles and characters in plays which aren't hugely well-known, so you don't have to worry about doing the same piece as everyone else on the block.  The Humana collections (I have several) are great for this.  Recently finishing the 2004 version, I was able to find half a dozen monologues.  The plays ranged from a epic poem lasting a few pages to lengthy multiple acts.  Most are not realistic and range from absurdism to modernist.  On a personal level this worked for me and not.  There were plays I loved (one, in particular which I would love to direct) and plays I couldn't make heads or tails of.  This was particularly true of the final "play" which was four plays by different authors interwoven.  It was too many characters, too many threads.  I found myself reading and re-reading whole pages to capture the storyline.  That being said, collections like these are a boon to actors.  I'm definitely looking to update my holdings to some of the more recent options.

New Season

Well, it's been three to four weeks, so time to review the current TV season.  If nothing else, the new shows have distracted from the endless drone of our infant-in-chief as the midterms warm up.

Best goes to ... "Sorry for Your Loss" streaming on Facebook and "Doctor Who" season 13.  "Sorry for Your Loss" can be difficult to watch at times but is so clean, direct and real that it kept drawing me back.  Elizabeth Olsen is a winner.  Expect kudos in award season.  "Doctor Who" finally got a female doctor.  A diverse cast which looks like the real world and Jodie Whittaker.  Need I say more?

Lots of frothy adventure fare worthy of DVR time.  None of these will tax your intellect but all are decent:  "Chicago Fire", "9-1-1" (credit to Angela Bassett for knocking it out of the park at 60!  you go, girl), "Station 19" and "The Rookie" (great premiere with Nathan Fillion being more Malcolm Reynolds than Richard Castle.  Needs to lose the 17 year gap physical relationship, however, with the 47 year old Fillion and much younger Melissa O'Neil.) 

Grab the kleenex:  "This is Us" and "A Million Little Things".  Quality friends/family dramas.

Hospital drama with emphasis on the drama:  "Grey's Anatomy" (continues to balance the medical with the personal, the main reason it is still raking in viewers while other Shonda Rhimes' shows aren't) and "New Amsterdam" which will have liberals in ecstasy.  Ryan Eggold ain't bad, either.

The CW:  Yup, I still watch nearly all the superhero shows and very much enjoy them.  The new "Charmed" appears decent, if not somewhat darker than its predecessor.  Like many shows, the post-911 version is a tad bleaker and more violent.  Bailed on "Legacies" as I am done with the whole vampire stuff for now.

Sitcoms:  Newcomers "Single Parents" and "The Kids are Alright" do well.  The first one is a smart show which requires actual listening to the dialog, the second is more touching than ha-ha.  Both have nice family relationships.  "Modern Family" continues although it is aging.  Rumor has it there will be a death soon?  "The Good Place" remains nicely arch and the CBS Thursday night lineup continues to be a great staple, with one exception.  Leaving the DVR?  Wanted-to-love because of the casts but can't because of the scripts -- "Murphy Brown" and "I Feel Bad".   One is gone already and the other is dropping to the bottom of the list.  Don't forget to tune in for the upcoming season of "The Guest House" next week, now set in a beach town.

Sci-Fi Anyone?  I didn't want to like "Manifest" given NBC's struggle with great sci-fi shows at 10pm on Monday or Tuesday nights.  I fell in serious like for the last four or five shows and didn't want my heart broken again.  Oddly enough, "Manifest" is getting truly great ratings, so maybe it will hang in there.  I've enjoyed watching and continue to hope.  It is as much family drama as sci-fi, so maybe some non-sci-fi types will tune in.

This, of course, is the fall season.  Stay tuned for the Spring season, including the final episodes of "Gotham" and "Jane the Virgin".  Still trying to decide if it is worth joining Netflix to watch my much-beloved "Lucifer".

Crazy Rich Asians

An absolutely delightful summer flick which has significantly more depth than the average Rom Com.  Enough layers to have you laughing, crying, thinking and going "aww" a lot.  Three of us, with distinctly different tastes in storytelling, saw it and all three absolutely loved it.  Terrific actors, writing, direction, cinematography.  Really nothing more to say.  Great film.  Would be glad to see again.  Catch it while you can still see the excess of Singapore on a large screen.

