"Blonde"

Wow.  So much to unpack here.  So.  Much.  First and foremost, this is a movie about a real person based on a fictional novel, so don't look for reality.  And when it comes to Marilyn Monroe, what are the facts?  What is reality?  Much like "Spencer" this isn't a retelling of the woman's career but rather, an internal look at the mind of Norma Jeane.  It's just about a million times better than "Spencer."  The brilliance of the film is evident in a lot of ways.  Ana de Armas does a lovely job capturing the childlike innocence of the woman's public persona and allows her true intelligence and insight to break through now and then.  (My one complaint is that Ana de Armas is very petite and Marilyn was downright zaftig.  So much for Hollywood learning the lesson about trying to fit women into a set ideal of beauty.)  The filming is detailed and beautiful.  There are glimpes of her films but more than that we see the world from Norma's eyes.  There is hope and promise ... dashed, bleary-eyed/drug-induced confusion, an unconnectedness of herself to the people and of events in her life.  There is constant questioning and insecurity.  And there is a switch, so subtle at first that I missed it.  The film is in color, then in black and white, then in color again.  Back and forth, back and forth.  What are these changes meant to convey?  The past and present?  Reality vs imagination?  Norma or Marilyn?  About half-way through I decided it had something to do with her mood.  You know how depression can turn the world grey?  Like that.  Maybe.  Who knows?  And that's the rub.  We don't know the mind of Marilyn.  She has been written about, analyzed, explored for 60+ years now.  Men wanted her, women wanted to be her.  Everyone around her seemed to want to take from her, use her, abuse her.  Some people in her life wanted to own her.  But who was she, really?  Not an icon but a person.  A broken person, certainly.  One who loved often but not too wisely, perhaps.  Beyond that ... well, for all the films and books and fascination, we don't know.  We most likely will never know who she really was.  What she thought, what she felt.  She may not have known those things herself -- more the tragedy.  Collectively we put people up on these pedestals, make them into symbols or gods, and then they die (MJ, Whitney, Robin Williams, etc etc etc) and there is a nagging sense of guilt.  Did our idolization contribute to their tragics ends?  Would there have been a way of caring about them rather than being part of the vampire horde sucking them dry?  Would it have made a difference?  There is a lot of talk about this film.  Everyone has their opinions.  Me, as well (obviously).  But none of it matters.  The Marilyn we talk about today is fiction.  Norma Jeane was a human being.  One who will forever remain a mystery.  

"Uncoupled"

This Neil Patrick Harris vehicle on Netflix is light, fluffy and fun ... given the serious undertones.  It's a Darren Star production and has all the hallmarks of his work.  Characters are full of privilege, navigating New York as if it is a playland, not a city of struggles and class.  Once again, we have denizens of the great city who couldn't use a subway if they had to.  Mr. Harris hits the perfect note as a man whose husband walks out, with no apparent reason, after decades together.  He is a self-involved mess and finds a client, beautifully played by Marcia Gay Harden, who is more messed up than he is.  The production is nicely balanced with co-worker Tisha Campbell playing a wise smart-ass and two friends who put his character in his place (when needed).  I do appreciate that, for once, this is a story of mature folks, of those in their 40s and 50s trying to navigate the world rather than the young and effortlessly beautiful.  It's not deep, it's not life-changing, but it's entertaining.  And maybe, from time to time, that's all we need.

