TCM Classic Film Festival

A silver lining to this Covid thing resulted in the cancelled Turner Classic Movie Festival placing many of their materials onto the network over a long weekend.  It allowed common folk like me to see a huge number of interviews, commentary and classic films (many of which I had inextricably missed).  Weeks of thoughtful, impactful viewing followed.  Though I knew her story, I was struck by the luminous fragility of Marilyn Monroe in two different films.  I shook my head at the towering vocal gifts of Judy Garland.  I added a third “A Star is Born” to the versions I’ve seen – a timeless tale reflecting three massively different periods of time.  I smiled at the brilliance of Peter Lorre, who could be horrific yet sympathetic in the same instant.  I was transfixed by the massive scope of “Metropolis”, brilliant long before anyone knew the power of this complex film.  I was surprised by “Lawrence of Arabia”, which was massive in scope but ultimately a very personal story.  I also found “Casablanca” to be unexpected – not as “great” of a film as I thought but oh, the cast, the cast, the cast.  I loved how Cary Grant brought humor and charm to a Hitchcock film.  I was awed by the physicality of the silent film era and Gene Kelly, a guy who looked like a boxer but moved like a supple ocean wave.  I giggled at the salacious content of films before a restrictive Hollywood Code took over and laughed again at how subversive sexual themes wiggled into post-code films.  I cringed at the racism, sexism and stereotypes which were considered “normal” in the first half of the 20^th Century.  I was intrigued by the complex, messy realities of “Floyd Norman:  An Animated Life”.  I watched the fall from pinnacles over and over, from “Grey Gardens” to “The Magnificent Ambersons”.  I marveled at how Orson Welles used light, and dark, as characters in his films.  I found myself riveted in front of a screen instead of zoning out, breathless at the scope of film history in the first 50 years or so of the medium.  I gained insights from those who hit it big but found stability in an unstable business (or left it entirely), including Luise Ranier, Eva Marie Saint, Norman Lloyd, Kim Novak and more.  Yes, I watched “Grey Gardens”, “Safety Last!”, “Double Harness”, “Mad Love”, “Some Like it Hot”, “A Star is Born” (1954), “Metropolis”, “Baby Face”, “The Magnificent Ambersons”, “Singin’ in the Rain”, “The Passion of Joan of Arc”, “Red-Headed Woman”,  “Lawrence of Arabia”, “North by Northwest”, “Floyd Norman:  An Animated Life”,  “Night in the City”, “Jezebel”, “Casablanca”, “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes”, “The Lady Vanishes” and finally, with the weirdest opening credits ever, “The Women”.  It was all-encompassing.  And now, onto the very end of “Star Wars” …

"Jezebel"

I’m binging a bunch of classic films, thanks to the now-cancelled TCM Classic Film Festival.  While most are going into a single review this film deserves more comment. 

Imagine:  Politics ripping a country apart while a fast-moving infection destroys a city and closes borders.  No, I’m not talking about now.

Imagine:  Antibellum south.  A fiery, spoiled belle will let nothing stop her from pursuing a decent man who has married someone else.  She destroys a simple minded guy in the process as she uses him for her own gain.  Disaster strikes and she finally sees the light – maybe – and the film ends on an ambiguous note.  No, I’m not talking about “Gone With the Wind”. 

1938, a year before GWTW, a rival studio (Warner) tried to one-up MGM by releasing this remarkably similar film.  It starred Bette Davis, who was miffed that she got passed over for the lead in the “other movie”, a role which went to nobody Vivien Leigh.  This story was a virtual carbon copy but filmed in black and white with a much smaller scope.  The racism and sexism is as prevalent as it is in GWTW but is more heavy-handed with Ms. Davis’ character, who is compared to a child, a harlot and beating is repeatedly recommended (with a smile) as a way of straightening her out.  The title is biblical and makes it clear that she isn’t just being unladylike, she is literally breaking commandments. 

It’s called the greatest role of Bette Davis and had a star-studded cast which included, among others, a very young Henry Fonda.  Ms. Davis and her co-star, Fay Bainter, won Oscars for their work.

However.  I can’t not compare it to GWTW, which is better.  This film is rushed and it shows.  Edits are jerky, the script is thin.  Only the great actors manage to give meaning to a lot which feels meaningless.  And you just can’t compare the 104 minutes of this film to the 238 minutes of GWTW.  The carts of sick people being wheeled through New Orleans is powerful but pales in comparison to the bodies in the street after the fall of Atlanta.  Scarlett O’Hara faces the Civil War.  Julie Marsden (aka Jezebel) faces the ire of rich people when she wears a daring, inappropriate dress to a party.  The most interesting part of GWTW, Scarlett’s ability to fight, is negated in “Jezebel” as the end credits start rolling just as Julie faces a real challenge.  I couldn’t root for her.  Scarlett, for all her many (many, many) flaws, had something admirable.  Julie was just a girl who broke convention and was seeking absolution.  Scarlett never got, nor asked for, forgiveness.

As to Ms. Davis, yes, she is great.  She was always great.  Personally, though, I liked her later roles.  I liked it when she had enough power to stand up to the studios and play women who didn’t simper.  I like the real Bette Davis, not the pretty girl with the cultured tones which starred here.

Mid-Season Television

Just as networks are dumping the Autumn clunkers (say bye-bye to "Almost Family") my DVR is getting full again with new series.  It is the usual mix of "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly".

The Good:

"Miracle Workers:  Dark Ages" is even funnier than the very unusual first season.  Changing up the premise entirely (the first season was based on a book where a bored God decides to do in Earth unless a bunch of heavenly office nerds can get two humans to find true love) this historical setting allows for scathing satire of modern-day issues.  Playing a self-involved Prince and a Shit Shoveller, respectively, Daniel Radcliffe and Geraldine Viswanathan make the humor work by treating the ridiculous lines with utmost seriousness.  Their "all in" dedication makes the show hugely engaging.  Steve Buscemi goes from God to hapless but well-meaning Dad, and does so with aplomb.