Summer TV

This being summer, there are a variety of offerings.  While I am enjoying The Outpost (on the CW) and am finally binge-watching Leverage, two shows really stood out.

Pose on FX.  Grab the kleenex as this is the "This is Us" for the LGBTQ community.  Set in the late 1980s underground drag queen scene, the glitter doesn't begin to cover up the struggles, not only from AIDS but from society in general.  Tossed away by their families, the core story is how these people ache find a sense of belonging.  Trapped in the sex trade and unwelcomed by the rest of the gay community, they find solace with the families they create.  Production quality is top-notch with major kudos for two stars, MJ Rodriguez and Indya Moore, who captivate with their sensitive, layered performances.  They illuminate the screen in every scene.  Producers have assembled the largest LGBTQ cast ever in this profound, touching drama.  The only piece of advice is to dump or downsize the B line story of mainstream Wall Street types using these women.  Not really necessary, IMHO.  One look from Ms. Rodriguez and you can feel all the triumph and the pain.  Brava, Bravo.  Has already been given a second season so binge season one now.

Dietland on AMC.  Imagine if #MeToo morphed into a femanista terrorist organization.  This complex show is drama, black humor and political satire.  It's difficult to watch.  Even with the outlandish plot lines (Julianna Margolies plays a women's magazine editor who has a lot in common with a certain Scottish drama royal) there is a very real thread in terms of how women view themselves, societal and personal issues of weight and the reasons we don't always report sexual assaults.  The show makes my list of "must watch" because it challenged me in every episode to take what I believe and examine it.  Joy Nash, as lead Plum Kettle, is the standout star and addictive to watch as she peels away the emotional layers to find her center.  Perfect for the end of August, it will leave you feeling "schooled."

A Wrinkle in Time

So bad.  So very, very bad.  A true travesty.  Take a deeply loved children's book and mix it with a director more familiar with music videos than literature and you get two hours of visuals and special effects scored with pop music favorites that not only doesn't bear any resemblance to the original plot of the book but doesn't seem to have a plot of its own.  The plot could be taken as:  Oprah changes dresses a lot, diversity is only possible in families if you adopt the children (and Asian kids are always brains), and "Tessering" is a fun psychedelic experience which includes music by Sade and Sia.  Given the great cast and impetus to update the story a bit this could have been much better.  I spent the entire film wanting it to be better.  Next time, Hollywood, get an experienced director.  For those still looking for a decent film version of this book, try the 2003 made-for-TV version.  It's plodding but so much better than this.  But then, anything could be.

Wash, Rinse, Repeat

Finally splurged to get the Castle DVD set.  Ironically, this summer also saw a whole series of Castle rip-offs.  Seriously?  Cable TV seems to be caught in the same morass of Hollywood and Broadway, struggling to come up with something new.  That being said ...

Castle -- the semi-original.  Oddball cop pairings are nothing new but ABC did it well with Castle, which bounced between kind of funny and kind of dark without going too far in either direction.  The chemistry between Castle and Beckett always seemed a tad forced, IMHO.  I was nearly laughed out of the room when I once made the mistake of saying this out loud.  I was vindicated when the series wrapped and it was revealed that Fillion and Stanic were definitely not on each other's Friends and Family plan.  It doesn't matter.  Flying quips and good pacing, along with predictable but interesting twists, made this worth the hour.

Take Two -- Unlike Castle, where a writer shadows a cop who flings subtle insults at him backed by a quirky cast, this one is a troubled actress who shadows a private eye/former cop who has little respect for her.  They are backed up by a quirky cast.  Seeing a pattern?  This one is almost too hard to watch.  Plots are utterly forgettable and the solution to the mystery easily reached in the first five minutes.  Rachel Bilson is bubbly to the point of being in a sitcom, while Eddie Cibrian is just moody.  Makes the chemistry on Castle look good.  While it has aged better than the premiere promised, I don't see this one staying on my DVR.

