Orphan Black

You know a show is binge-worthy when you simply have to watch the next episode, and the next, and the next.  Orphan Black met that bar and exceeded it.  I stayed up late and watched all five seasons in less than a week.  It was an emotional roller-coaster which had me on the edge of my seat.  Reminiscent of Frankenstein, La Femme Nikita, Breaking Bad, anything from Michael Crichton and a book called "The House of the Scorpion" the show is in no way derivative.  It is engaging, surprising and not nearly as bleak as I expected.  We begin the tale with Sarah, a punk street kid and con woman, who sees a woman who looks just like her in a train station, only to see that same woman step in front of a train moment later.  Sarah, being the practical sort, takes the woman's purse and plunges into a life far different from her own, discovering along the way a network of clones who are identical to her in looks but completely different in lives and personalities.  There are, of course, the big evil corporations, the ethically bankrupt scientists, etc., but the bigger questions of the series focus around nurture and nature, what makes a family and how to find the strength to survive.  It's kind of brilliant and the major kudos go to Tatiana Maslany, the lead actor who is responsible for portraying some dozen clones.  As many have noted her work is incredibly impressive.  It's not just that the characters are very distinct, you quickly forget that this is the same actor portraying all of them.  At times the women have to impersonate one another.  Even this is specific -- the impersonations are slightly imperfect, and are clearly the original character "playing" the woman she is pretending to be.  The CGI is also terrific and in scenes where there are multiple clones it is easy to slip into the storyline without a single thought that this is the same person playing multiple roles.  The show isn't perfect.  Not every clone is fully realized.  The needed humor in one storyline sometimes becomes too much.  Characters seem to change gears quickly and extending the show through five seasons meant an unending list of bad guys trying to do in the women.  Season four, in particular, became hugely dark and fairly gross.  In the midst of it all, however, is a growing bond of sisterhood and of redemption for those whose circumstances made them into monsters.  It's a compelling tale and a show worthy of the many awards heaped upon it.  Go ahead, binge it.  You know you want to.

Good Trouble

I loved "The Fosters" so I wasn't sure where they would go with this spin-off which focuses on "new adults" Callie and Mariana Adams Foster.  The girls have graduated college and are living in Los Angeles.  Callie, fresh out of law school, is clerking with a conservative judge, and Mariana, who went to MIT, is navigating minefields at an innovative tech company.  SPOILERS AHEAD.  The news is mostly good.  Creators have found the core realities to existence for 20 somethings.  Callie and Mariana struggle with money, with work, with relationships.  Like the members of the co-op they live in, issues of identity and their roles in the world are paramount.  Like "The Fosters", most of the events are realistic and well-portrayed.  Guest stars from the original family are frequent and provide a nice grounding to that sense of being a little lost which is so constant with the girls.  The new cast deeply enriches the narrative, particularly Zuri Adele as a rebel with a real cause, Alice Kwan who plays a lesbian in search of herself and a real partner, Emma Hunton as a body positive blogger who paradoxically doesn't always value herself and Josh Pence as the adult in the room who struggles with unimaginable loss.  Rounding out the cast are many solid actors who go far beyond the stereotypes -- a hot bisexual artist who wants to be known for his work, a judge who often surprises, a gay lover who wants to be first on his boyfriend's list.  One challenging thing to navigate is structure of the show.  Most episodes begin with a "now" moment and most of what you see after that is a lead up to the final moment you saw at the beginning.  This isn't made clear from any kind of titling and you just have to get used to it.  Aside from that and the girls having a LOT of "the sex" (what is this, "Sex in the Other City"?) as well as Maia Mitchell and Sherri Saum having become shockingly thin, the show is engaging and compelling.  I binge-watched the first season (thank you Freeform) and look forward to season two.

"What Alice Forgot" by Liane Moriarty

A delightful surprise.  Having torn through a book I took on vacation my cousin offered this treasure, which I managed to read in four days despite the heavy page count.  Australian author Liane Moriarty (sister to Jaclyn Moriarty, a YA author whose "A Corner of White" I really loved) apparently writes a lot about suburban wives and mothers.  This book, where a power soccer mom loses her memory of the past 10 years, brings up great questions about identity, relationships and family.  Intriguing in its slow reveal of Alice's past, it brings in different perspectives including that of Alice's sister and her surrogate mother figure.  These outside voices aren't critical to the narrative but they round out a tale which is accessible and yet not black and white.  They help to make the point that relationships around us, be they family or lovers, are often unexpected and complex.  I really liked the idea that life simply doesn't go where you point it, which is something I have said for years.  The bigger questions -- who stays with you on the ride and whether you can roll with the curves, is one left to the reader to decide.  I liked the concept here and a book which had me thinking a lot about how we move forward.

