I have added a Search Window on the Sidebar (=========> ) to allow for previous Reviews to be found. It took a while to figure out how to add this feature which to me is necessary for anyone looking to see what any thoughts have been for something that they wish to watch. You will note that there are multiple entries for many movies.
I hope this makes the reviews more accessible and available for those visiting. Happy movie watching!
Original Posting:
Thanks for joining me! For many years I have been sharing movie reviews with my good friend Alison. What started out as Monday water cooler discussions on what films we saw (we seemed to see movies often) then turned into emails. She moved from her job. I moved from mine, but we still kept in contact.
The reviews have been been shared with others over time, but the beginnings remain the same. When I review, the email was addressed to Alison, and then others were added.
So here I am. After much thought, the idea of sharing the movie reviews over time has finally taken shape.
I must early on make a shout out to the late, great, Pulitzer prize winning reviewer Roger Ebert, from the Chicago Sun Times. I depended on Roger and his reviews, and his TV show At The Movies with Gene Siskel. Now I didn’t always agree with Roger and his reviews, but I would read and enjoy how he viewed these films. It is not unusual for me to refer to him, or wonder what he would think about a particular film.
I am adding present reviews as some historical reviews as I find them. You will also see some more lengthy discussions about films as well (like discussions about Alien Covenant or Star Wars The Last Jedi).
These of course are all one man’s opinion. Nothing more, and nothing less. If it can save you from spending $13.99 on the latest film in the theatre, by avoiding a bad film (in my opinion) then great! If it opens up a level of discourse on a film and a debate – I have always enjoyed debating films (and other things).
Maggie Gyllenhaal at TIFF premiere of The Kindergarten Teacher
I am so very sorry to read the shocking news from last night that acclaimed actor, director Rob Reiner (78 years old) and his wife Michelle were murdered in their Los Angeles (Brentwood) home last night. Reiner was “Meathead” in All in the Family as an actor, and he was the director of such films as This is Spinal Tap (sequel coming shortly) and other classic movies like Stand By Me, Princess Bride, When Harry Met Sally, Misery and A Few Good Men. They together leave behind three children. Rob had a daughter with first wife Penny Marshall. What a senseless tragedy.
Train Dreams: This is a new release on Netflix, and stars Joel Edgerton, Felicity Jones, William H Macy and Kerry Condon. It is an impressive cast. I had heard a positive buzz about it as well so I wanted to see this. Sadly I was disappointed. Set in the northwest of the United States at the end of the 1800s, when the Spokane International Railway was being built. Edgerton plays ordinary labourer Robert Grainier who keeps mostly to himself, being mostly a loner, having some modest skills with carpentry as well as logging. He meets Jones playing Gladys and his world turns into a marvelous life with purpose. He finds a plot of land, and starts building his dream life with his dream girl. A daughter comes shortly thereafter. Gladys and daughter stay behind while Robert works logging, which is hard work in difficult circumstances. It is also dangerous work with little regard for safety, but rather a focus on building the line as fast as they can.
On the work site, Robert meets up with elder demolition man William H Macy (Macy blows up trees and makes way for tunnels). He has been in his role for many years and doesn’t do the backbreaking work any longer. He is too valuable and old. The two men speak of life and simple pleasures. Things happen both at the job site and to the family that I won’t detail here. Suffice to say that Robert has some hard knocks delivered to him.
Somewhere in this movie about a simple guy doing ordinary things there are much deeper life lessons. Okay. It is like me thinking about the average soldier at a castle in Europe and how he would be feeling guarding a wall, and looking out into the black for night after night, week after week. He isn’t anyone famous, nor part of any battles of note. He does his work, he takes his shift and returns to his life. This is Robert. The story is a glimpse back in time, and one of the messages I take away is that I was glad that I was born in this time rather than that. Robert lived a difficult life, exhausting and what did he get for it? Yes, as the title suggests he has some dreams, but these can act as fillers to potentially show what may have happened in circumstances where Robert simply is in no position to know. It was slow and when it ended I thought, “is that it?” And it was. Having said that, there are some very pretty pictures with quality cinematography. The forest, trees, skies and sunsets are lovely. I am unclear what lesson was gained by having the Kerry Condon character meet up with him. I did not come away from this thinking that this is one of the best films of the year. I have seen a couple recently, and this one wasn’t it.