"911 Lone Star" takes the over-the-top style of the original show and totally makes it work with a different focus, themes and cast.  Big stars here for some real diversity and some of the best work I've seen Rob Lowe do since "West Wing".  The only negative is Liv Tyler, whose whispery line delivery seems odd at best.  She seems out of her depth and dumping the character would be a plus.

"Dispatches from Elsewhere" is a kooky, weird and sometimes inexplicable mini-series which will be enjoyed by fans of "Mr. Robot", "Falling Water" and "Legion".  Is it a test, a game, a government conspiracy?  Who knows?  With a healthy dose of anti-capitalism there is an overarching message of hippy-style love, called the "divine oneness" in this offbeat cinematic adventure.  The essence is that we aren't them and us, we are "we", humans who innately and intimately understand the trials and tribulations of each individual.  With a stellar cast and highly creative filmmaking, it's a definite keeper.

"Motherland:  Fort Salem" has a film-like quality to it.  In "Divergent" meets "Charmed" this dark show envisions a militarized America, run by the female descendants of the Salem witches.  Even better than it sounds the characters are layered, the story complex, the world well envisioned.  My only qualm is that we are, as a nation, struggling with the idea of female leadership.  Depicting women leaders as vicious and possibly corrupt pretty much plays into that stereotype.  That being said the performances transcend any messaging.

"Council of Dads".  "A Million Little Things" meets "This is Us" in a tear-jerker slice of life show.  A blended family provides a good amount of diversity and a strong cast helps viewers connect.  The gut-punching first episode will have you reaching for the tissues but it is likely to lighten up a bit in coming weeks, along with strumming a few more heartstrings.  A nice option as the regular shows begin to wind down for the season.

"Almost Paradise".  Those mourning the death of "Hawaii 5-0" will love this frothy replacement which stars yummy Christian Kane in a typical role of scary spy guy who can kill you with a finger but has a mushy soft heart.  Arthur Arcuna and shapely Samantha Richelle are solid and round out a cast of actual Filipinos (the series is filmed in the Philippines).  100% enjoyable with very tolerable drama.

"The Baker and the Beauty".  SO much better than expected.  What could be a forgettable girly popcorn show is actually something with depth.  There are beautiful people, sure, but they are age appropriate.  Nothing is black and white -- fame has real advantages as well as a darker side.  The aforementioned baker isn't just some poor shlump, he is part of a strong Cuban American family who have built a successful business.  We see the sparkly part of Miami but the working side, too.  The premiere successfully had me engaged and intrigued by the multifaceted supporting characters as well as the palpable spark between the leads.  Worth a watch, and not just summer escapism.

The ???:  

"Party of Five".  This one took a while to get into as the first handful of episodes were so emotionally dark.  By episode four or five they found the beginning of a balance, adding in the trials and tribulations of everyday life.  One character also disappeared suddenly (Amanda Acuri as a possible love interest for older brother Emilio), but was quickly replaced.  The immigration theme is powerful and makes for a great contemporary twist.  If they can continue growing the bonds between the siblings and mixing it up with ups and downs, I'm in.

"Everything's Gonna Be Okay" is a quirky, weird comedy from Australians Josh Thomas and Vivienne Walshe, who also star.  It's funny in the same way as "Better Things" is funny.  Not so much with the ha-ha but more wry irony about the challenges of life.  Lauded for casting an actual person with Autism as a person with Autism I tried to get over the fact that the actor is much older than the character she plays.  What hooked me, however, was a first sexual experience scene which was more realistic than anything I've ever seen on film.  It was followed by a frank discussion of what consent means for those who are labeled as "special needs".  The show is, quite frankly, very, very odd.  But it can grow on you.

"Broke" is a pretty standard sitcom but is a good bit stronger than "Carol's Second Act".  Starring two of my favorite actors (Pauley Perrette and Jamie Camil) I'm willing to hang in there a bit to see if the stupid/pat jokes make way to something more real.  I don't necessarily need guffaws with sitcoms but I do need them to step out of the cookie-cutter flat jokes and create connections.  The Chuck Lorre shows are good examples of sitcoms which hit on feelings rather than rely on tired gags.  Ms. Perrette, the actor playing her son, Mr. Camil and a "butler" played by Izzy Diaz are all showing the ability to transcend the simplistic and familiar plots.  Jamie Camil, in particular, always plays an over-the-top character but still manages to exude caring and warmth.  It's like you could meet him in real life -- and like him.  The biggest problem at the moment is Natasha Leggero's character, the sister of Ms. Perrette.  She's strident and fake and irritating, speaking in a faux accent most of the time.  The saving grace is that in each episode thus far there is a fight between the sisters.  Out of that comes honest conversation, and from that there is hope that this show can improve.

"68 Whiskey".  In the first five minutes I was ready to dump this show, billed as a "modern day MASH".  Opening scene was a too-skinny blonde having sex in a trailer with a soldier (who is not her boyfriend) followed by a boxing match.  Not my thing.  But producers Brian Grazer and Ron Howard have some real creds, so I hung in there.  There are things I like and things I don't.  As the characters are rounding out I'm connecting to the story developments more but still feel they could cool it with the sexualization of the female characters.  It's also hard watching lead character Roback fail, week after week, in his money-making schemes.  It's like "Two Broke Girls" meets "This is Us" or a much sadder version of Klinger or Johnny Gage.  The whole thing is a bit dark, so I don't know if I will hang in there, but for now I'm keeping it.

Less intriguing is "Awkwafina is Nora From Queens".  Although I like Awkwafina I'm struggling with the rude/crude nature of the comedy here, which often focuses on cringe-worthy things like vaginal farts.  Maybe I'm just too old.  Seems like every other comedy these days is about Millennials who smoke too much pot and can't get it together to move out of their parent's house.  All I can think is "grow up already".  Outside of seeing BD Wong in a very untypical role, I might have to call this show "one and done."