Blood & Treasure

I tried, I really did.  Four weeks of predictable, massively derivative episodes which had the energy of a slow Sunday afternoon (imagine Indiana Jones mixed with a soap opera, or, you know, the 2nd Indiana Jones film).  Too skinny actors who seemed to be either bored or embarrassed to be working on the project. As each episode progressed I became restless, checking email or news on my phone.  This show made me ache for the recently cancelled Whiskey Cavalier, which had some charm and humor that didn't fall flat.  Don't.  Just.  Don't. 

A Discovery of Witches

Haven't read the books by Deborah Harkness which this is based on but the tale is familiar.  Neophite witch discovers she has more power than she knows and manages to fall for an ancient, sensitive vampire (he only eats deer, really!).  In the meantime, werewolves/demons, whatever, have some issues with this new hookup.  Pacing is slow and very British (this is a BBC offering) and there is much talk and little action.  When there is action the special effects are sadly inferior, looking more like the over-the-top stuff from mockumentary "What We Do in the Dark" than a serious effort to create magic.  What saves the series is very yummy Matthew Goode, whose lingering looks make me downright melty.  Will the series survive?  I'm not sure.  For now, I'm willing to spend a week ogling. 

RIP, Gotham

Truly, one of the highest quality shows I've seen on television in a good while.  It will be missed.  The production, including writing, acting, direction, set design, cinematography, costuming and more can only be summed up with one word -- "Vision".  A strong vision ran through this show from the very beginning to the (almost) end, creating a detailed, visceral Gotham with strong and memorable portrayals of the characters we have known for so long.  We didn't just see all these iconic characters in their nascence, we saw them growing into what they would become.  Huge bravos, bravas, to everyone included in this rich series, including:

• Ben McKenzie -- portraying a Jim Gordon who tried, and often failed, to find the moral center in an environment which was a moral morass.
• Donal Logue -- who I have loved through many a series but found particularly intriguing here as the guy with questionable behavior who looked to Jim for the light.  
• Sean Pertwee -- Alfred kicks ***.  And he's kinda hot.

Bad guys who were so good that they stole every scene they were in:

• Robin Lord Taylor -- for making the whiny, vicious Penguin a whirling dervish of contradictions.
• Corey Michael Smith -- a psychopath to remember.
• Cameron Monagan -- SOOO creepy.  Made me forget Jack Nicholson.
• Anthony Carrigan -- the deadpan humor of Victor Zsasz had me LOLROTF.

And the "are they bad or are they good" folks:

• Erin Richards and Morena Baccarin -- who went through a LOT of changes and committed to all the crazy.
• Drew Powell -- so darned lovable for a henchman.  I cried when you died.  Both times.

And our young folk.  My one and only complaint is that you were written out of the finale, which really should have been your moment.

• Camren Bicondova -- you made Michelle Pfeiffer proud but also made the role your own.
• David Mazouz -- you so totally deserve to play adult Batman sometime.  Really.

As to that last episode, well ... with the series ending the creators felt the need to "bridge" to what was to come.  Problem is that it's not the bat suits and cat suits, it's the troubled people under the suits which makes us watch (Michael Keaton, anyone?)  So I will forever hold the second-to-last episode in my heart, as the characters there were the heart of this show.  Besides, that episode really felt like the finale.

This show was excellence in television.  Had it been anything other than a superhero story it would have been recognized for its work with numerous awards.  A pity.  This show deserved them all.

Five years of watching these well-known paths being travelled.  Thanks for taking me along for the ride.

"In the Dark"

This new show on the CW is so not what I thought it was.  A case of advertising giving the impression of a sardonically humorous series when the reality is much, much darker.  Perry Mattfeld, a seeing actress, does a good job of playing the completely broken, blind Murphy Mason.  Roomate Jess is also admirably portrayed by the talented Brooke Markham.  SPOILER ALERT:  The gist is that Murphy's dear friend is murdered but no one believes her because the body is taken, she was wasted when she found it, and, oh yeah, she's blind.  Murphy continues having random sex and downing morning-after pills with vodka as she pursues her single-handed mission to prove that her friend was killed.  This pulls her into the world of drug dealers, where she inexplicably meets a money launderer who sets her off the deep end by trying to have a real relationship with her.  It's a troubling tale and yet I can't stop watching it.  Providing a deeply needed lighter tone is Rich Sommer, a sweet but hapless cop trying to figure out the best way to support his blind daughter.  The enjoyable actors Derek Webster and Kathleen York play Murphy's parents but are mostly wasted as two-dimensional figures (comforting dad, hypercritical mom).  I'm only three episodes in and part of me is like, "this is good but too depressing" but another part of me is like, "I am intrigued and can't turn it off."  We will see which one will win out.