Sorry Baby: Eva Victor directs, stars and wrote the screenplay for this movie which can be found on Appletv. It was listed in both the NY Times and Rolling Stones lists of Best Pictures for 2025. I wanted to seek it out given all the positive buzz with it. If a movie is meant to be springboard to thinking about the ideas and issues presented, I can say that this is ably accomplished. I had a couple good conversations about overall theme and individual scenes within it. Separated by chapters which are entitled with the phrase “The Year of [insert the notable event]” where the opening scene is The Year of the Baby. Further chapters are entitled “The Year When The Bad Thing Happened,” “The Year with the Questions,” and “The Year of the Good Sandwich”. We have two friends in their mid-twenties meet up to catch up on their lives. One is Eva Victor (playing Agnes) and her buddy Lydie (played by Naomi Ackie). In seemingly rural New England in a university town where Agnes lives and works they meet at her house. It is evident that they are very connected and close. The next chapter begins a series of events which happen prior to the Year of the Baby.
I won’t go further into the events that become the turning point for Agnes. What transpires is a thought-provoking review of the issues surrounding these events. It includes discussions at the university where two female members in the HR Department pay Agnes a visit. Another scene involves an awkward discussion from a doctor, and later a scene during a Jury Duty interview where Agnes had attended. There are some funny moments and lines, bordering on black comedy. It can lighten an otherwise heavy subject. For the jury duty in front of a judge and prosecutor, Agnes makes salient points reflecting her wishes and most desired outcome which isn’t how our system of justice set up at all. What can seem as an innocent encounter can turn into something very unexpected having long term consequences.
For me, I found Agnes to be a socially awkward person, who with most people seems to keep to herself, looking away and not fully engaging. It is true that we first see her with her friend post the Bad Thing, and we did not see a lot of her before it. But we also see that she does move forward, certainly in her career on the university faculty, but also in relationships (notably the almost equally awkward neighbour Gavin, played by Lucas Hedges). Clearly the event has had tremendous effect on her, as she can run from hyper-ventilating and being extremely anxious to showing her capably working in her classroom full of students, where she is provided with excellent feedback. Overall the issue at hand is well handled showing a real-life, authentic realistic portrayal, and while everyone would experience this differently, sadly it will be experienced by far too many people. Watching it, I took it all in but it was upon more reflection and discussion that I liked it more. Certainly all parents would like to protect their children from all the bad things within the world, but this is simply not possible. For me I have not experienced such circumstances but I know plenty of people that have admitted it to me that they have. It is a surprising greater number than I would have ever expected. This is worth seeking out, and certainly young women should see the murky waters that can be explored. Having said that, I don’t feel that this movie is on the same level as other recent more compelling stories including Hamnet, Sentimental Value, or One Batter After Another. For me those are the front runners.
2000 Meters to Andriivka: This PBS Frontline Special documentary was brought to my attention from a friend. I thoroughly enjoyed it as it was powerful and provided me with insight into a war that has been mostly ignored from a media perspective. Politicians like to discuss cease fires and find a way to end the conflict by imposing plans onto the Ukrainian people without paying attention to those on the front lines in the battles. This film is a small group following a group of Ukrainian soliders from 2023 looking to make a counter-offensive to regain some territory that the Russians had taken previously. It is a strip of forest in a larger field entering into a small town which has been almost entirely obliterated. Fighting is intense, and as the young soliders say they don’t talk about time, they talk in meters to the target. The language is salty, for these young volunteers. The battle utilizes machine guns and grenades offensively against mines, tunnels, machine guns and mortars (along with the occasional suicide drone strike).
The young men are brave, and adament that they will defeat the Russian invaders. When they get an opportunity to face them, they are quick to ask Russian soldiers “why are you even here”? Back in the 1970s, the Viet Nam War was on TV all the time, with casualty and injured statistics on both sides. This war, despite all the technology and internet, there is very little coverage of action. No reporters with cameras, no Life Magazine colour spreads at all. It is important in my mind to remember that ordinary citizens put their lives on the line in this conflict. People are dying, towns and infrastructure are destroyed, and for no reason. For lines on a map or the political leaders’ agenda on his own legacy. I have utmost respect for those that fight for their land, identity and families. It is evident that they are fierce fighters and won’t be going away anytime soon. I especially feel for mothers and families that are burying their sons, husbands, and fathers. There was an interview with a man in tunnel taking shelter and he is 46yo, with a wife, children and grandchildren. 46yo men were not fighting in WWII. Not on the front lines that I have ever seen (nor as evidenced by tombstones in various cemeteries). So this is must watch TV for those who want to inform themselves of this conflict and humanize it. No matter what the result I don’t forsee peace in the region if ANY of the Ukranian territory is given back over to Russia because of their unprovoked assault on a soverign nation.