The Ugly:  

I'm not loving "Zoey's Extraordinary Playlist".  While the ensemble cast does a good job dancing and singing to a wide variety of tunes and the overall concept is cool, the lead actress is just unlikeable.  I'm not sure if she is written that way but I'm having a hard time dealing with what seems to be a near-constant whine.  Similar to "I Ship It" in structure the casting is generally odd, as most of the lead actors (Peter Gallagher, Lauren Graham, Mary Steenburgen) are not known as singers.  Their acting is great but the singing sometimes seems strained.  Alex Newell is a standout as the best friend but it's hard to count on a supporting player to bring heart to the project.  This one is in my "We'll see" column.

I tolerated "Katy Keene" for three episodes before saying no.  Too much saccharine and as shallow as the comic it is based on.  Stick to "The Bold Type" -- a very similar plot with much deeper storylines.

"Moana"

This was a great film to watch after having visited Hawaii last fall.  There was more detailed Polynesian mythological history than I found on the islands and a lot of views of the terrific natural features which are so breathtaking.  The water depicted in this animated film is particularly beautiful -- alive and reflective, the bright clear colors you can find in many of the Hawaiian beaches.  The story is compelling and lead character Moana is a tremendously strong young woman whose determination is admirable.  The music is fairly secondary.  Unoffensive but forgettable I was surprised to see Lin Manuel-Miranda wrote some of the tunes.  Honestly the story was powerful enough to survive without the soundtrack.  Auli'i Cravahlo's voicing of the main character is outstanding.  It is as if her infectious positivity inhabits the illustrated character.  Like all Disney movies there are life-affirming themes woven in.  The one about the dangers of isolationism struck me as particularly pertinent at this point in time.  It's a lovely, well-paced film with interesting characters and somewhat predictable plot twists.  Definitely worth a watch although my experience of swimming with Manta Rays in Maui definitely enhanced my appreciation for the whole thing.  Mahalo!

"Onward"

Yeah, I'm watching a lot of films.  As I attempt to see everything of interest on Disney+ I viewed "Onward" last night.  Between "Up" and "Frozen" Disney has perfected a kind of formula which includes complicated sibling relationships and pathos mixed with laugh-out-loud humor.  It works, beautifully, and creates stories which aren't pat and clean but messy and real.  This film, about an awkward boy turning 16 who misses the father he never knew, will make you cry as well as put a smile on your face.  The messages are clear -- believe in yourself and love those around you.  They give you more than you might ever realize.  There is subtle humor here, too, about how we have a tendency to settle, to deny the greater parts of ourselves.  Cloaked in a world of magical creatures who have become ordinary this film is a bit of a clarion call to push past our comfort levels and become the best version of ourselves.  An absolutely fun, inspiring movie. 

"Frozen II"

People slammed this film for no other reason than it wasn't the first film.  Well, of course it isn't.  That being said, I kind of loved it.  Totally held my attention and kept me involved.  There are different themes and no break-out song but there is thoughtfulness here, including the idea that the characters, and the viewers, are growing up and changing.  The romance is again checked by the sisterhood bond, resulting in a nice balance of interchanges between the characters.  Yes, there are some political themes but they aren't overt and don't supersede the basic humanity of the film.  Absolutely worthwhile, just don't expect a repeat of the first film.  Personally I'm thrilled that it (literally) explores new territory.  Will I watch it again?  Of course.  Right up there with the "Shrek" series, which brings a smile to my face every time.

"Funny Lady"

Hadn't seen this film since my youth (a very, very long time ago).  I remember liking it a lot less than "Funny Girl", which also wasn't my favorite film of the Barbra Streisand oeuvre, but couldn't remember details.  I was an incredible fan of the very petite, incredibly talented woman and saw every film she ever made.  Both films are about Fanny Brice, with Streisand playing the comedienne who got her big break in the Ziegfeld Follies.  The first film was a masterpiece, the songs indelible.  The chemistry between Babs and Omar Sharif absolutely burns up the screen.  If the ending was not what I would have liked it is only because this is a biopic.  Real life rarely ends in Happily Ever After.  The sequel was ... well ... like so many sequels of uber-popular films, ill-advised.  Madame Streisand is given a number of songs to show off those singular vocal chords but none are in any way memorable.  Just to remind you how much better the music in the first film was the earlier tunes are often played as instrumental background throughout scenes.  Odd that they made the choice to actively remind folks that the first film was just better.  New love interest James Caan doesn't carry enough spark to light a single candle, a fact that the Brice character acknowledges when she makes it clear that this is the man she settles for.  The whole thing is a muddle to highlight big stage numbers rather than individual stories.  The only good thing I would say here is that I didn't appreciate the sensibilities of the older Brice character when I was younger.  Seeing it now I like the strength of a mature Fanny, a woman who knows who she is and what she wants.  She is a woman who has the strength to cut and run, to stand on her own.  There is something very modern about her.  That's pretty much it, though.  Basically a film to have on in the background while you finish a puzzle or do some housecleaning (day 24 of the lockdown ...)

"Stargirl"

I found this on Disney+ and thought it was the "Stargirl" series upcoming on the CW in May.  It is actually a new movie based on the Stargirl book by Jerry Spinelli.  When the book came out, some 20 years ago, it was an instant classic which remains popular to this day.  A familiar tale of school bullying, Stargirl puts a spin on things by introducing a lead character with real "something".  She is intriguing, creative, and unique, particularly to interested guy Leo.  I hadn't read the book in over a decade so I knew there were some changes in the film but had to look online for details.  As suspected, the brutality of the bullying is harsher in the book than in the film, where Stargirl is accepted a tad more readily than one would expect.  The ending is also changed although in this case I would say that the film ending works very well.  Mostly, it's just a touching, simple film which will pull at your heartstrings.  All characters, from the leads to the smallest of supporting actors, deliver terrific performances.  The messages are clear but don't hit you over the head.  It's a worthwhile way to spend a few hours.

