"Coco Before Chanel"

This french language film isn't just informative and interesting, it's downright charming.  Audrey Tantou does an absolutely lovely job of portraying the icon in her formative years.  A woman trying to fit in who knows she does not.  A woman with desires she can't achieve or doesn't understand.  In typical french filmmaking style there are a good number of sections with little dialog and lingering closeups.  Audrey shines in these moments as conflicted feelings dance across her face like ghosts haunting her psyche.  It's a film of seeking and becoming, of searching and sometimes finding that which you had never expected.  It's a woman's film but most of all it is a human film.  A terrific watch.

"The Umbrella Academy"

Took a while to get into this one.  There are lots of characters which means a lot of exposition.  It took more than half of the first season to get to some real action and then I guessed the big reveal at the end of season one.  I also don't like that this is one of those shows where the dialog is so quiet that you have to crank the volume, and then, when the (kinda awesome) soundtrack plays you have to pull the volume back down.  It's distracting and irritating.  That being said the show grows on you.  The acting is strong, the emotion real.  While you might have some idea as to what is coming you begin to care.  Which leads to watching the next episode, and the next, to see how things turn out.  It's worth it.  And the second season twist?  Delightful.

"Ghosts"

I kind of love this show.  One of those, "Yay, it's a new episode, I can't wait to see it" things.  The show is a UK remake and, unlike many UK imports, it doesn't seem watered down.  There is a terrific cast which just makes the whole thing layered and rich.  It's smart funny, which I like.  There are fast one-liners which will have you on the floor but you have to pay attention to them.  It's like watching a great sports game -- just keep your eye on the ball.  Absolutely a keeper.

"Coming 2 America"

This sequel, coming some 33 years after the first film, has been criticized as being a watered-down version of the original.  I would agree, but not.  What is seen as being watered-down is bringing it up to speed with the current atmosphere.  Quite frankly, much of what passed for funny in 1988 is seen as downright sexist today.  Without apology the sequel tells a similar story but flips it on its head, giving women not only power but a voice.  And yes, "Black Panther" definitely had an influence here.  That's okay.  With most of the original cast making appearances and those terrific barbershop scenes making a return (I've always wondered if Tyler Perry thought up Madea by watching them) it's entertaining if not racous and rude, like the original.  Did I like it?  Yes.  It was entertaining which is all we ask of this type of film.  For me, anyway.  If you watch the original and think it is the funniest thing on the planet this movie may not be for you.  If you liked the 1988 film but cringe a little here and there then you might like this ever-so-slightly more PC take.  Your call.

"Annie Live!"

Annie has never been a favorite musical.  Other than two terrific songs it's always seemed, to me, to have a weak book and be light on plot.  One of those musicals where the only purpose of dialog is to get you from one song to the other.  That being said the recent NBC live performance was just lovely.  A few technical issues aside the undeniable star is Celina Smith.  She doesn't just have one of the best belts I've ever seen in a singer, much less a 12 year-old one, she simply lights up every scene with her smile and her energy (not to mention competing for attention against an adorable dog).  The company of girls playing the other orphans also deserves a significant nod.  They have the same high energy and pull off some breathtaking choreography.  It's definitely a show where the kids outshine the adults but that's the way it was written, right?  Another round for Ms. Smith who, I hope, has a terrific career in front of her.

"Flipped"

Not sure how I missed this Rob Reiner film which is already eleven years old.  I make it a point to see everything the man has directed and have never disliked a single film he's made.  This one is quiet and sweet.  Perhaps it was so niche that it was overlooked?  1957.  Bryce moves into a new home and is immediately repulsed by Juli, who forms an immediate crush on the boy.  Then, the movie flips.  And we see the first encounter from Juli's point of view.  It continues.  Into tales of school and trials and tribulations and growing up.  The story continues to flip from one point of view to the other.  It's fascinating and a little adorable.  I felt I couldn't look away.  Will Bryce and Juli ever see things the same way?  (Vision is an element of the tale).  Based on the Wendelin Van Draanen book this one is a keeper.  I just wish more people knew about it.

"Let Them All Talk"

This film has one of the most amazing casts we've seen in a good long while and the fact that it was shot, during Covid, mostly on a ship in about a month is equally impressive.  Typical Soderbergh, there are a lot of people sitting around talking.  Given that it is Meryl Streep, Dianne Wiest, Candice Bergen and Gemma Chan doing most of the talking, I'm fine listening.  It's a good way to explore the deep-seated issues between old friends and the problematic relationships of new ones.  The sticking point is that this kind of thing can only go so deep.  When we get to the "real stuff" in the film the emotion is muted.  Soderbergh literally pulls the camera back and distances the viewer from the emotional fallout.  In the end Wiest's character seems to have little relevance, Bergen's character doesn't get any resolution and even the sweet nephew, played by Christopher Fitzgerald, comes off as petty and a bit shallow.  It's interesting to watch for a time but I found myself asking, when it was over, what was the point?  In good literature a character makes a journey, physically, psychologically.  In Soderbergh's films people remain basically flawed, sitting at a table drinking and talking, musing about life but not really living it.