Hamnet: Sometimes a movie can provide a fresh new perspective on a familiar story. In this instance it is a new surrounding story about William Shakespeare and his life along with the creation of the masterpiece tragic play Hamlet. In truth I will admit that from high school many years ago that I didn’t like this play. For me it was infuriating because of Hamlet’s inability to act; he suffered from analysis paralysis in exacting revenge for his slain father. That, of course, was the point and the tragic flaw for the young Prince.
Along comes director Chloe Zhao and the interpretation of the bestselling book from Maggie O’Farrell (unread by me). It starts with a young Shakespeare (played excellently by Paul Mescal) meeting up with a local girl who is known for being strange and “of the forest”. It seems her deceased Mom was known for being the same. The girl is played by Jesse Buckley. The two begin a relationship that moves along quickly. They are very attached and children arrive soon after. A daughter, named Suzanne and then twins (Hamnet and Judith). These are the actual real-life offspring of Shakespeare himself. I won’t delve further into the plot developments to avoid spoiling important aspects of what occurs. The family is well connected it seems, with loving parents and a caring rural community. The story continues and culminates in the final act with wife attending in London for the first performance of her husband’s new play.
This is a remarkable film with tremendous performances. The people involved are real. They act authentically and show real emotion when life happens to them. They struggle and are creatures of their times. Shakespeare has a strained relationship with his father, who wishes his son would take up his the family business rather than engage in this theatre nonsense. His mother played by Emily Watson struggles with the bohemian attitudes of her daughter-in-law. His wife is a rebel, which was an endearing feature about her when they courted. There is such emotion with these characters as they interact, and we see much like the recently reviewed Sentimental Value that a father who spends much time away from the family can express to those he clearly loves his emotions and how the events have impacted him through his work. Shakespeare as father is reaching out and reconnecting to show that he cares and he sees those he loves, despite protests to the contrary. Jesse Buckley in my view with this performance has won the Oscar. It is excellent. Such emotion. Such devotion and dedication. She shows a woman who struggles in her times while balancing motherhood and pressures of her family (including in-laws) and station. She suffers herself with the relationship with her mother. The scenes in the final act at the theatrical performance are just excellent as we see how the words of the play can reveal so much more if viewed from a different lens. In short, go see this. I have lamented that Hollywood is not creating enough human stories (unlike more independent and generally European filmmakers) but we have Steven Spielberg (who is as Hollywood as it gets) executive producing this masterpiece. Go see it. Immerse yourself in an emotional story that just may have you seeking out Hamlet one more time.
Jurassic Park Rebirth: My goodness this was bad. It was unnecessary. I had such low expectations too. This is the seventh movie in the franchise. It is remarkable to think that this is the case. For me only the original Spielberg movie is memorable. But that aside there was a discussion in the movie between Scarlett Johansson, playing a mercenary project manager, and a paleontologist (who studied under Alan Grant from the original film) who talks about dinosaur bones and packing up a museum display. It seems according to him that “people don’t care about dinosaurs any more” and “exhibits that once would have had huge crowds are now having few visitors”.
For me Johannson is out of character as a cut-throat mercenary with dubious morals about international laws who simply seems to be in the movie to fill out a tank top. Yet surprisingly she also seems to grow a conscience very quickly after initially agreeing to an enormous sum of money for completing the task at hand.
The task is to retrieve real live blood from three types of dinosaurs (air, land and sea) in order to study their hearts to produced an expensive “cure” for heart disease. The bad guy is “big pharma”, personified by actor Rupert Friend who is as slimy as you would expect. This team must go into forbidden air space where the dinosaurs have limited environmental conditions to sustain them, which makes them filled with the dinosaurs and dangerous. The team adds in (Mahershala Ali) to the team, and then by happenstance a family (father, two daughters and a young boyfriend) who have their sailboat have an encounter with the very large sea-baring dinosaur. Ironically of course it is the one that Johansson and team seek out. The challenge through all of this is that it has been done before. Sure some of these “engineered” dinosaurs which were made at a facility on another island are bigger and more strange but they aren’t new, nor exciting. It is much the same again and again. Even the star power involved can’t save this effort. I saw this on a plane and I am glad that I didn’t spend any real money on it. This is a hard pass for me.