"Fosse/Verdon"

There were few new shows this Spring that I was looking forward to as much as this mini-series based on a book about the powerhouse dance couple of Bob Fosse and Gwen Verdon.  Played by Academy Award winners Sam Rockwell and Michelle Williams the legendary couple are seen through the lens of time running out, the first episode notating in days, even minutes, as to when Bob Fosse died (right here in Washington, DC, on his way to a revival of "Sweet Charity" at the National Theatre).  Rockwell and Williams do well.  Both move like dancers and they encompass both the passion and destructive nature of this relationship.  Rockwell is particularly chameleon-like, slithering about the rehearsal spaces on the edge of dancing, with Fosse's perpetual cigarette hanging from his lips.  Williams manages to have the charm and lilt of Verdon, although the trademark vocal quiver is absent.  The series is engaging, even if you know the history.  These two made each other better, even when they tore each other apart.  It is nice, after all these years, to see the contributions Gwen Verdon made to Fosse's success, most of which were uncredited.  The show doesn't shy away from Fosse's legendary and compulsive sexual appetite but it does try to put it in context with his tortured childhood.  Similarly, Verdon's past is revealed with surprises which have never fully come to light.  They weren't a perfect couple, but together they created greatness.  A worthy follow-up to some of the high-end mini-series we have seen in the past few years.

Movies, Movies, Movies

Did I mention that I have spent a LOT of time in planes over the last month?  In addition to the three books, listed in the review below, I was able to watch some 12 films while airborne.  Here are my takes.

"If Beale Street Could Talk".  One of the few award films I didn't get a preview of (the other was "Roma"), this is a very quiet, atmospheric film, which is simply a touching, poignant love story.  There isn't a lot of plot, nor dialogue, but the lasting looks between our ill-fated couple (played beautifully by KiKi Layne and Stephen James) are the draw here.  Set in the late 1960s (I think) the city around them creates both a cocoon for the couple, as well as danger.  It was great to watch but was oddly not memorable.  Two weeks later I had to look up the film to remember some key points.

"Eighth Grade".  What's better than an angsty teen?  A movie about an angsty teen!  Elsie Fisher gets major nods here for looking into the camera with such openness and lack of guile that you really buy the idea that this is real life happening in front of you.  It's pretty close.  Without Hollywood flourishes and soundtracks, this simply becomes a tale of a teen girl trying to fit in.  It is touching, funny and sad, with Elsie's character being just annoying enough to seem real but not so annoying as to make you want to slap her.  Kudos also to Josh Hamilton for being the well-meaning dad trying to navigate the hormone filled waters to be a support, or anchor, for his drifting daughter.  Brava, bravo all around.

"Oceans 8".  No better or worse than any of the other Oceans films.  If you have seen one you have pretty much seen them all.  Entertaining fare which is not going to stay with you in any shape or way after the credits roll.

 "Deadpool 2" and "Ant-Man & the Wasp".  I review these together because they are both sequels of films I enjoyed and they both represent a trend in Marvel which I really, really like (started by Joss Whedon on "The Avengers", perhaps?)  The trend is this -- snarky, silly, mouthy, funny, not-taking-themselves too seriously.  Yes, there are big explosions and (in Deadpool anyway), slow-mo sequences of blood and brain matter shooting across the camera lens, but there is also breaking of the fourth wall, snappy comebacks you have to replay to catch and a general sense that these films are what they are supposed to be, entertainment.  Enjoyed them greatly.  Paul Rudd ain't hard on the eyes, either.

"Spiderman, Into the Spiderverse".  Interestingly enough this animated feature follows the trends I mentioned above (in a far more family friendly way, no blood spatter) and really got to me.  An animated feature with an accompanying book (not sure whether the movie or book came first or if they were created together), this one has laugh-out-loud funny moments, social commentary and a Peter Parker worth his weight in gold.  Lead character Miles Morales is drawn beautifully and as his world explodes you see the grief and struggle in every moment.  Commendable also is his relation with his dad, which is rare in teen films but needed so much.  Yes, there is a big battle but there is a lot of growth on the part of Miles along the way and at least one twist surprised me.  Best animated feature I've seen in a long, long time.