"Cruella"

As far as prequels go this one is top-notch.  It might not satisfy the action film crowd who crave explosions and violent action but it does create a complicated, nuanced explanation of why Cruella is just so darn bad.  Filled with twists and turns you may not see coming there are few places where Estella has a choice on the difficult path of her life.  When she does choose for herself it isn't the person society wants her to be.  And that's the reason I enjoyed the film, because it allows the character to be real even if it isn't pleasant.  An outstanding cast rounds out this very watchable movie.  Beyond Emma Stone's lovely perfomance in the titular role, be prepared to relish Emma Thompson as a really, really, awful human being.  She manages to do it with zest and avoids the tendency in these things to be a two-dimensional cartoon character (bad memories of Angelica Huston in "Ever After").  Enjoy!

"The Wonder Years"

This remake has heart and pathos and Dule Hill in probably the best performance of his life.  Not big on the comedy but huge on the soft, sweet feelings.  Nostalgia squared.  'Nuff said.

"Ordinary Joe"

One of the more complicated stories I've seen on network TV in a long time, this one is great but requires a massive amount of concentration.  Wonderful James Wolk plays the same man in three iterations of his life, each 10 years after his college graduation where he had multiple roads he could have travelled.  After clear delineations between the different storylines in the first episode you have to learn to recognize the sometimes-very-subtle shifts between the three men's stories.  It's made slightly easier by lighting and differences in the character "looks" (hair, dress, etc).  The entire cast, including Wolk, has to shift as well, slipping into slightly altered versions of the same persona.  It's not a small feat and the production does it as well as one can.  Our job as viewers is to follow along.  I am intrigued by the "what if" scenario.  Like "Sliding Doors" we always wonder what our world could have been if we just made a different call at a crucial point.  This show's major message is clear.  No matter what path you take there are challenges everywhere.  Turning right instead of left doesn't necessarily improve your life it just gives you a different perspective.  Worth the time.  A thinking person's show.  A real rarity in this day and age.

"The Big Leap"

So, of course, I'm not wild about the top new show ("La Brea") and the show I do like, "The Big Leap" is at the bottom of the ratings for the freshman pack.  I'm the first to admit it's not artful, but it doesn't have to be.  It's fun.  It's a terrific cast (Scott Foley, Piper Perabo and Teri Polo are joined by terrific fresh faces like Simone Recasner and Karen Rodriguez).  It's a great premise.  It has all the skeez of "UnReal" but is more PG.  Maybe the ratings are low because Americans like to believe that reality TV is, you know, real.  I don't mind the veil being pulled back.  It shows how we are addicted to the so-called drama of other people's problems and makes it clear that what we see on those shows is usually manipulated.  And it's got dance!  Worth an hour (or, you know, 42 minutes).

"La Brea"

The top new show of a lethargic fall TV season, I really want to like this more than I do.  I keep watching.  A little Sci-fi, a decent cast, but somehow it's not coming together for me.  For one thing, it's a little derivative.  With huge echoes of "Lost" and "Land of the Lost" there has been, so far, not a single plot twist which has surprised me.  It's also somewhat plodding.  Despite the urgency of the story there is not a lot of energy in dialog or action to deal with things.  Mostly, it's stuff like "planning" to fly into the mysterious rift, dealing with injuries and arguments about limited food stores, etc.  So, for me, this one is a current watch but I'm not making any promises for the long term.

"Cinderella" (Amazon, 2021)

Let's be clear, I love Cinderella.  Lo-o-o-v-e it.  I have no fewer than five versions of it in my home library.  This new take is ... well ...