"Young Cassidy"

One of the movie channels dove deep into the past, showing this 1965 film for St. Patrick's Day.  Based on the Sean O'Casey book Mirror in My House it featured some of the biggest actors of the time.  Australian Rod Taylor is compelling as the eponymous lead and nails the Irish accent.  You can almost excuse him for being a bit too old for the role.  Unfortunately much of the supporting cast doesn't live up to his performance but they don't seem to be given much of a chance.  The writing is abrupt and hackneyed, a poor vehicle for someone like Maggie Smith who is trapped in a cardboard cutout of woman rather than provided with a fully realized person to portray.  Julie Christie's accent is barely there and not good, while other accents are so thick as to make the dialog unintelligible.  Many of the others come off as bad caricatures, like the offensive "paddies" portrayed in comedy clubs of the early 20th century.  All-in-all my Irish roots demanded that I watch this but I wouldn't recommend it for the uninitiated.  Better off reading some of O'Casey's actual work, which has a poetry that is utterly missing in this low-budget flick.

"Booksmart"

This sleeper hit from last summer was one of those films which came and went but was part of a mental list to see if I had the chance.  Sitting at home on day 12 of the shutdown -- I had the chance.  Somewhat less deep than I expected I came around to liking it but wasn't a fan from the outset.  Of the two female leads, Beanie Feldstein's dominant character Molly is immediately unlikeable.  She isn't just an unpopular nerd, she is an elitist who looks down on almost everyone around her.  The film isn't just a coming-of-age tale.  For Molly this is a "wake up and smell the roses" tale.  It was that angle, and the path of fellow traveler Amy (Kaitlyn Dever's character) which finally had me buy into this understandably awkward story.  Most of the film takes place in a 24 hour period -- from the last day of school to graduation.  It's a good call.  That 24 hour period is often one of the most powerful and unforgettable times in the life of young people, much like the moments when baby birds are ejected from the safety of their nests.  While I didn't love the "Bridesmaids" level gross-out humor the script is solid and provides a good number of laughs.  Directed by Olivia Wilde there is also a decent awareness of how girls think.  Always nice to see a woman director when it comes to female lives.  Worth a look but a tad lighter and sillier than you might think.

"The Farewell"

Recommended by a friend this quiet little film was a first pick to while away some time during our city's virus lockdown.  It did not disappoint.  With a mostly Chinese cast and Awkwafina in a subdued role it was a touching look at illness and aging through the lens of a very different culture.  In this case, the story is based on a true tale of a beloved grandmother who is not told of her cancer diagnosis.  This is typical practice in places like China where the quality of life is often valued over quantity.  Awkwafina plays the American granddaughter who insists on being there for her grandmother even though the family feels she will not be able to keep the secret.  There are funny moments, sad moments, real moments.  It was the kind of thing which has a universality to it and the story worms its way into your heart.  My friend wondered why it wasn't nominated for some awards.  With excellent cinematography, acting and writing, I wonder the same thing.  Watched the final scenes with both a smile and a tissue.  Bet you will do the same.

Darwin

Hoping to head to the Galapagos, but failing (thanks, Covid-19) I read two books on Darwin.  There was Charles Darwin (part of the "Giants of Science" series) by Kathleen Krull, and Darwin's Ghosts:  The Secret History of Evolution by Rebecca Stott.  Both books were written for the educational market and both revealed much that I didn't know.  Both had strong but very structured writing, books of this type being held to strong standards on their length and number of chapters.

The first one, by Ms. Krull, was a little bit more "upbeat" than I cared for, glossing over the darker parts of Mr. Darwin's life, but did a good job of looking at the facts of his work rather than the hype.  Ms. Krull did a nice job of showing what Darwin actually researched and how that informed his changing view of biology.  The most amusing quote in the entire book was "The most hardened resistance to Darwin's theory is in the United States, where scientific literacy lags behind that of other industrialized nations."  Given the politicizing of our Coronavirus-gripped country as I write this, the quote struck me as humorous, sad, and insightful.

Darwin's Ghosts was somewhat more intriguing as it looked at all who had come before.  Ms. Stott gets major kudos here for her research which found figures and theories not listed on your general Google search.  Starting hundreds of years in the past it was impressive to realize what random men, often without education, were able to surmise about the origins of our world long before Darwin climbed aboard the Beagle.  It showed how theories can mirror each other despite being separated by time and distance, pushing the idea that truth will surface regardless of our means to fully interpret it.  Ms. Stott also does a good job of showing how politics and religion suppressed scientific discovery for thousands of years.  She manages to do this without becoming preachy.  I enjoyed the book a good deal and only had minor quibbles about the inclusion of Leonardo da Vinci, which seemed a tad crowbarred in (part of his chapter was shared with a potter who made discoveries independently).  There was also the issue of chapter length which seemed mandated.  To make the chapters "equal" some figures were described with a detailed personal history, others had long tracts of their works reprinted.  The book may have been better had the author just been given the freedom to write about each person to the extent that there was information available.  That being said, I liked that Ms. Stott left me with several philosophical questions to ponder, including the idea that maybe universal truths only come to light when a society is ready to hear them.

More Airplane Movies

Yes, I had a lot of travel set for this Spring.  "Had" being the operative word (thanks, Covid-19).  I digress.  Watched "Blinded by the Light", "Paper Towns", "Overcomer" and "Diciembres".  The good/bad news is that I have seen so many airplane films at this point that I have fewer and fewer choices.  It means watching films I might have otherwise skipped.