"Fantastic Beasts:  The Crimes of Grindelwald".  I really liked the first Fantastic Beasts film.  They introduced a whole new world (New York, 1920s) and Eddy Redmayne was adorable as the awkward, sweet monster-whisperer, Newt Scamander.  I'm not sure why, exactly, I disliked this second film so much.  Yes, I watched it on a plane so there were distractions, and yes, I've come to dislike Johnny Depp as much as I previously liked him, but the film in general seemed all over the place with huge events and little through-line.  I could watch it again at home to see if I still can't follow it, but probably won't.

"The Greatest Showman".  Many (many many) people I know saw this for no other reason than to see Hugh Jackman.  Not a bad thing.  It was ... interesting, if not brilliant.  The musical score was the big standout and I may buy the whole thing just because it was that good.  Much like "Moulin Rouge" the score and particular visuals were more compelling than the whole.  Like musicals of the past the book here was weak, and that was unfortunate.  You can't help but want a deeper look into this man, this story, but the musical setting prohibits that with characters leaping into song the minute things get interesting.  It's not bad.  I enjoyed it.  But it left me with a lingering feeling that I needed to read a book on the man, because, in the end, he was no Hugh Jackman.

"Book Club".  This film gets props for treating older actors as real people with real hearts and desires, who aren't content to sit around playing grandparents and watching their private parts get dusty.  It starts with lust and ends with love, but in the end it's just a romantic comedy rather than anything with any kind of depth and meaning.  I will say though, I've never been particularly attracted to Don Johnson ... until now.  Oy, mama.

"Christopher Robin".  This great little film is strong on many parts, from casting to script to animation.  It was not a box office hit, however, and I can see why.  The first issue is the audience -- it isn't really for kids.  But the adults who would get it would dismiss it as a kind of "Mary Poppins" foolery.  Which is ironic, because that is exactly the kind of adult Christopher Robin turns into.  The truth is that the film is hard to watch.  It's The Giving Tree all over again.  Christopher Robin was a sweet little boy with wonderful friends and then life "happens" and he grows up and becomes a work-obsessed adult.  His treatment of Winnie is painful throughout the film and maybe that's why it is so hard to watch, because it shows us all how we forget the important things in life when we are focusing on what we think are the important things of life.  It's a touching film which produced a single tear here and there.  It's also one that we should all watch, to remind ourselves of the importance of doing nothing.

"Smallfoot".  Any animated film has a certain appeal.  They are fun, often warm and fuzzy, sometimes touching.  "Smallfoot" entertained on a mild level but didn't, for the most part, succeed.  Main character Migo is struggling against the philosophy/religion of his village and believes, against all doctrine, that something more exists out there.  When he discovers it, things do not go as planned.  The heavy-hitting moralism portrayed here drags down the plot and the sugary ending seemed too perfect for our complicated times.  The music and songs were fairly forgettable.  They had some nice elements here, and, again, didn't mind spending time watching it on a plane, but not what it could have been.

"What Women Want".  Yup, it's a really old film and no, I never really saw it.  With a remake of sorts out now ("What Men Want") it was worth seeing.  There is humor and Mel Gibson, who I'm not a particular fan of, is pretty good.  Ashley Johnson was perfect as the ignored daughter and Helen Hunt, well, I just love Helen Hunt.  The film is generally entertaining, walking that line between downright silly and a little insightful.  I was only flummoxed a bit by the end, which didn't seem to fit, or work, just right.  I'm not sure what a good ending would have been but maybe if they didn't have the two main characters hook up there might have been a cleaner solution?  Not sure.  Will have to see the new film and make a comparison.

Books, Books, Books

Nice thing about really long plane rides is the chance to catch up on reading.  Read three books during my recent trip to China.  While I had picked two of them randomly (just wanted really skinny books for my suitcase) the selections all turned out to be weirdly resonant for my first (and likely only) trip to a Communist nation. 