"The Evangelicals: A Struggle to Shape America" by Frances FitzGerald

I have been trying to understand our unique times.  Or are they unique?  I read through this weighty tome (more than 700 pages) to try and get a sense of how we got here.  The book starts in the 1740s and continues through American History at a snail's pace, detailing every evangelical movement, every leader, every event impacting both politics and faith.  It must have truly been a labor of love for Frances FitzGerald, who has created a virtual encyclopedia on the topic.  But it is about as fun as reading an encyclopedia -- plodding and plotless.  I really didn't need to know the biography of every faith leader of the various religious movements in the United States over past two hundred years.  All that being said, I pushed through and I learned a lot.  I really didn't know nearly as much about evangelicalism as I thought I knew, including the fact that the evangelicalism we know today is not that old.  So, maybe it was worth it.  For those who don't want to dig through it all, here are my take-aways:  Evangelicalism has meant very different things to different people in the faith community over the past 250+ years in this nation.  Evangelicals are not a single entity, but rather a large number of disparate belief systems which grew up and out through the major denominations of early America (Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists and Anglicans).  There were major religious movements throughout time and these not only helped to develop the faiths but created schisms and break-off churches.  For the better part of the last 200 years, many of the various evangelical groups have not gotten along, or agreed on fundamental points.  Most evangelical groups shunned the political spotlight and preferred to keep to themselves.  That only changed when an issue of concern (such as the evolution battle of the 1920s) came up.  The groups would come together briefly to involve themselves in that single issue, then fade back into their segregated communities until another topic came up.  In the 1960s a confluence of things created the seeds of modern evangelical efforts.  Society took a sharp left with the Civil Rights acts, followed by the rights battles of women and gays.  The pill made sexual activity more prominent outside of marriage.  The streets of this country erupted with protests and hippies.  Television broadcast images and stories as far away from the "Andy Griffith Show" as you can imagine.  Televangelicals arouse, denouncing the very medium which helped them grow their memberships.  In 1979, a single person, Jerry Falwell, did what few others had done.  He brought a large number of the conservative faith groups, including evangelicals, into a single tent.  He called it the "Moral Majority".  Working with Ronald Reagan he and his people got a seat at the table -- and liked it.  The idea of re-making America into a Christian Nation was born.  The moral majority fell apart in the late 80s but the roots were there.  Leaders came together and planned out how to win more elections.  They worked at the grass-roots level rather than at the national level, where they had seen some success and a lot of failure.  They made steady gains in local and state offices, the impact of which is seen today.  They created a playbook of lasering in on a single issue of concern for the people they called "values voters" (gay rights, bad books in schools, abortion, etc) and made that the entire focus of an election.  Today, we call these "wedge issues".  The conservative leaders made it clear from the pulpits of evangelical churches that a failure to act on these issues would have a hugely detrimental impact on the freedoms, rights, even lives, of their devoted followers.  Anyone who disagreed was helping to destroy our nation.  This was an important shift.  Not only were the evangelicals of the 1980s and beyond more political than their predecessors, but they supported political messaging from pastors (which had not been the case very often in the previous two centuries) and they were vehement about stopping abortion ... which many groups had actually supported in the past! (or ignored).  The increase in conservative "news" organizations and Social Media after 2010 allowed the right wing to spread their messages more quickly, and to a wider audience, than ever before, bringing on the Presidential election of 2016.  And here we are.  I still don't buy into it, but at least now, to some degree, I get where it all came from.

"The Rookie: Feds"

Love "The Rookie" and love Niecy Nash, so this show is a natural for me.  It leans into Ms. Nash's quirky, fun personality and retains several of "The Rookie" hallmarks.  We have a person "of a certain age" starting over in a new job with plenty of doubters.  There is bodycam footage cut into the chase montages and lots of action (although the first episode had more casual violence than "The Rookie" usually has, which I didn't care for).  Ms. Nash's character is more confident, and good at her job, than Nathan Fillion's character was when the original series began.  Both characters, though, are good at connecting with people, "read" people well, which gives them an edge.  And, of course, there is the race issue -- which is dealt with in a kind of ongoing, subtle way.  It's good, to see the intersection of race and policing in the modern age from people who represent the complicated middle.  The supporting cast is terrific and includes a lot of familiar faces, including a personal favorite, Britt Robertson.  I'm not wild about the constant focus on Ms. Nash's "attributes" -- it can be distracting -- but as her character says "you be you".  ABC also didn't do the show any favors by putting the show on Tuesday nights rather than allowing it to follow the OG series on Sunday nights, but "The Rookie" has always had midling ratings with a thrive factor in DVR, so it will take time to see how it all plays out.  In the meantime if you like a little action with a lot of sass, tune in.

"So Help Me Todd"

This is classic CBS -- fun, easy, enjoyable.  It has a terrific cast headed by Skylar Astin, who brings his traditional energy and verve to the character.  His character (the aforementioned Todd) bounces all over the place and is alternately obnoxious and funny but in the end, brilliant (minus the ego).  His foil is his mother, played deliciously by Marcia Gay Harden, who is excelling of late in playing powerful, broken women.  Add in a smart sister, an engaged ex co-worker and a legal investigation of the week and you have a show which can slide into your viewing without a lot of work.  It's a pleasant way to spend an hour.  Go for it.