Black Mirror: I am steadily going through each of these episodes. Some I have liked more than others. Generally I like them all as a collection of individual stories. Each stands on their own with the Star Trek theme USS Callister having a follow up sequel which was itself excellent. The last couple I have watched were the space themed Beyond the Sea in Season 6, and within Season 3 both Playtime and Nosedive.
Beyond the Sea stars Josh Hartnett, Aaron Paul (who I haven’t seen much since Breaking Bad ended) and Kate Mara. The two men are astronauts heading out for a long journey. Technology has been developed, almost like The Matrix or Avatar where by sitting in a special chair the man’s consciousness can be transported back to earth. On earth there is a synthetic version of him to interact with his wife, kids and environment. It keeps the astronauts grounded and helps the families to cope for the time that has a husband away in space.
Something happens to one of the synthetics on earth and his family which was unforeseen. The other astronaut and his wife decide to help him out and share some time back on earth. Without giving a lot away, this episode goes places that was unexpected for me. It is a dark place but very satisfying. The acting is good in this episode and generally in the series as it attracts some big star power. I liked this and it certainly makes one think about technology and benefits as well as unintended negative consequences.
Nosedive stars Bryce Dallas Howard and Alice Eve. They live in a world where, much like today, every interaction one has throughout a day is rated on a 1-5 scale. See the picture below, does this look familiar? The added feature is that the scores are compiled and the person then becomes the sum of their ratings. The higher the number, the perception is that the person is better. At least more desirable. But it also becomes the basis for discrimination. A person whose scores are trending down is shunned by those around them.
Howard lives with her brother but wants to move out into a place of her own in a desirable neighbourhood. She is sitting at 4.2 and pleasant with those around her. In order to get into this new condo and obtain favourable financing she needs a Person Score of 4.5 or higher. It is a challenge. A potential solution presents itself from old friend played by Alice Eve. She is getting married and the party is all exclusive 4.6 and up. If Howard can deliver a killer speech as Maid of Honour from higher pointed people, then her life would be (in her mind) better. Things happen from there that conspire against her. It was good. It makes me think from time to time now about whether I want to rate a particular transaction.
The next episode was Playtime where a young man with a strained relationship with his Mom heads off suddenly to travel the world. After some globe trotting near the end of his trip he is in London. He meets a young woman who he finds out works for a gaming company. They sleep together and the next day he is out looking for cash for his trip home but his bank card has been hacked. He needs money for his last few days. He meets back up with the young woman and she recommends he test out some next software from this well known company. He decides to do it. The game being tested is virtual reality which includes a temporary technology attachment to the back of your neck. The device engages with your memories as part of the simulation. Things happen with interesting consequences for the affable young man. Although not the strongest episode it was still worth checking out.
Nuremberg: I had recently rewatched the excellent 1961 film Judgment at Nuremberg in anticipation of going to see the latest movie Nuremberg being released with the excellent cast of Russell Crowe, Michael Shannon, Leo Woodall and Remi Malek. The prior all-star cast movie addressed the secondary trials that were undertaken after WWII in bringing judges and other notable people to justice for their participation in the atrocities of the war. This movie deals with the trial of the Nazi High Command still living just after the war was over in May 1945. The trial was of second-in-command Hermann Goering, Rudolf Hess, and others. In total there were 23 defendants. As part of the team overlooking the inmates, there was brought in a psychiatrist, Douglas Kelly (played by Remi Malek) who was to ensure the mental stability of those to be tried.
The US had pressed for a formal trial to be undertaken by the victorious Allied forces for the actions of the Nazi government, which the Allies had just realized had been unlike anything ever done in human history. The death camps with the extermination of 6 millions Jews, plus many others was outside any action previously done. The world wished to ensure that an independent body founded in international human rights laws could bring to justice people who were responsible for such unspeakable acts.
Within this film there is footage from 1945 of the conditions at these camps as found by the Allies when they were being liberated. This footage is disturbing, but necessary for everyone to see. To his credit General Eisenhower made a point that film, pictures and eyewitness accounts should be taken of the concentration camps as they were and ordered that the US Army Signal Corps, along with other politicians and prominent people, see the camps for themselves and report on them. He foresaw that in the future there could be those who would deny that any of this had ever taken place.