Private Eyes -- this Canadian import on Ion is about a former hockey player shadowing a private eye who was a cop's daughter.  They are backed up by a quirky cast, which includes a blind daughter for the hockey player.  This takes a page from the Castle playbook as Castle's interactions with his mother and daughter were some of the best scenes of the show.  In Private Eyes, it is a father and daughter but doesn't stray much from the formula.  The mysteries are a tad more complex, the characters somewhat more real and overall show less fluffy than Take Two.  If I had a choice between the two shows, Private Eyes wins hands down.

Carter -- another Canadian import (on Bravo) which features a troubled actor shadowing his female cop friend.  Frankly, by the time this one debuted, I was done.  Didn't even bother.

Who wore it best?  Castle.  Private Eyes is a contender, though, and worth a summer play.

Deadpool

Hands down one of the more conflicted reviews of my life.  I LOVED the humor, which begins with opening credits and was smart and sharp.  I laughed through the entire film, which had an interesting plot -- and that's not easy to say in the glut of super-hero films out right now.  This one manages to avoid the cookie-cutter storyline in almost every action movie of the summer.  They do it by allowing Deadpool to be the complex anti-hero that he is.  But.  This isn't just R Rated, it is the closest I have seen to an "M" rating in a long, long time.  Every song used in the film is a rap thing with the F word throughout.  The violence is visceral, with digitized blood spatter on the camera lens, a beheading in the first three minutes and brain matter spewing out repeatedly in head shot after head shot.  There are a lot of head shots.  And chest shots.  And yes, more beheadings.  Not to mention the sex -- although I'm never going to complain about seeing Morena Baccarin in hooker-wear.  All of that being said I'm giving it a thumbs-up.  Prepared for the gory violence, lewd conduct and obscene language I could tolerate, even enjoy the sequel.  This is tongue-in-cheek (and other places ...)  If I know that and don't take it seriously, there are serious hee-haws to be had.  But don't take the kids.

This is Spinal Tap

Nope, never saw this.  Feeling a burning need to understand the pop culture references to this 1984 film, I finally carved out time to check it out.  HILARIOUS, in a very dry sherry way.  From the opening DVD slide (don't push Play too fast) through the credits this is one subtle but ridiculous film.  I'm not sure it was the first mockumentary but it is definitely one of the best.  Coming across so legitimate that the uninitiated might mistake it for reality you really have to pay attention to the dialog (and exploding drummers).  I was laughing days later and still thinking about it.  Yes, this could have been the Beatles had they made it to the 1980s.  Bravo to the very clever writers/producers:  Michael McKean, Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer and Rob Reiner.

Oceans 13

George Clooney, Brad Pitt, etc.  Cons, thieves, Vegas, twists.  No better or worse than the other two, just a fun, airy way to spend a couple of hours.  I was going to say, "Yay, I finally finished the Oceans franchise" but now there is Oceans 8.  Definitely looking forward to exploring the X chromosome version.

The Giver

Somehow this 2014 film slipped by me.  (To be honest, a lot of things have slipped by me in the past few years).  Since it got very iffy reviews I didn't put it high on the list.  That was a mistake.  In my humble opinion, it is great.  Strong cast and well directed, there is little to pick on.  The struggle, I think, is a typical one.  When you have an award-winning, classic book, people who love the book will never like the film version because a two hour movie just can't capture all the subtleties of a book.  And for those who haven't read the book (yeah, you should really read the book) you might feel a little lost.  In this shorter film there isn't a lot of time given to exposition, so the viewers have to jump right in.  It's an amazing book and there is a reason it is still being read all these years later.  The issues it deals with are complex and film isn't always the best medium for complexity.  That being said, the director (Phillip Noyce) does a good job of finding the right balance.  He incorporates modern news footage into the "memory" sequences which gives context to the messages the Giver is trying to share with Jonas but he also keeps the pace up.  For me, the film works because it honors the ideas and concepts of the book but allows the film to be a different entity and that, I think, is the best you can do when taking a book to film.  As long as you can appreciate the difference between a movie and a book, this is totally worth the time.  (PS, on a very similar note, check out the Wonder film).