"Blinded by the Light".  Star Viveik Kalra and the entire cast create indelible characters which you can't help but be drawn to.  Clever filmmaking adds just a teensy dash of magical realism to echo the idea that this is sorta-kinda a musical ... but not.  It is actually a massive homage to Bruce Springsteen.  Massive.  I've never been a huge fan of his but the film, about Pakistani teens in England in the 1980s, gave me a decent insight as to his popularity.  While I didn't become a convert, I got it.  My only complaint was a wrap-up which was a tad too neat.  Long-standing family issues seemed to be overcome with a smile and a hug and I just don't feel life works that way.  Also, the focus on Springsteen sometimes blurred over the actions and desires of Kalra's character, leaving one wondering what his future held.  That being said, very worthy for an airplane ride.

"Paper Towns".  I broke a cardinal rule here and watched this without having read the book.  I did, however, read "Looking for Alaska" and couldn't help but think the enormously popular John Green was a bit of a one-trick pony.  Both stories are about sexually/socially mature teen girls who upend the life of a quiet boy and then disappear.  "Paper Towns" is less bleak than "Looking for Alaska" and the film says something about the value of taking life by the horns.  The story also excels where Green excels -- at being realistic.  The end is not what you would expect but it isn't made into something fanciful, either.  Solid tale with good acting (and writing, of course).

"Overcomer".  This one was a surprise.  In the spirit of old-time flights, there was only one feed for the whole plane, kind of a "watch it or read" situation.  One of the flight crew apparently picked it.  The tale of a high school basketball coach forced to take on the track and field team of one, a girl with asthma, is a cloak for Christian messaging.  Having never really watched a Christian film before, it was both better and worse than expected.  Acting, writing, production quality -- all were pretty good.  I didn't mind the messaging to the young runner that she was loved and important.  These are things we should be saying to every kid, regardless of religion.  For the most part the heavy-handedness was avoided as the lead character was struggling with his own faith, a message I could relate to.  That ended in the last chunk of the film when the Christian messaging took over the storyline and the "morals of the story" were, IMHO, somewhat mixed.  On one hand, there was the idea that you accept Jesus into your heart with no expectation of reward, that the love between you and the divine is enough.  On the other hand, there is the message that those who are Christians will naturally beat the competition and "win" in all things.  I found this to be a bit of conflict.  If you want me buying into this, I need to believe that faith is the reward in and off itself, regardless of payoff.

"Diciembres".  This mostly Spanish language film is gut-wrenching, telling the story of the U.S. invasion of Panama through multiple voices.  Something which went nearly unreported in the American press, and was twisted by a massive propaganda machine when it was reported on, left most of the people in this country thinking it was just a "simple police action."  It was anything but.  Hundreds, maybe thousands, of Panamanian nationals, civilians, were killed by the U.S. military, who "disappeared" the bodies so that no record was made of the slaughter.  In one of our many ill-advised coup attempts in a foreign country, our soldiers went in and carpet-bombed an entire neighborhood, marching through the area and shooting everyone in their path, including locals who wanted the U.S. out.  The film is told during the events of the invasion and ten years later.  It is a story of healing and struggle.  Emotional wounds run deep for La Mujer and her son (characters are named for archetypes, showing them as symbolic of the people of Panama as a whole.)  Estranged from the mother-in-law they live across from, each of the three seem entrenched in anger and sadness.  Not a story for the queasy, the film opens with a brutal attack and the loss of a beloved pet.  Narrated by "El Hombre" there is a sense of what was lost, and the vacuum he created with his death.  It's a smart, pointed, powerful film and should be required for any student skimming through 20th Century history.  We need to take responsibility for our actions as a country.  Films like this are important as they call us out to the human toll of U.S. imperialism.

Airplane Movies

More travel means catching up with more films I have missed.  Best of the bunch was "Up" which really struck me on a million levels.  It's sad, funny, and more real than most cartoon movies I've seen.  It's got a lot of contemporary themes but mostly just strikes you as being extremely human.  Characters are flawed and the total thing is just massively memorable.  It resonated with me long after watching it.

On the other end of the spectrum was "Music and Lyrics", a Drew Barrymore film so forgettable I actually don't remember much about it, other than silly vapid entertainment which kept me entertained on the long ride.

Somewhere in the middle was "The Sun is Also a Star".  Based on a book I loved this is a somewhat faithful rendition of the story in film with well-cast actors but it lacked energy somehow.  It was nice to see the words come to life but I would have liked a little more spark.

There were two other movies I literally forgot ("Best in Show" and "Joy") ... what does that say for airplane films?

And the Award Goes to ...

It's been four weeks of watching 14 series and 15 films in preparation for the SAG-Aftra awards.  I've been sitting so long I've gotten muscle cramps and I've been going to bed with my mind spinning.  I've heard more of the "F word" in the past month than I have in the past year and, thanks to HBO, seen more male appendages than I have in decades.  I've seen three movies where established actors were "un-aged", two movies where tragic events were made into black comedies, and lots (and lots and lots) of "based on".

Having watched everything I could (see previous post) it is time to cast my ballot.  People always ask "what was your favorite?"  It is an impossible choice given the high quality of nearly every entry.  Exceptions only for Hustlers, Dead to Me and Schitt's Creek, which were just ... bad (IMHO).  How they got nominated, I will never know.  That being said, I would pick Rocketman, Just Mercy and Joker for best films, with a serious nod to Jojo Rabbit.  Rocketman was fresh, clever and engaging in an era with far too many rock star biopics.  Just Mercy was a tender production which had me caring, deeply, for every character and on the edge of my seat -- this was lacking in many of the so-called "best" films this year.  Joker was ... riveting.  Didn't take my eyes off the screen.  Viewers shouldn't dismiss this film as "one of those DC superhero movies".  It isn't, on any level.  It fits in with one of the unofficial themes of the year by addressing mental illness, front and center.  And then there is Jojo Rabbit.  Many (many many many) people are offended by this film but I tend to think they don't get it.  The tone may be light but the Nazis still look like awful human beings.  Lastly, if you are feeling depressed by all of this, watch solid feel-good films Harriett and A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, both of which have some strong performances and terrific cinematography.