First up was Anthem, by Ayn Rand.  The story of a nameless young man living in a highly controlled society, he is an intelligent, feeling person who has been assigned to work as a street cleaner.  His curiosity gets the better of him and he experiments with leftover Science equipment (a serious breach of protocol) while simultaneously becoming attracted to a young woman working in the fields.  The spare prose beautifully reflects both the bleak existence of his world and the angst he feels in being trapped in a place with no individuality.  Written in the 1940s it could have been penned for China's Cultural Revolution, which occurred some 25 years later.  This is the society the Cultural Revolution might have produced had it continued.  I didn't love the end of the book due to some patriarchal attitudes (again, written nearly 80 years ago) and an unexpected twist in his final discovery, but the tone of the tale perfectly matched the feel of modern day Beijing in surprising ways (older factory workers are put to work as street sweepers).  Ms. Rand makes the point that brilliance can come in small packages.  In this case, a novella of only 123 pages.

Next up was China in Ten Words by Hua Yu.  Again, a perfect choice, as each of the short essays explored issues I was witnessing each day of my visit, and doing so in concise, perfectly selected prose.  There are essays entitled "People", "Leader", "Reading" and more, each covering Mr. Yu's personal experiences and history, along with Chinese history and the country's current path.  Yu rarely makes full-on conclusions, such as "good" or "bad" but simply tells the story and lets the reader decide.  The combination of his words and what I was learning and seeing in China created a rather indelible impact, helping to understand, and perhaps mourn, China a little bit.  The only criticism of this book is that China is moving so quickly that the essays, penned in 2011, are already looking a bit dated in 2019.  The true sadness is this ... Yu makes a great personal connection to China's recent past, drawing out an understanding of difficult times, but the book is ... you guessed it ... banned in China.

Last was Thomas More's Utopia, this one translated and notated by Paul Turner.  I'm glad of the lengthy introduction and extensive notes.  It helped me understand better a book everyone seems to talk about but perhaps have not actually read.  We talk of "Utopia" a good deal, but it is clear that More was not really describing a perfect society (the actual translation for Utopia is "no place" and the narrator of this fiction is a man named Raphael Nonsenso).  This mythical land has war and slavery and capital punishment.  There is also euthanasia and divorce, which Thomas More was unlikely to actually support.  There is paradox.  More talks about religious tolerance, sort of.  Atheists are tolerated as long as they keep it quiet but those who break canon law can be killed.  It's all a bit of a muddle.  Through the notations by Mr. Turner I began to see the book as a kind of Science Fiction of its day.  From H.G. Wells to Star Trek, Science Fiction has often been used as a kind of cloak to talk about modern day issues.  In 16th Century England More could not speak out about practises in the court which he disliked.  By penning this semi-humorous, outrageous tale he could hide criticisms in ridiculous banter and pray that Henry VIII didn't quite catch his meaning.  The book was oddly predictive.  Written in 1515 it nearly perfectly describes the excess of the The Field of the Cloth of Gold, a meeting between Henry VIII and his French counterpart, Francis I, five years before it actually happened.  (Maybe Henry never got around to reading this particular book).  It also predicted More's own death.  Near the end he states that the residents of this nonsensical nation, praying to their God, say they would "rather come to Thee by a most painful death, than to be kept too long away from Thee by the most pleasant of earthly lives."  More's counterpart, Raphael Nonsenso, somehow knew that his brand of honesty could never be tolerated by a nation's leader.  In any case, the reading was thick -- had to stop to digest frequently -- but interesting.  The Communist thread which ran throughout (again, not something More supported) was interesting to consider, given that this was created some 500 years before Mao got his grip on China.  I wonder if Mao read this, or what More would have thought of Communist China.  Real communist states don't really live up to the ideals set forth here, but then any society with real people, as opposed to fiction, must deal with the real human traits of ambition, pride and envy.  Seeing Mao's China and More's Utopia side by side was nonetheless interesting and made for a good final read on my last week or so there.

"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values" by Robert M. Pirsig