Coco

In addition to reading a little and writing a lot, I am using the summer to explore the treasures that are APL DVDs.  Coco, winner of last year's animated film Oscar, was the most recent delight.  And a delight it is.  Visually stunning, fresh and layered, this one is a film which can really be appreciated by the entire family.  Demystifying death by exploring the Dios de la Muerte celebrations of Mexico, the movie touches on deep topics with a sensitive brush.  The hugely engaging and fully dimensional lead character, Miguel, feels so real he could step off the screen and be one of any of the kids who play ball in the street on my block.  With enough twists to keep me engaged (I didn't see most of them coming) and a well-thought out script I fully enjoyed this contemporary, clever tale.

"Snuff" by Terry Pratchett

I got this book through a series of happenstances.  I found out at the last minute that Sir Terry Pratchett was doing his "final book tour" and would be in DC at the end of the week.  Days later I was at the booktalk and had dug up the funds to get a signed copy of the book from, and picture with, the author.  I treasure that photo, when Mr. Pratchett said I must be a librarian, as I had the Orangutan hair!  Unfortunately life intervened and the book sat on a shelf for nearly a decade.  I finally had time to read it this summer but I have struggled with it.  I have read none of the "Men At Arms" series of the Discworld novels and haven't, in fact, read any Discworld novels in nearly 20 years.  Jumping in at the middle as it were, I tried to catch up with the many characters and histories, including a version of Ankh-Morpork which seemed to be more Steam Punk than the mythical world I remember.  That being said, the character of Sam Vines was perfect for me in this place and time.  Sam Vines is a strong but flawed leader who is forced to take a vacation with his much smarter wife and inquisitive son.  I literally picked this book up on the first day of retirement when I was feeling a little lost.  Vimes' struggles matched my own.  Sir Terry's prose also remains excellent.  Take this line:  "Vimes also indulged in a rare cigar because, well, what good is a snooker room without smoke twisting among the lights and turning the air a desolate blue, the color of dead  hopes and lost chances?"  It is that prose, and his biting social commentary (this book features a group of creatures considered to be somehow "lesser" in the society, a perfect lesson for America in 2018) which made Sir Terry Pratchett a brilliant literary addition to the modern canon of fiction.  Bravo and RIP.  You are missed.

"A Skinful of Shadows" by Frances Hardinge

Honest to goodness if my life was a little different I would have sat down in a big comfy chair to read this and not gotten up until it was done.  At 415 pages it isn't short but it is very, very good.  Ms. Hardinge takes the troubled times of Charles I in England and interweaves them with a gothic tale of soul-eaters.  The result is a tale which is unexpected and engages.  The story unfolds around central character Makepeace, a Puritan by birth and heretic by nature.  Contrary and strong-willed, it is her unshakeable core which allows her to survive the unthinkable.  The world-building here is without flaw and the story weaves in such a way as to pull the reader in.  A page-turner with complex language and imagery I was surprised that this was a Middle School pick but an advanced reader will appreciate the richness of the narrative.  Makepeace is committed to survival -- a trait I love in a heroine.  Brava to Ms. Hardinge for taking a mystical creature in a strange time and making her feel dimensional and real.  A worthy, delicious read.

"The Seventh Most Important Thing" by Shelley Pearsall

Another quiet book about a young boy coping with loss, this one had a surprise for me -- it is based on a true story!  Kind of.  The main character, the inciting incident, etc. are all fictional.  The subject, however, James Hampton, and his artistic creation, are real.  In the novel, a boy named Arthur Owens takes a violent action against a man he perceives to be homeless.  The complexities of the action, of Arthur, and of James Hampton, however, make for a revealing, healing tale.  Arthur escapes prison for his crime and is allowed a chance to make up for his actions.  The assignments he is given are mysterious to him and the lessons are subtle, more allusions than pedantic.  The thread of the book is one of discovery.  Along with Arthur, the reader goes on an internal journey to learn what redemption can mean.  Sweet, touching and unexpected.  Worth the read.  For more on James Hampton and his work, see:  https://americanart.si.edu/artist/james-hampton-2052