For the "best of" television and streaming series I would pick Unbelievable or Chernobyl.  Unbelievable probably had one of the biggest impacts on me personally, challenging the idea that a woman who recants a rape is lying about the attack.  The current situation in Cyprus, with the 19 year-old accuser, is now seen by me with new eyes thanks to this mini-series.  Chernobyl was the hardest to watch, in two ways.  First, it doesn't spare the horrific and cameras linger on bodies which no longer look human, flesh being eaten away by radiation, the sounds of Geiger counters clicking madly as men take on suicide missions.  It's also hard to watch because of 20/20 hindsight.  We know what happened and so much of it was avoidable, driven by the social morays of Soviet Russia, a place where failure was unacceptable.  It also resonates today, both with my recent visit to China, seeing the systemic denial of basic truths there, and with Russia as it retreats back to that time, covering up yet another nuclear accident recently in Siberia.  All of that being said, I would vote for Chernobyl as best overall production if there were such an award in this ceremony, but there isn't.  It is simply really well put together, from direction to acting to writing to, well, everything.

I digress.  But a strong theme of the year besides "It's Complicated" was to see how the past informs the present, and there are so many unlearned lessons.  Lots of politics, lots of #MeToo and two separate projects about Roger Ailes.  Familiar faces -- directors and actors.  Actors Jessie Buckley, Olivia Coleman, Brett Cullen, Robert de Niro, Mark Duplass, Scarlett Johansson, Nicole Kidman, Elizabeth Moss, Al Pacino, Margaret Qualley, Margo Robbie and Sam Rockwell each appear in two of the nominated projects with Laura Dern in a whopping three.

I do wish that the awards weren't competitive.  I wish we could say "you folks ALL did a great job" instead of saying one is better than another.  That being said, I had to make choices.  (And they will inevitably not be the actual winners as I have unique sensibilities).  For me, the most interesting thing about the list below is that there is no single film or series which dominates.  There were bright stars in every production with no single production standing out as being "the hit of the year."  For me, anyway.  Awards are announced on TNT and TBS at 8pm Sunday, January 19th.  They will additionally be streamed on People.com and EW.com.

Outstanding Actor in a TV Movie or Limited Series:  I love Mahershali Ali in everything.  Then there's Sam Rockwell, a non-dancer, who was transformative in Fosse/Verdon and very ... unique ... in Jojo Rabbit.  Russell Crowe did a great job inside the skin (and prosthetics) of a truly horrible man in a year when we saw two different takes on FOX News and Roger Ailes.  That being said, Jharrel Jerome (When They See Us) made the transition from innocent teen to long-term inmate, hardened but with hope, in a stunningly beautiful performance.  Mr. Jerome won my vote.

Outstanding Female Actor in a TV Movie or Limited Series:  Patricia Arquette or Michelle Williams will win this, but Joey King (The Act) should win.  She gets my vote not only for shaving her head but by portraying, very subtly, the complex emotions of loving and hating the woman who raises you.

Outstanding Male Actor in a Comedy Series:  Alan Arkin (The Kominsky Method).  Always.  Alan.  Arkin.

Outstanding Female Actor in a Comedy Series:  Rachel Brosnahan is consitently brilliant as Mrs. Maisel but Phoebe Waller-Bridge, who also created and wrote Fleabag, does this amazing thing where she plays a scene but does outtakes directly into the camera.  It's a hard thing to break the fourth wall and yet somehow not.  And she does it brilliantly.  Ms. Waller-Bridge wins.

Outstanding Comedy Ensemble:  The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel works because every single solitary actor brings their A-game.  Period.

Outstanding Male Actor in a Drama Series:  This one was very hard.  Both Billy Crudup and Steve Carrell enriched The Morning Show significantly (and ironically, given that this is a female driven narrative).  And there is David Harbour, whose deeply flawed daddy-figure on Stranger Things is almost impossible to define.  In the end I had to go with Steve Carrell, who not only got robbed last year for Beautiful Boy but his depiction of a nice guy with a seriously creepy streak was impeccable.  His comedy work is really good.  His drama work is shockingly great.

Outstanding Female Actor in a Drama Series:  Why, oh why, are Olivia Colman and Helena Bonham Carter in the same category?  (The Crown)  Because this awards ceremony doesn't have a supporting actor category for television, only film.  It's a shame. And I have to whine, again, that Regina King (Watchmen) isn't nominated, as she would have my top vote in a minute.  I am also disappointed that Merritt Weaver didn't get a nod for Unbelievable.  I love her work in everything she does.  Elizabeth Moss is great, too, but she has won a bunch of times (deservedly) for The Handmaid's Tale.  Helena Bonham Carter wins here for a tender, delicate, and more reigned in (pun intended) portrayal of a sad, tortured woman.  Her best performance, IMHO, ever.

Outstanding Drama Ensemble:  Unbelievable should have been nominated instead of Big Little Lies, but it wasn't, so I went back and forth between Stranger Things and The Handmaid's Tale.  Both have large casts where each character plays an important role.  I ended up with Stranger Things because these kids are growing up and they are still giving 100%, a challenge as their characters age and develop.  That, and I'm not sure the show, unlike The Handmaid's Tale, has ever won.  They probably won't win here, either, but they deserve to.

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role:  Once Upon a Time ... in Hollywood and The Irishman may be considered "great filmmaking" but they were hugely predictable and I wasn't able to connect with either in any meaningful way.  A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood was delightful, in great part because of Tom Hanks' spot-on portrayal of Mr. Rogers, but it was Just Mercy which had huge emotional resonance, bringing me to tears, and Jamie Foxx's performance was a significant part of that.  Bravo, sir.  You get my vote.