"Pitch Perfect" meets any given Disney show in this mash-up which ditches Rodgers and Hammerstein for a series of pop songs.  Our Cinderella of the moment clomps around in some sort of equivalent to combat boots and dreams of working as a dress designer.  She couldn't be less interested in love or, you know, the Prince.  The songs mostly work.  Des'ree's "You Gotta Be" fits perfectly, Billy Porter slays Earth, Wind and Fire's "Shining Star" and Queen's "Somebody to Love" is a showstopper.  Throughout, the choreography (thank you Ashley Wallen) is outstanding.  Unfortunately that's all there really is.  The script is lame, the jokes don't land and the technicolor costumes look like something dreamt up after playing Candy Crush on an Ecstasy trip.  The infamous dress (you know, "the" dress) doesn't fit Ms. Cabello well and throughout the ball I'm watching with discomfort to see if the petite actress pops out of the too-large bustier.  None of the characters beyond Cinderella seem to have any motivation for what they do or why they do it.  Idina Menzel's considerable talent is wasted as her evil stepmother is all over the place.  Pierce Brosnan is so convincing as an awful person that his 5th act conversion is not believable and Minnie Driver's surprising singing gifts aren't revealed until the very end.  She is left making unhappy looks and passive-aggressive comments for most of the film.  When she finally gets a monologue to explain it all it's brilliant.  And doesn't feel like it fits in this particular film.  

There are so many things wrong with this production that it is hard to pinpoint one in particular.  The attempt to modernize, feminize and humorize the whole thing generally doesn't work, with the exception of the one scene in which James Corden and his fellow mice explore their temporary humanity.  Yes, there are talking mice.  This is Disney, after all.  The bottom line is this -- nearly every successful Cinderella film has two critical elements:  Charm and Romance.  This retelling has neither.  Particularly at the end (which ends not as you might think).  It's just a clutter of modern-day references which will age faster than milk on your countertop.  Tweens may like it for five minutes but other than that, don't think this one is headed for the "best of" shelf.

"Wilderness Tips" by Margaret Atwood

This collection of ten short stories may be the most personal thing ever written by the incredible Ms. Atwood.  Set mostly in the 50s, 60s and 70s there are tales of summer camp, of romantic breakups, of women and work.  The events of the stories aren't generally extraordinary but they are bathed in Atwood's rich prose and deep internal reflection.  There is often a slightly-but-not-overwhelmingly creepy thread.  This is also a hallmark for the author.  

For fans of "Handmaid's Tale" this is more of a slice of day-to-day life, but in the hands of Margaret Atwood, it is anything but ordinary.

"The Maid of the North" by Ethel Johnston Phelps

An interesting collection of tales from around the globe highlighting smart women heroines.  Some of the women are brave, most are clever.  All of the stories have been re-written by the author, which works better for some stories than others.  Dated more than you would think for a 30 year-old book, it is very clean and to-the-point, but you lose some of the flavor of the different cultures in this white-washed re-envisioning.  It's a throwback.  Today a collection of stories like this would be gathered from the works of existing, diverse authors.  That would have been better.  

These were entertaining and short (although sometimes abruptly so) but I can't recommend it for modern readers, who demand more authenticity in their "world" tales.

"Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card

Yes, I'm late to the party but the book showed up in my Little Free Library and I needed something to read while traveling, so ...

I do know, as a librarian, this book never stayed on the shelf.  It wasn't just popular it was MASSIVELY popular, and now I get it.  Not that it's fabulous, it's not an incredible piece of great literature, but it has the kind of elements kids love and intertwines them really well.

What you will like about this story:  There is plenty of action, including videogames.  Ender is an intriguing, smart boy, and like so many protagonists in kidlit, he is an awkward outsider.  The battle scenarios are thoughtful, interesting and worth reading more than once.  The book moved and I got through it in two sittings.  Fairly engaging, I was happy to turn the page to see what would happen next. 

In some ways I was surprised.  I thought that this might be a complicated tale with undercurrents of Mormonism (Orson Scott Card is openly Mormon and the books have been called propaganda for the faith).  I found neither of these things to be true.  The book is fairly simple in terms of plot and fits into the mold of most fiction of this type.  I guessed the big reveal at the end and didn't find myself thinking of any deep moral questions when it was over.  And, while there might have been Mormon themes in the story I didn't pick up anything specific even thought I was actively looking for it.  (I'm told the Speaker series is more obviously based on Mormon beliefs).  The only subtext I saw was a real question about war, its purpose and its price.  I appreciated this given the unusual times we are currently living in.

The only element I didn't care for, which has been much talked about, is the age of the character.  I worked in schools for 30+ years.  Ender is six?  Nope.  But I just ignored that.  The film, which I haven't seen, had a sixteen year-old in the lead which fits better.  In my mind, as I read the book, I just aged Ender up.

In any case, a fun and entertaining novel.  Worth it (particularly on a longer flight).

"The Inkeeper's Song" by Peter S. Beagle

I love Beagle's writing.  Its descriptive and poetic, like strolling in a museum of odd, beautiful, disturbing paintings.

This work, like so many of his, has a kind of mystical, dreamlike quality.  Things happen, of course, and the multiple points of view make for a delightful sense of perspectives (one voice is that of a sentient fox).  There is magic and symbolism and a surprise or two.  It makes for an unexpected, fresh tale.  