Yes!  I read a book.  It was hard.  Really hard.  This novel hooked me in the first few pages but I had to take repeated "brain rests" along the way.  It isn't really a book about zen.  It does have a good bit of motorcycle maintenance in it, but that information is provided as metaphor more than for practicality.  While most people remember the title, it is the subtitle which has the most importance here.  So what is this book about?  After 406 pages all I can say is that I'm not really sure.  It's about a lot of things.  It's about nature, about a road-trip, about a father trying to connect with his son, and with himself and his past.  It's about philosophy and it is about madness.  Pirsig presents this tome as a semi-real version of events surrounding a road-trip he made in the early 1970s.  He frames the narrative as a "Chautauqua", a kind of entertaining learning experience, and internal monologues become lectures to explain and define his theories.  He goes deep into the roots of philosophy, drawing from it the conclusion that life is about "Quality", something we know exists but cannot define.  Using a wealth of knowledge the book had me scrambling to learn more about the early Greeks and modern day theorists on the nature of truth, goodness, and more.  It was very deep reading.  I had to read passages over and over then set the book down to think about what I had just read.  There were tremendously insightful sections and parts which were nearly undecipherable.  Pirsig's observations of the world around him and need to understand the underpinnings of existence could be exhausting.  They did, in fact, drive the brilliant author to an insane asylum in the early 1960s where he received electroshock which effectively wiped some of his memories of the fanatical breakdown he suffered while trying to prove his thesis over that of academia of the 1950s.  While the zealotry he expresses in his "new church of reason" can be hard to take, his reflections also include tremendous insights.  Take this passage, which is possibly more relevant today than when it was written.  He notices a good deal of loneliness in people of the big cities, and says "Technology is blamed for a lot of this loneliness, since the loneliness is certainly associated with the newer technological devices ... but I hope it's been made plain that the real evil isn't the objects of technology but the tendency of technology to isolate people into lonely attitudes of objectivity."  When he talked of "truth" winning out over "good" in the minds of Greek philosophers I couldn't help but wonder what he would think about the United States at this time, when "truth" has taken quite the hit.  It was a hugely engaging and slightly frustrating book, and one I might return to someday, as I may want to start over with an understanding of what it is trying to say.  In the meantime, I think I need to bone up on some basic philosophy to help with the context.

"Won't You Be My Neighbor?"

In typical Monday morning quarterbacking, a good number of folks felt that this documentary should have won this year's Oscar over "Free Solo".  Having not seen any of the other nominees I can't say which documentary film should have won, but I do know that this film was very, very good.  Beyond telling you about the subject, Fred Rogers, and revealing several things I didn't know, there was something to be said for the style of the project, which tried to echo Fred Rogers' personality and beliefs.  In that sense it was a quiet film, one which was gentle and took time.  In addition to the actual footage, some of it behind the scenes, it relied heavily on the comments of people who had worked on "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" for decades.  It says something that these people not only worked on the show for many years but still had good things to say.  When Fred Rogers talks about the importance of just being still, the camera stays on him and the filmmakers allow the audience, too, to take a moment to just reflect.  Much like the famed children's series, this documentary isn't too splashy and one viewer who watched it with me fell asleep.  Unfortunate as there is a larger issue here -- an America where all of the values Fred Rogers championed have fallen apart.  At one point, where there is an exploration of the rumor about his sexuality, it becomes clear that the modern world simply doesn't seem to have room for a decent guy like this.  And that is kind of tragic.

A Tale of Two Movies

 "Love, Simon" and "Boy Erased" were both released in 2018, both are based on books, and both deal with young men who struggle with their identity as homosexual men.  "Love, Simon" is pure fiction while "Boy Erased" is based on a memoir by Garrard Conley, who was placed in a gay conversion program by his conservative minister father.  Both films are good and tend to strike at the heart-strings.  "Love, Simon" however, is more of a slice of life with a fair amount of humor and day-to-day pathos.  "Boy Erased" is darker and involves rape and suicide.  I liked "Love, Simon" better as I felt like it was intriguing to explore the idea that homosexuality is still an issue in these supposed open times.  The movie rang very true for me in terms of how teens think and act, with complexity in the relationships between the four core friends.  I also didn't mind the lighter tone.  I really don't think everything of value has to be heavy handed.  There was a point in YA lit where every gay character faced abuse or death ("Annie on My Mind" for instance).  "Love, Simon" is far past that time, making the struggle for sexual identity a normal right of passage and not a devastating issue which will destroy one's life.  It looks at the lead character holistically, a young man who doesn't just have a secret, but deals with the fallout of some poor decisions, as well.  "Boy Erased" is compelling, almost entirely due to the unspoken struggles lead character Jared faces, played extremely well by Lucas Hedges.  The script and editing, however, are a bit staccato, and we veer from one scene to another, some of which are flashbacks in no particular order, making it difficult to stay emotionally in tune with the damage being done by the conversion therapy institute.  For those inclined towards liberal sympathies this film will create some outrage but I couldn't help but think a better produced film would have made the points more organically rather than the heavy-handed efforts here.  It should be noted that the people I watched this film with preferred it to "Love, Simon" but that is the beauty of film.  It is a subjective art.  Select one, or both, movies and compare them yourself.