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role:  Margot Robbie has shown incredible range of late (Tonya Harding to Elizabeth I to Harley Quinn) and stole the show in Bombshell but Laura Dern has had a terrific year -- Little Women, Big Little Lies AND a creepily manipulative divorce lawyer in Marriage Story.  For body of work, and very overdue acknowledgement of a four decade career ... Laura Dern.

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Lead Role:  Super tough.  Taron Egerton made Rocketman, in many ways.  Adam Driver did his best work, IMHO, in Marriage Story.  Christian Bale almost made me care about car racing in Ford v Ferrari.  Almost.  But not enough.  But then there was Joker, a stunning film in which Joaquin Phoenix is seen, close-up, in nearly every shot.  I couldn't take my eyes off of him.  For this film, and body of work, Joaquin Phoenix.

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Lead Role:  Not too hard.  I was underwhelmed by Bombshell and, despite the tremendous prep by Renee Zellweger, by Judy.  Scarlett Johansson was impressive in Marriage Story but less so than her counterpart, Adam Driver, whose character seemed to have a stronger sense of self.  (IMHO her role in Jojo Rabbit was more interesting).  Lupita Nyong'o played a million levels in Us and would have been my first choice had it not been for Harriett, where Cynthia Erivo dominated, truly "becoming" the eponymous character.  Ms. Erivo edged out Ms. Nyong'o by a slim margin.

Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture:  Here is where I wish SAG/Aftra would separate Dramas from Comedies/Musicals.  Rocketman was brilliant (and, I have to say, better than the very very good Bohemian Rhapsody from last year) and I would vote for that if given the chance.  Because of the limits, however, Rocketman didn't make the cut. The irony here is that the films which were nominated didn't bowl me over much.  I'll be glad to say they are extremely well-made.  The Irishman is, of course, another gangster classic by Scorsese.  Once Upon a Time ... in Hollywood is a suprisingly gore-light "fairytale" by Tarantino.  Parasite does a great job of addressing the inherent inequities of societies in a sad way but feels like it goes too far.  The oddball weak link here was Bombshell, which wasn't, IMHO, nearly as good as The Loudest Voice (same topic).  That left me with Jojo Rabbit and I was glad to cast my vote for this very weird but somehow fresh film which made me laugh, cry, and ponder.  Led by Roman Griffin Davis, an affable and smart eleven year old, every member of the cast brings something unique and special to the production.

Outstanding Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture:  This will go to Avengers but they never provide screeners so I picked Ford v Ferrari to spite them.  Of the nominees it was the one with the most complicated stunts, based on all the car action, and I'm guessing that more of these stunts were practical, rather than computer-generated, than those in Avengers.

Outstanding Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Television Series:  Glow.  Always Glow.

SAG/Aftra Nominees

It's that time of year.  I'm binging my brains out trying to watch every nominated project before casting my votes for the SAG/Aftra Awards.  So far, I have watched:  Handmaid's Tale (season three), Big Little Lies, Watchmen, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (season three), Fleabag, When They See Us (only episode #4, Netflix was stingy), Fosse/Verdon, Dead to Me, Chernobyl, True Detective (season three), The Kominsky Method (season two), Unbelievable, The Act, Stranger Things (season three), The Morning Show, The Crown (season three), Little Women, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, Rocketman, and Hustlers.  Still to come?  The Loudest Voice, Bombshell, Us, Marriage Story, Harriett, Ford v Ferrari, Parasite, Jojo Rabbit, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Judy, Just Mercy and Joker.  It's going to be a busy ten more days ...

Who will I vote for?  I have no idea, yet.  This has been a year when I found the stories to be somewhat more compelling than individual performances but that being said there are some threads which many productions have in common.  1)  "It's Complicated"  Almost without exception these shows focused heavily on complex relationships.  Characters were rarely predictable, their emotions were often hugely layered and they changed direction ... a lot.  You don't have good guys or bad guys, just people.  Sometimes they are likeable, honorable, and sometimes not.  2)  "Based on"  While none are documentaries (SAG/Aftra Awards are about acting) a good number of them are based on real events and/or people.  However, even the obviously made-up tales (Watchmen, Handmaid's Tale) have significant commentary on the politics of the times.  3)  Diversity, but not.  Women (as directors, producers and writers) and people of color are far more represented here than in the Golden Globes nominees but there are still slights.  Regina King would be my #1 "why the heck isn't she nominated?" candidate.  (Followed closely by Elizabeth Olson in Sorry for Your Loss and MJ Rodriguez in Pose)  4)  Comedic actors taking dramatic turns which really, truly work.  5)  Streaming networks aren't just impacting network television, they are essentially changing the way television shows are made.  They cover topics the networks would never cover, there is more freedom to do limited series, episode length varies widely to allow for the story rather than for commercials, bigger stars are willing to commit to an occasional 7-10 episodes rather than a full season, major players like the increased flexibility to produce outside of the Hollywood blandness machine and there is a "flow" in the storytelling which means bigger arcs rather than "wrapping it up" in 42 minutes.  In short, streaming series are more innovative and out-of-the box than anything on network.  What it all looks like ten years from now will be fascinating to see.

There is little feel-good here (with notable exceptions A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood and The Kominsky Method).  Even Mrs. Maisel goes a little dark and comedy Fleabag comes with plenty of pain.  This isn't unusual.  I remember the year of Brokeback Mountain.  After watching all the nominated films that year I desperately needed a drink.  What is interesting, and different this year is how watchable these films and series are.  You really feel compelled to binge the entire seasons of each show, and many of the productions leave you thinking, deeply, about unanswerable questions.  It is a year of smart programming, media which challenges assumptions.  And that is a good thing.