My only complaint is that Peter Beagle rarely follows up with sequels after taking all the time to create these rich vistas.  By all means, dig in and let yourself wander through a very different world.

"A Royal Night Out"

What a surprise.  Recorded this 2015 film on a whim, thinking it was some sort of Hallmark/Lifetime romantic fluff.  SO wrong.  "The Crown" meets "Roman Holiday" in this light-hearted tale of a young Elizabeth and Margaret taking to the streets of London during the celebration following the end of WWII.  Based on a single rumor that the two young women snuck out for a few hours on VE day this quiet little movie explores some very real issues in a beautiful, subtle way.  Director Julian Jarrold allows the camera to linger, repeatedly, on the luminous face of Sarah Gadon, playing Elizabeth.  She runs the full gamut of emotions from utter joy at her new-found freedom, to confusion over a world she has never been a part of, to a kind of deep, resigned sadness at the reality that she will never have a "normal" life.  It's gorgeous and compelling.  The script is gentle.  It makes clear how clueless the two women are but doesn't make fun of that fact.  It just allows them to find their way as best they can.  In one of the many unexpected turns Elizabeth finds her power by the end of the film.  She is a depiction of Elizabeth the real royals would approve of.  She is smart, determined and confident.  Brava.  Accurate to the period and very British, only the two actors playing the King and Queen are household names.  I can see why it slipped by unnoticed but I'm glad I found it at last.

"Mama"

Having ENTIRELY too much time on my hands, I randomly decided to compare Mama Roses, from "Gypsy", singing "Rose's Turn".  (It's a fave).  Who was the best?  This is an impossible choice, given that the greatest names of stage and screen have played the role.  And yet.  

Here is my completely, utterly subjective take on the matter.

Patti LuPone -- My number one.  At its core, this song isn't just a song, it is an expression of some pretty powerful emotions.  Patty LuPone milks that for every inch, showing a vulnerability that is not typical of this powerful, complex woman.  Rage, grief, everything, it's just out there, bleeding onto the floor.  The song doesn't end on a note, it ends in a scream.  Brava.

Tyne Daly -- With a very different take, Tyne Daly comes in at my #2.  With moves that prove she could have been the star if things had been different she starts out with sheer fury then makes a discovery ... and pivots.  During the song.  You can't take your eyes off her.

Imelda Staunton -- Hard to say what it is with this performance from an actress who typically plays much more sedate roles.  You can't put your finger on it but it's a bubbling mix of emotions which explode halfway through the song.  

Rosalind Russell -- It's Rosalind Russell!  One of the people I want to be when I grow up.  She just has to be on the list.  The vulnerability isn't really there but she pretty much chews up the scenery in every scene she's in.  There's a reason she was chosen for this film role.

Bernadette Peters -- Let's face it, Ms. Peters hits every note with precision, grace and talent.  It makes it watchable.  But the recording I saw didn't have the depth of the other performances.

Bette Midler -- Who doesn't love the Divine Miss M???  Her performance is delightful camp.  It's entertaining.  But that's it.  

Chris Colfer -- Honorable Mention.  This wasn't your typical performance but the emotional notes were there in spades.  Infinitely memorable.  Bravo.

"The Secret Garden" (2020)

Disappointing.  The 1993 version set the bar and this dark and dreary retelling is a pale by comparison.  It looks like the last movie but only on the surface.  Like so many films of late it sacrifices story-telling for visual effects (see my review on the absolutely abysmal "Wrinkle in Time" film).  The magic of the garden isn't in discovery and Mary's personal growth, it is made by digital butterflies and oversized plants with vibrant colors (and the place goes on, like, forever ... not so much a garden as a significant portion of the estate).  Necessary dialog to connect the dots on relationships is thrown out for lingering shots of unhappy people.  Almost everyone is too old.  Colin Firth (at 60) feels more like a grandfather than a father.  Edan Hayhurst and Dixie Egerickx, in the leads, are well into their teens and it shows.  They are world-wise, with no speck of the innocence which makes their lost souls so compelling.  Julie Waters, as Mrs. Medlock, is a talent wasted.  Her character comes off more as an annoying gnat than a formidable presence.  Every important element of the tale has been downgraded, with the new time-period placed inexplicably placed in 1947.  The Indian Partition is a compelling moment in history but has nothing to do with the struggles of Mary Lennox.  Added to this film is a massive fire and a dog.  The only reason for this seems to be giving Colin Firth more screentime and filmmakers who didn't understand the role of the robin who leads Mary to her redemption.  Which shows that these filmmakers didn't understand this story at all.  Stick to the 1993 version if you want tugs on your heartstrings.  This just confuses and bores.