"Quantum Leap" (the 2022 sequel)

So far, haven't been impressed.  Like the cast but the stories are very testosterone-laden.  The first three eps:  #1 A Fast and the Furious rip-off, #2 Spacewalks during a doomed shuttle mission, #3 A boxing tale (usually a last-ditch move in many dying series).  What they seem to be missing is a core facet of the OG "Quantum Leap".  Samuel Beckett didn't jump into world-changing events or semi-famous people.  He jumped into little lives.  Forgotten lives.  A secretary being harassed by her boss.  A young man with Down's Syndrome who is written off by family and co-workers.  People who will never be in the history books.  He sometimes did big things to fix those lives but his greatest impact was in listening and caring.  The best moments?  When Sam talked with someone in a quiet voice, trying to get them to believe in themselves, to see the importance of their lives.  The new series isn't there yet.  It's focused on the events, not the people.  It's not badly made so I'm willing to wait it out ... for a while.  We'll see.

"His Dark Materials"

This new(ish) BBC version (airing on HBO Max) is about a million times better than "The Golden Compass" film from 2007.  It's deeply respectful of the book's themes (although updated to include, among other things, climate change) and filled to the brim with talented actors.  Unlike the film, which was full of "stars", this one has a cast which plays to the subtle aspects of the characters (pun intended ... if you know the books ...).  Watch the thousands of microexpressions skimming across the face of Ruth Wilson, who plays Mrs. Coulter.  The character has layers in the books.  In this production she's a crystal with more sides than you can count.  Young Dafne Keen plays the lead role and brings an energy, passion and freshness to the role.  All of the characters have layers and depth.  You connect with them, which makes it even harder when they ... well ...  

It's not a happy tale.  It never was.  From sleepy beginnings the trajectory, and the body count, ramps up very quickly.  The point is made over and over again.  War is coming.  The great war.  The war to end all wars.  There will be losses along the way.  The story may feature a young woman and man coming into their own but it's not a kid's fantasy.  It is, true to the name, a dark, troubling, difficult path.  

Love the books.  In my top 10 of all time.  Although not an easy read, by any measure, it is a thoughtful work.  One which wraps religion, politics, philosophy and more into the complex narrative.  The mini-series adds to the written work rather than diminishing it.  This is a case where the visual version builds on a strong foundation of the books and makes the story richer.  I started in and finished the first two seasons in under a week -- my heart pounding at times.  Can't wait for season three.  Although -- well, the mountain of loss will grow ...

"The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks"

Films and books are different mediums.  People often blast a film for "not being the book."  I argue that it shouldn't be.  The printed word is not the same as a production with images, sound, and more.  The book (which I loved) tells a story which provides for the reader a certain amount of outrage -- at the lies, the manipulations, the unfairness of it all.  Medical professionals saw Henrietta Lacks as a source, not a person.  They didn't care about her or her family and some dismissed them in gross racial terms.  The film leaves out most of the medical storyline and focuses on the the Lacks family.  Oprah Winfrey does an outstanding job subverting her big personality to truly "become" one of the troubled daughters of Henrietta.  The rest of the cast is top-notch as well.  The writing is strong, the filming delicate and pointed.  One can see, and feel, the pain of a family which was used and abused, over and over and over again.  This came out in 2016 on the (then) quiet Hulu streaming service and slipped under the radar.  If it came out today, with the preponderance of streaming material, it would have been nominated for awards.  A worthy watch, and a worthy read.  Read the book for the facts, watch the film for the feelings.

"Thor: Love and Thunder"

I really don't know what to make of this.  It starts out with one joke after another.  Thor (or is it Hemsworth?) is a little over the whole hero thing and bumbles about, being reckless, and careless, in his work.  Then comes a serious threat and an old love with a secret.  The jokes continue.  And then they don't.  The film twists into a sad seriousness at the last minute and stays there.  I typically love the work of Taiki Waititi, who wrote and directed the latest entry in the Marvel universe.  "What We Do in the Shadows" is one of my top comedies of all time and "Jojo Rabbit" was f-ing brilliant.  ("Wellington Paranormal" is also very funny and worthwhile).  The laughs are there but the balance is not.  There should be a subtlety to the humor, a kind of weaving of story elements and the ridiculousness of it all.  This movie entertains but seem to be a little all over the place.  It's your run-of-the-mill superhero tale but it doesn't resonate.