"Girls"

What if ... What if "Sex and the City" was remade for today?  What if it featured the women not in their settled careers of 30 somethings but of the really early years, in their 20s, when jobs were hard to get and even harder to keep?  What if they weren't size 0 fashionistas but real women who focus more on what's going on in their insides than what they are wearing on the outside.  This is "Girls" the Lena Dunham series about a group of young women trying to navigate the world -- work and love -- in the NYC of the modern age.  A clear homage to "Sex and the City" there is plenty of sex and lots (and lots and lots) of focus on Adam Driver's penis.  I enjoyed season one and the "real" of it all but didn't make it too far into season two.  Being a good bit past the daily angst of youth I got a little burned out on Hannah's continuing need to be involved with a man who is clearly not good for her (Mr. Big, anyone?)  There is also a lot of nudity on the part of Ms. Dunham, which began as revolutionary and freeing but ended up feeling gratuitous.  That being said, it's a great show and has a lot to say about women, their roles, their lives.  This is the complicated, messy stuff and Lena Dunham doesn't shy away from making one or more of the characters fairly unlikeable as they swing through the emotional rollercoaster of trying to figure out their path.  A good addition to the new definition of female as Hollywood struggles to figure us out.

"What We Do in the Shadows"

In anticipation of the new FX series, I watched the 2014 New Zealand film by creators Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi.  Hysterically funny in a dry, kind-of "off" way, the original film focuses on a group of vampire roomates and their familiar being filmed, presumably, by a documentary film crew.  A mockumentary of sorts it induces the mundane into the profane creating humor through dissonance.  Not lacking in blood and gore it is hard to take it seriously given the deadpan line deliveries by characters to the camera in the midst of the carnage.  It struck me as the kind of Monty Python humor which ranges from chuckles to outright guffaws depending on the hour of the night when you are watching it.  The first episode of the TV show keeps closely to the premise and maintains the low-budget look.  Actors are equally committed to their over-the-top droll vampire characters, complete with ridiculous accents and big hair.  It was funny although seemed less-so than the movie.  That may be the difference in format.  Thirty minutes is a significant change from two hours.  I will continue to watch as they find their footing, but I'm likely going to save it for late nights when I'm a little punchy anyway.  If you are looking for something which is a COMPLETE ESCAPE from everything real, go for this. 

"The Village"

NBC has come up with a "This is Us" follow-up pairing.  "The Village" is a hanky-inducing sob-fest about various members of a small apartment building in New York.  SPOILER ALERT  Characters are what you might expect.  There is the mother with the pregnant teen daughter, played by the too-pretty Michaela McManus and the somewhat too old to be playing a teen, Grace Van Dien.  There is the disabled, troubled vet played by able-bodied Warren Christie.  There is a law student who brings his mouthy grandfather home to live with him.  There is a cop who loves a woman who is an undocumented immigrant.  When she is taken by ICE, he takes in the woman's kid.  Lastly, there is the oft-under appreciated Lorraine Toussaint, the social worker who holds it all together for everyone else but is hiding her own health crisis.  It lacks the personal touch of "This is Us" but has potential.  The show walks the line between truly good drama and soap-opera pablum.  Not sure which side it will land on but l am more than happy to watch for now. 

"Hidden Figures"

Finally got to see the movie everyone was talking about ... from two years ago.  Such is my life.  Like most "historical fiction" this film takes huge liberties with, well, the truth, but succeeds anyway given that it has a stellar cast and a good number of "truths" to explore beyond the actual history.  The truth here is that women, black women, black women in the sciences, had a horrendous time finding acceptance in the 20th century.  It wasn't just one battle, it was many ongoing ones.  The men in their lives didn't understand how a woman could work, much less in a field dominated by males.  The female co-workers were often secretarial types resentful of any woman, particularly a black woman, being elevated to a position of power or authority.  Being able to share in the office coffee pot at a time when there were separate water fountains or use a convenient bathroom were symbolic of the tiny wars being waged across America on a daily basis.  Favorites Taraji P. Henson and Octavia Spencer do a tremendously good job walking that impossible line -- being subservient and unoffensive even though their characters knew better than those above them in the work hierarchy.  Janelle Monae, newer to the screen, does a solid job portraying a woman whose is determined to reach for her dream, no matter how much the bar is moved.  Yes, there are a couple of "white saviors" here.  Such is the ugly truth.  When a group is being put down, it takes at least a few of the privileged class to "see" what is happening (or "get woke" in modern parlance) and address it for others to rise up.  Don't let that fool you, however.  These are women with voices.  They may speak quietly but they have a strength of conviction which each of them unfailingly commits to.  Although many of the major events of the film are known history there are still chills and tears.  Worth watching.