For me the story with Malek and his efforts muddies the story unnecessarlily, and he takes actions that I find quite surprising (especially when interacting with Goering’s wife and child). The focus should not be him, but rather the prosecution and defense of the Nazi commnd. Sadly, unlike Judgment at Nuremberg, we do not see the defense lawyers and their arguments. Those are addressed early by the wife of Robert Jackson, the lead US prosecutor. For me, another couple aspects that stood out include that unlike Goering, Hess did not receive a sentence of death by hanging. Rather he received a life sentence, and he lived until he was 93 years old. Also, the underlying view that the world was changing, and the power dynamics had shifted from Germany to the Soviet Union and that the Western Allies realized that Germany would be an important future allie against the Soviets one day, which tempered the retribution potentially of the Nazis. I will say that it was important to bring home the point that the Nazis were human, and they didn’t have any particular gene or trait that made them monsters versus others. Rather it is pointed out that the victors get to judge the vanquished, and the Americans in bombing Japan with two nuclear weapons on women and children were unable to take a high ground and judge what the Nazis had done. Moreover, in a recent visit to Dachau concentration camp in September near Munich, the actions and propaganda of the Nazi party are eerily similar than what we are seeing from the majority authoritarian Administration in the US. Yes, it’s not Hitler, but most of the marks of a fascist regime in setting up such a system are well under way.
After the movie was over, I wanted to see whether the examination of Hermann Goering actually took place, and you can see from below that it did. For the movie, rather than showing the interplay with lawyers, it becomes the psychiatrist against the narcicisst (Goering) who believed that he would be walking free from the proceedings.
This is not an awards movie. But I do think that this is a good reminder in these times that we set up International Laws and Tribunals to review the actions of States that act like they are above review and reproach. The Rule of Law internationally is as important as it has ever been, and yet no one seems to be stepped up and looking to have it review current worldwide conflicts. This is a movie that people should see, if for nothing than a reminder of how shocking The Final Solution really was.
Sentimental Value: I had seen some positive buzz about this movie, released just a short time ago in limited theatres. It stars Stellan Skarsgard (who seems to be getting better and better at his craft as he ages despite suffering a stroke in 2022 which impacts his memory and ability to remember lines), Renate Reinsve (from The Worst Person in the World) and Elle Fanning. The movie is split between English and Norwegian with subtitles. I welcome quality acting and storytelling like this, which reflects on real, authentic human relationships, and in this instance family relationships. It covers themes like father and daughters, family trauma, communication and very real dynamics which are universal. For me, being an older person, it impacts me (I think) more deeply as there is more history in my wake, with marriages, children and notably a daughter.
The very beginning of this story speaks to a quaint, distinctive old house in Oslo. This has been a home for generations of the Borg family. We learn about some of those previous owners. Presently in the house, Skarsgard plays a well known director, Gustav Borg, who is attending the wake of his ex-wife, and his two estranged surviving daughters (Nora the elder, played by Reinsve, and Agnes the younger). Dad wishes to reconnect with his eldest daughter, who is an actress by bringing to her a new project which he says was “written for her” and would be perfect for her career. She flatly refuses to work with him, and continues performing on the stage, where she can struggle with her stage fright and emotions at times that we see. Younger daughter Agnes has a husband, and a 9yo boy. With Agnes, who had acted in Gustav’s last film project from 15 years ago as a child, Dad wants to have some more family participation. His new screenplay is very family focused, yet not completely autobiographical. The movie continues.
What I liked best about this film, and I really liked it, is that it shows the family details with conversations that are stilted and superficial and never addressing the underlying issues. There are smiles and knowing glances between those watching an interaction but there is tension. It doesn’t seem to get better. The hurt continues. Gustav is a director focused on his own needs and wants and paying little attention those around him. He is charming to strangers and persists strongly with his girls to pressure them to do what he wants. The women daughters are pleasers, who suffer while generally being compliant. They keep many thoughts to themselves, even when then strongly object to an approach. Elle Fanning plays an American Hollywood star who attends a viewing of the previous Gustav film at a Festival and approaches him about doing something “more substantial”. Fanning plays a surrogate to daughter Nora for the movie project, which Gustav is also planning on shooting in the house where the girls and the family had lived. This movie isn’t for everybody, and I think younger viewers could struggle with the pace. However they might gain some insight into how they perceive their own parent. This remains a really good film and I am glad that I saw it. It sticks with me as I think through the ways that it reflects back on my own life. Good cinema does this. It can mirror circumstances that you may have experienced before and allow you to see them for different angles. There isn’t really a “truth” per se in family situations, but different perspectives. Ultimately your parents are still your parents, and as the saying goes “blood is thicker than water”. Family carries on and the hope can be that it may cause pain, but still also provide love and support which can carry one through tougher challenges.