"Spencer"

Honest-to-goodness, it has been a long (long, long) time since I hated a movie this much.  First, there is the unending opening where the director has the camera stare at trees for an interminable amount of time, then we see Diana in a car.  She gets lost, she wanders into a cafe where everyone stares at her, she is overwhelmed.  She is overwhelmed throughout, and, as portrayed by Kristin Stewart, she is a simpering whisperer who seems to be evoking the spirit of Marilyn Monroe as she experiences weird visions of Anne Boleyn.  There is little dialog, just lots of artful, lingering shots of unhappy people staring at each other.  The images have, perhaps, intent, but it's all kind of lost under a thundering and inappropriate musical score.  This is one of those situations where the director had a story he wanted to tell in some sort of avant-garde way, the facts be damned.  And there are few facts here.  Did Diana make a final trip to Sandringham the Christmas before the infamous divorce?  Yes.  What occurred there?  Who knows?  Not this.  So, my issue isn't just with the "let's make the movie we want to make regardless of whatever" but the fact that Diana was a real person and her sons, still alive, have to deal with this nonsense.  It's disrespectful and gross.  If you have the chance to see it, refuse.  For the sake of Diana's memory, and that of Will and Harry.

"In the Heights"

Nowhere near "Hamilton" this is a small-scale story.  There is love -- of a boy and a girl -- but it is also about love of a people, a culture, a place.  It's a gentle, quiet tale.  You have a young man trying to make a decision, who is looking around his community for guidance.  Song and dance ensues.  It's all quite lovely and has a fresh feel, even though there is a faint reminiscence of "West Side Story".  I enjoyed it.  But, strangely enough, it wasn't memorable.  It didn't "stick" with me.  I wasn't humming the music after I heard it.  It's very worth the two + hours, which fly by, just don't expect it to be a classic you return to over and over again.

"Ender's Game"

It's easy to see why this film didn't make it.  It did have a good cast, Asa Butterfield in particular, but the script just didn't work.  For readers of the books there are too many departures, starting with the fact that they couldn't cast a seven-year old in the role.  For those who didn't read the book it's a fast-paced mash-up of the events without the foundation of the relationships.  Ender's journey as an outsider, his connection with the team he assembles -- there just isn't enough time, in a two hour format, to unfold.  We are left with some random battle simulations without much of an understanding as to why they are so important in the tale.  Should this ever be re-made, it needs to be a mini-series. 

"Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness"

The strangest part of this film is that it isn't really a movie about Doctor Strange.  It's a movie about the Scarlet Witch aka Wanda Maximoff.  Her grief, as seen in the Avengers films and "WandaVision" is a palpable thing and the resolution of that is the real focus here.  Which leads me to the following -- this film has some fun raging through various realities (not as well as "Everything Everywhere All at Once" I suspect) but is just a bit plotless.  I love the actors and enjoy the witty repertoire, but I'm getting a bit tired of every Marvel film existing for no other reason than to set up for the next Marvel film.  So, yeah, it's a needed coda for Scarlet Witch but it clearly leads into a new storyline with a dozen unfinished threads.  And I'm almost at the end of my rope with these unending Marvel sequels.

"WandaVision"

Loved this.  Loved loved loved this.  It's weird, it's unexpected, it's kind of brilliant.  A lot of it, of course, has to do with Elizabeth Olsen, who gets my vote as one of the most underrated actors of our time.  She has a full range of emotions which play across her face, over and over, making every viewing a new experience as you try to understand the kaleidoscope of feelings playing out inside of her.  The concept is terrific and will leave a smile on your face if you, like me, are a long-time TV viewer.  It's a great way to address Wanda's pain and loss, and does a real honor to the roots of the character.  The end ... well, no spoilers ... but it did not go where I thought it would.  I binged the whole thing in a couple of days but kept thinking about it long after I had viewed it.  By all means, indulge.   

"Encanto"

Fun and clever, this is one of those Disney films the kids will enjoy, and most likely will want to watch over and over and over, but there isn't a lot of depth here.  Cute magic stuff, cute songs, a mild point or two ("be yourself" I guess???) and that's it.  It's not one of those clever movies where grown-ups can see stuff the kids don't.  It's not nuanced.  It's just, well, "nice".  And "We Don't Talk About Bruno" will haunt you a bit but not in the earworm way.  It was entertaining.  That's about all I can say.

"Wedding Season"

I thought this Netflix production was a series, not a film.  It might have been better as a series.  Or not.  As it is, there is a major montage in the middle to make up for lack of storytelling.  In typical Hallmark fashion there is a career-minded woman being pressured by her family to find her Mr. Right, and she and an handsome Indian fellow agree to a faux relationship to get their parents off their backs.  You know what happens next, right?  The acting is good, the plot is on the light side -- predictable and boring, and the portrayals of Indian culture is fun and engaging.  So, like any televised rom-com, it's worth having on in the background while you are doing something else but don't expect to have a deep connection with it.