"The Stars Beneath Our Feet" by David Barclay Moore

Mix Jason Reynolds' "The Boy in the Black Suit" with a healthy dose of Jacqueline Woodson's lyric style and you get a sense of the gentle novel about a boy struggling with the violent death of his older brother in Harlem's rougher neighborhoods.  Wallace, aka "Lolly", is thoughtful and sweet.  Most of the tale is told through his internal reflections as he uses the construction of Lego buildings to salve the wound of emptiness left by his brother, Jermaine.  Mr. Moore does a great job portraying the cycles of grief -- the anger, guilt and more.  Add in a host of interesting and unexpected characters and you have a story which meanders more than moves but it will touch your heart.  This winner of the Coretta Scott King Steptoe Award for New Talent is promising.  There are some questionable jumps in the narrative but this is a minor complaint.  The story isn't about A to Z, it is about feelings and those feelings take Lolly where they take him -- physically and emotionally.  The voices of each character are well-rounded and compelling.  I look forward to more works by Mr. Moore.

"You're Welcome, Universe" by Whitney Gardner

This novel is fascinating, frustrating and a bit fun.  Julia, a Deaf high schooler who loves creating street art, has been expelled from her deaf school for a work in the school gym.  Her new school is "hearie" and she struggles on multiple levels ... with her interpreter, her lack of friends, her Moms, her desire to create, and more.  Julia's voice is strong, powerful and real.  The issue of signing vs. lip reading is well portrayed and this book is the first I know of to address the topic so seamlessly.  I didn't even understand the emojis at the beginning of each chapter but it speaks to the visual nature of those who are d/Deaf and hard of hearing.  The story isn't perfect.  Julia is a passionate young woman who flies off the handle at every provocation and her whining/fury did get a little tiresome but I can't say it is an inaccurate depiction of a teen girl -- right down to the girl drama.  Transitions are sometimes abrupt and some will bemoan a hearing author writing about the d/Deaf and hard of hearing community.  That being said, credit to Ms. Gardner for creating a fairly edgy, crunchy character you still care about.  Despite her many faults Julia's heart shines throughout.  Secondary characters are created with multiple layers of complexity and the artwork depicting the various creations enhances the tale a good bit.  This won the Schneider Family Book Award for best story of the disability experience for teens this year (even though deafness is not seen by many in the deaf community as a disability -- read the book for more).  Not bad for a first work.  Well deserved.

"Leadership and Self-Deception: Getting Out of the Box" by the Arbinger Institute

Of the three Arbinger books I have read this year, this was the hardest.  Not that it was bad but each of the other two had a hook while this book was slower and more introspective.  "The Anatomy of Peace" blew me away with the take-away messages and stress reduction. "The Outward Mindset" was impressive for the real-world stories and application.  Like "The Anatomy of Peace" this one has a pseudo-setting (taking various clients and combining them into a narrative) but instead of a group setting, this narrative focuses on a single person, "Tom" meets with his new boss and gets challenged in ways he doesn't expect.  If you can get past the artificiality of the premise, the lessons are still there -- clear and simple and powerful.