Sad

Bunching together a number of reviews for new shows as few are worth an individual mention.  Bottom line:  save the space on your DVR.

"Proven Innocent" is a show about a woman who was convicted for murder, served time, and was then exonerated.  Along the way she became a lawyer and now works for a law firm committed to freeing those who are wrongfully incarcerated.  If the plot seems familiar, it is.  There is little originality here and the show depends on politically tinged, emotional plot-lines which only occasionally hit home.  The actors seem mostly irrelevant with the heavy-hitting morality playing throughout.  For instance, there is Rachel Lefevre in the lead role.  Her talents are wasted.  She plays a whiny, unlikeable character bent on revenge.  Kelsey Grammar is her mustachioed villain and all the sidekicks are fairly forgettable, with the exception of chameleon-like actor Vincent Kartheiser, who's investigator character is just ... weird.

"The Enemy Within" borrows so many plots from recent shows I looked twice to make sure the set wasn't one from another FBI/CIA drama.  Even the actors are re-hashed.  Lead actor Jennifer Carpenter played a federal agent in "Limitless" and co-star Morris Chestnut seems to have patented the law and order guy who has a soft side.  The show could survive all of this if not for a dour, dark production which leaves one more depressed than entertained.  I'm hanging on to see if they find their way but I pretty much doubt it.

"Fam"  Despite a stellar cast this is unfortunately one of those cookie-cutter sitcoms with bad writing, bright lights and overacting.  There isn't a drop of reality here.  You would think networks would have learned by now (MASH, Big Bang Theory, Mom) that good comedy needs to be anchored in something.  One exception -- Odessa Adlon is a breakout star.

"The Fix"  Marcia Clark has had a top-shelf career but clearly regrets her one historic loss -- the prosecution of O.J. Simpson.  This show has a great cast, good writing and strong direction but the over-arching self-flagellation and wishful "re-do" through arch plot development kills what could be a decent show.

    

"Whiskey Cavalier"

A fun, frothy, action/comedy/romance show for the Spring.  This is the show ABC has been trying, and failing, to make for a few years now.  They finally hit gold with the casting, a better timeslot, and catchy, engaging dialog.  Scott Foley plays a great comedic sideman to Lauren Cohan's cranky isolationist.  Sidekicks Ana Ortiz ("Ugly Betty"), Tyler James Willams ("Everybody Hates Chris"), Vir Das and TV veteran Josh Hopkins as an irritating philanderer round out a team which bats the one-liners around like pros.  It's a show worth watching.  Do listen to the back-and-forth, which contain enough jabs to keep you smiling through repeats.

I Am the Night

'Tis the season for mid-season debuts.  "I Am the Night" is a six part miniseries based on the book by Fauna Hodel, called "One Day She'll Darken."  It is a biographical tale of the grand-daughter of Dr. George Hodel, a prime suspect in the Black Dahlia murder.  Fauna, raised by a black woman and told she was biracial, discovers her past and some disturbing mysteries when, as a young woman, she tried to piece together her parentage.  Possibly a child created by incest between Dr. Hodel and his daughter, or a child resulting from the rape of her mother in a mental health hospital, Fauna lived a difficult life, as did her mother, Tamar Hodel.  The novel was a way of addressing her abusive childhood and the unique perception she had on race in America.  The miniseries makes a muddle of it all.  Ignoring the facts it focuses on a fictional reporter, an ex-Korean War soldier who is hooked on drugs and gets beat up pretty much every week.  Additional fictional characters, and events, are used to try to beef up the narrative but fail.  Episodes one through four are simply boring and the over-the-top violence and creepiness introduced in episodes five and six do nothing for the narrative.  It's a shame.  You have great actors -- India Eisley and Chris Pine commit to their roles despite inconsistencies and a lack of script-based motivation, but they do so in a fog of film noir atmosphere which drowns out the possibly provocative conversation about race in the 1960s and sexual abuse by family members.  Written by the husband of Patty Jenkins (the brilliant director of Wonder Woman), and directed by Ms. Jenkins, it is all atmosphere and no meat, simply a meandering tale full of sound with no fury, signifying nothing at all.  Sorry I spent six hours on it.