The CW. Again.

So.  As it goes up for sale, the CW has done what it has never done -- cancelled, like, everything.  A fond farewell to "DC's Legends of Tomorrow", "Batwoman", "The 2200" and more.  And it's time to evaluate the new tries.  

First, there is "Bump", cementing the CW as a network of imports.  This one, from Australia, features a thoroughly unlikeable teen who has a baby.  The child's arrival is unexpected and the father isn't the girl's long-time boyfriend.  Complications abound.  Despite the half-hour format, it's not a sitcom and it's not generally funny.  But it's not bleak, either.  It's kind of ... real?  And compelling.  

"The Great Chocolate Showdown" is a game show from Canada.  I generally don't watch these competitive things.  Most weeks I hate how a chef I like, who has previously done well, is booted off for a single fail.  But there is chocolate.  A lot of it.  'Nuff said.

"Leonardo" comes from British actor Freddie Highmore's production company, paired with an Italian broadcaster.  Examining the early life of Leonardo da Vinci it does a nice job of mimicking the art in the filming and taking a subtle approach to a very complicated man.  It's not historically accurate, hardly at all, but it does create compelling characters and spins an intriguing tale.  The cast is strong and the only one fail, in my humble opinion, is trying to convincingly to fit a 40-something actor into a group of 20-something art protegees and make them all look like contemporaries.  I'm willing to overlook it and see where this goes. 

"Turning Red"

This f-ing brilliant animated film does an incredible job capturing the struggle of leaving tween years and becoming a full-on teenager.  Not as popular as "Encanto" I have to say I enjoyed this one more.  It's smart and layered.  The choices by the characters are nuanced, the resolution more real than idealized.  Just a terrific movie for young folk -- and their parents -- to watch.  Wraps Chinese culture into the story a lovely way and respects both the traditions and the struggle of younger people growing up in these cultures.  The characters aren't all good or all bad and even the lead can be irritating at times.  This one I would watch again.

"Look Both Ways"

This Netflix film sits somewhere between the NBC show "Ordinary Joe" and the film, "Sliding Doors".  It's not as depressing as the Gwyneth Paltrow vehicle but it's not quite as well-done as the NBC show.  Like James Wolk, the lead character here, Natalie, has a seminal event (pun sort of intended) at the end of her college career.  It sends the young woman down two completely different paths.  In each life she has a five-year plan which doesn't go as planned.  There is "a guy" in each iteration although they both do and don't have a major impact on Natalie's choices.  There is an attempt to portray her as an independent woman and she has the spunk for it but in typical rom-com fashion the men must be part of the equation.  The film is good but not great.  The ending is muddled -- in part because the beginning wasn't clear on location and how that location plays out in the final events.  Everything is wrapped up neatly.  Perhaps too neatly?  Almost rushed?  It is as if those who produced the movie didn't want to offend anyone and so they just made everything "okay" without passing anything even close to judgement.  It's tricky times to portray a woman in America who may or may not pregnant.  You can try to focus in on the film but may end up thinking about a woman's choice -- or lack thereof.  

"Perry Mason" (2020)

This ain't your parent's Raymond Burr version of the famous fictional lawyer.  It's a completely new take.  Gritty, dark and hard to watch at more than a few points, it's an origin story, and it is done in the style of film noir (not my favorite).  Set in the early 1930s, the violence is visceral and graphic.  Perry is an alcoholic, chain-smoking veteran with no small amount of PTSD from the Battle of Argonne.  He works for a lawyer who has chops, but is fading.  The lawyer manages to keep it together with his smart and sassy assistant, Della Reese.  Paul Drake is now a Black police officer who struggles to walk the line of an impossible existence.  The eight episodes of the first season cover a single, brutal crime.  You want to know all the who and why?  You have to watch all eight episodes.  In true film noir fashion, even the ending isn't a real ending, not in the sense that everything is tied up in a neat bow.  Things come to a natural pause, but a happy path is not in the cards here.  Besides wanting to know what it was all about, I stuck in for two of the leads.  Matthew Rhys can do nothing wrong, in my humble opinion.  And Tatiana Maslany, continuing her tradition of being a chameleon, is transfixing, as usual.  To make the story go eight episodes there are a lot of convoluted plotlines, most of which end up unfinished.  The film-making here is outstanding but I don't know if I will watch season two.  Ms. Maslany will not be back and the whole thing is just way too moody and dark.  But I can't say the first season was bad.  Not at all.  So, it's a dilemma.