"The Other Wes Moore" by Wes Moore

An intriguing book, well-written and compelling.  Another in a long list of titles which have been on my "to read" list for far too long, this one should also be required reading.  Wes Moore, a successful man who grew up in challenging circumstances, is shocked to discover another Wes Moore, who grew up in similar circumstances but ended up very differently.  This true story involves both men, looking at snapshots of their lives.  The author attempts to track the critical turning points in the lives of him and his namesake, trying to figure out where their lives diverged, and why.  He doesn't come up with a simple answer and he shouldn't.  This is real life stuff, not fiction, and real life is messy.  Crafted carefully and built through multiple interviews with people in their lives, it is an engaging read and one with accessible prose.  The "what-if" question hangs over the entire tale and drives the narrative.  The book doesn't end so much as sum up, leaving the reader to take away what they will.  As for the author he is forever changed by this revelation, the idea that so many people are simple on a knife edge away from tragedy.  The end of the book includes a huge list of resources, organizations dedicated to intervening in the lives of young people.  The hope is clearly that an adult stepping into the course of a life might help someone move in the right direction.  Hugely worthy and very thought-provoking, I'm not sure this is a book you put down and walk away from.

"The Testaments" by Margaret Atwood

The inimatable Ms. Atwood wrote her brilliant "Handmaid's Tale" in 1985, one of my top ten books of all time.  It took 34 years to get the sequel and it is, in my humble opinion, worth it.  There was the bad 1990s film, best forgotten, and the brilliant Hulu show, which brought this important novel back to prominence.  The original story ended in ambiguity, the new novel does not.  That being said it is as rich as the first yet very different.  The setting is 15 years after the end of the first novel.  The characters include two young women -- one in Gilead and one in Canada -- as well as a familiar character, Aunt Lydia.  The three narratives intertwine to build suspense.  The details tiptoe in, providing a powerful picture of the world Gilead has created.  There are tremendous political threads but that is only the frame.  The people, the women, are at the heart of the tale.  Atwood's literary felicity is again hugely evident, as she draws strong characters and relatable stories which are layered and complex but easy to "get".  The ending, as all definitive endings do, could cause some controversy but it will make you think about the big picture.  Atwood had made it clear that she draws her inspiration from real-world events and that what some might see as an extremist society is anything but.  In a time of tremendous upheaval in the United States these days (which was clearly part of the impetus for the sequel) this book is a great reminder that we should not allow the voices of hate to become the "new normal" or allow the little attacks to pass, as they foreshadow much worse.  Not just a great novel, an important one.  Should be required reading.

Patsy and Loretta

This new Lifetime movie explores the tremendous friendship which grew between two icons of country music.  Their entire relationship took place over less than two years but was striking in how powerfully felt it was for both women.  The producers smartly put a good deal of focus on the music, allowing the hugely talented Megan Hilty and Jessie Mueller to use their fabulous voices to echo Patsy Cline and Loretta Lynn, respectively.  Megan Hilty is particularly skilled at diving into a troubled, brilliant performer.  It was easy to forget the actor under the wig and see only the star who died too young.  The music, the friendship, and the performances are admirable.  The script, however, is choppy and the timeline unclear.  Transitions are abrupt and rough.  It's as if the producers said that they they wanted to see snapshots of every important moment between the two women, so instead of natural flow you end up more with snapshots.  Nevertheless, it was an engaging two hours which left me with a significantly better understanding of this moment in history and a soft spot for the human side of two superstars.  Their daughters contributed to the development of the project, bringing needed grounding.  Worth a viewing.

"The Truths We Hold: An American Journey" by Kamala Harris

I first saw Senator Harris at the Women's March in DC.  Hearing her speak I paid attention.  It had been a lengthy day of speeches but hers stood out.  She had a clarity, a passion ... and she was smart.  Really smart.  Ever since then I have watched her career with interest, including her current run for President.  It has become defacto to release a book when you are running for President.  It is supposed to make clear to the constituency where you came from, how your beliefs formed, who you essentially "are."  In that sense this book succeeds to some degree.  The first few chapters cover Senator Harris' early life, somewhat sanitized at times but clear in that she identifies as a black woman and has tremendous family bonds.  About a third of the way in we reach the point where I became aware of her -- the 2016 march.  After that, she covers her time in the Senate, which includes a good bit of behind doors power plays.  Given her background, she was given a spot on several prestigious committees in the Senate.  This is not typical for a Freshman.  It is interesting to read what was going on behind the scenes during some of the more public events of the last few years.  The book clearly spells out what Senator Harris believes.  For this, jump to the final chapter where she sums up the core beliefs in her life.  As to the rest of the book, well ...  Senator Harris is clearly a private person.  This book could never be called a "tell-all".  But it does show off her personality fairly well.  She is hard-working and makes a point to delve deep into every issue, understanding the history as well as the current situation.  She is committed, determined to fight when she believes she is right, even if it is not popular.  She does fail, and as a rule-follower it surprised her when she didn't pass the bar the first time.  She is a boots-on, in-the-thick of things brawler.  She has a great deal of empathy and sees the big picture, using many stories not only to illustrate national concerns but to thank those of her friends and staff who pitched in on a given issue.  The problem with many of the "middle" chapters is that they read like stump speeches.  All numbers and great leaps like the discussion of big pharma and Wall Street.  The arguments are compelling but can seem impersonal.  Instead of talking in detail about the loss of her mother, she launches into a tirade about insurance.  This is typical.  The points are strong but they aren't about her, specifically.  On a weak note, many of her televised Senate hearings are recreated verbatim, which seems unnecessary.  So, no, not the most fabulous book.  But a good one if you want some insight into Senator Harris, albeit more about her work and policies than her private life.  It does make me wonder -- will we ever choose a President based on their ability to do the job, rather than whether they are someone we'd like to have a beer with?  It will be an interesting year to come.