"In the Footsteps of Crazy Horse" by Joseph Marshall III

I wanted so badly for this to be good.  Apparently so did the Virginia State Reading Association in selecting it for their annual Readers' Choice event.  I know why they picked it.  In striving for diverse titles we are woefully short of material on Native Americans.  This should have fit the bill.  It is authentic (the author is a Native American) and covers "the other side" of history by telling the tale from the side of the Lakota tribes.  Unfortunately, Mr. Marshall primarily writes nonfiction for adults and his attempt at writing a fiction tale for youth is predictably strained.  The book is a story within a story.  The better part of the tale is the inside story.  Snapshots of critical moments in the life of Crazy Horse are covered in the style of Native American storytelling.  They have an authentic cadence and structure and are compelling.  The outside story bogs the whole thing down.  The idea is that a Grandfather takes his grandson, Jimmy, on a journey through the various monuments of the upper Midwest, following the path of the famous warrior Crazy Horse.  Just when you start getting into the stories there are needless insertions of pointless information, which is often repeated ("Remember, it was very cold").  There are also inaccuracies.  The Grandfather points to a "photo of Crazy Horse" which has been proved bogus in recent years.  Mr. Marshall wouldn't know this as most of the sources he used in researching the topic are significantly dated.  The details of each stop along their route also include so much specificity that we learn things like "the restrooms are in a brick building to the right of the main building".  Do we really need to know this?  How did this kind of detail contribute to the story?  Answer:  It didn't.  Also problematic was the fake wholesomeness of the relationship.  Young Jimmy often says "For reals?" to which Grandfather smiles and says "For reals!"  It was so cheesy it made the Andy Griffin Show look like 60 Minutes.  We need good stories about our troubled history from the point of view of those whose families and culture were annihilated.  This just isn't it.  Frankly I find more compelling stories in the 1990s TV show, "Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman."

"When I Was the Greatest" by Jason Reynolds

Jason Reynolds writes quiet books.  This story is no different.  Often set in New York's inner city he creates lead characters who are reflective, who care, and who observe their surroundings with a kind of depth which draws in the reader not only to the setting but to the world created by the author.  I like reading Jason Reynolds books.  "When I Was the Greatest" is no exception.  Despite the provocative cover the story here is just a story -- a slice of life.  There are lessons learned and lots of levels and complexities to every character introduced.  This is one of Jason Reynolds' greatest skills.  He creates characters who feel real and you can't help but care about them and connect to them.  In this novel "Ali" makes friends with a pair of brothers who live in the run-down brownstone next door.  "Noodles" is fun, mouthy and hugely protective of his brother "Needles" who suffers from Tourette's Syndrome.  Most of the story takes place over a few days of a hot New York summer with a good bit of reminiscing about how the friendship grew.  Ali is close to his family, which creates a point of grounding not only for him but for Noodles, who tends to walk on the edge.  While events do happen the point of the book is the internal journey.  It always is, which is why his works are so universal.  Almost everything Jason Reynolds writes wins an award.  And well they should.  Enjoy.

"Funny in Farsi: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in America" by Firoozeh Dumas

I wish two things.  #1 That I had read this before reading "It Ain't So Awful, Falafel" and #2 That I had read the "extra chapter" at the end, added in this reprint, before reading the book.  It is obvious that the fictional middle school tome "It Ain't So Awful, Falafel" was an attempt to synthesize this story in a palatable form for younger readers, but this book is so much better.  Essentially, this is a collection of short essays.  Some are about the author's time here as a child, others are about her Berkeley years, her Iranian homeland, her travels, her husband, etc.  But mostly, this book is about family.  The reason I wish I had read the extra chapter first is that Firoozeh is a bit caustic in her humor, making frank (very frank) comments about her family, particularly about her parents.  I kind of laughed and winced at the same time.  The extra chapter lets the reader know that all parties were mostly okay with the content.  That being said the stories are hugely relatable.  I can't imagine a person with a large family ~not~ finding something familiar here.  It was "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" and my personal "Big Fat Irish Catholic Family" all rolled into one.  Hence the laughs, and the understanding.  Ms. Dumas' writing style is accessible and engaging but I'm not sure I saw the "flow" she mentions in her notes at the end.  The short essays sometimes seemed to have a connectedness, sometimes they felt like stand-alones.  They are not arranged in any kind of time-line and often feel like the free-form ramblings you might experience in a story told at a dinner party.  You may not get the point at first but then you do (mostly).  Even when you don't get the point, the tales are engaging.  Some pull at your heartstrings as we experience yet another questioning of immigrants here in this great nation.  It is for that reason that this 2003 book has such power -- it should be a must-read for every member of the U.S. Congress.  Worthy of its status as a bestseller and hugely applicable to our current world.