Black Mirror: I am steadily working my way through this series. I was least enthused about Fifteen Million Merits, which addressed a Britain’s Got Talent, X Factor like game show where participants are vying for a chance to be offered a dream job. The story addresses people who ride bikes to earn merits, and then an enormous amount of merits are needed to go on the show. The twist was surprising by the payoff didn’t really work.
However, I was very excited about two further episodes entitled Be Right Back and San Junipero which were both very good. Be Right Back stars Hayley Atwell and Domnhall Gleeson and addresses grief. Once again technology is used to provide a backdrop for a moral dilemma. But the technology they speak about isn’t too far distant in the future (at least initially in this episode). I thoroughly enjoyed this from the performances to the story and the dilemma involved.
I also enjoyed San Junipero starring Canadian Mackenzie Davis and Gugu Mbatha-Raw. This is another relationship story with an awkward woman (Davis) meeting up with a more wild woman. Together they build a bond in a unique place, as Davis learns to come out of her shell and be her authentic self. Well worth seeing.
I actually rewatched Mackenzie Davis in Terminator Dark Fate and once again was pleased with the story in this franchise. It takes an off ramp on the original John Connor story, and becomes more about the strong women involved in this time including of course Sarah Connor, being played once again by Linda Hamilton. I still stand by my review of this movie from back from November 4, 2019.
Blue Moon: Ethan Hawke stars in this movie directed by Richard Linklater. He plays Lorenz Hart in 1943 who was a very talented musical lyricist, who worked alongside the more famous Richard Rodgers (of Rodgers and Hammerstein fame). Hart worked with Rodgers for over 20 years, having met him in 1919 until Hart’s death in 1943.
The film opens with the death of Hart, drunk on the streets of New York and dying of exposure. He was an alcoholic and suffered from depression. Going back in time, the movie then goes to opening night of Oklahoma! which Rodgers worked with Oscar Hammerstein. Hart goes to Sardi’s bar/restaurant, a New York institution, and chats up the bartender, a piano player and another patron about this lovely young woman that he has met. Later on, Rodgers arrives, played by the excellent Andrew Scott, who makes time for Hart, but who can be seen to be increasingly uncomfortable in engaging further with him. Rodgers found Hart to be too unreliable with his drinking and attendance in working sessions, but still recognized the brilliance of the man with the words and ideas in songs. Songs which they worked on include “Blue Moon”, “The Lady Is a Tramp”, and “My Funny Valentine” among many.
The film is really almost a one-man show for Hawke. In an interview he described that his good friend and director Linklater had challenged him with this role, and said that he didn’t want to see any of the typical Hawke mannerisms. If he saw any, he would stop and do it again. Hart was a short balding man at around 5 feet tall. Hawke is 5’10” and so they had to do some camera tricks to make him this short. It was noticed but done well. Hawke captures an annoying, talkative, know-it-all person who was just sleighted by his collaborator in creating a memorable work without him. It is a divorce in a way. To Rodgers’ face, Hart gushes about Oklahoma, but behind his back and with others he condemns the piece as not reflecting the midwest or current values of the day (wartime USA). Hart rambles on about the young woman, who he talks about his love for her (despite those in New York scene thinking that he was actually gay) but one wonders whether she feels as he does in return. She arrives and we see how it plays out. Despite being an alcoholic, we see that Hart didn’t have a great deal of fortitude to keep the drink from running his life. It seems the part of him that made him an excellent lyricist also made him an insufferable human being. Having seen this past summer the most excellent play Good Night Oscar about an appearance by another addicted and talented pianist Oscar Levant, I could see a number of similarities between the two. In the end I think that Hawke was excellent here and it should garner a Best Actor nomination. The movie was only 1:40 long, and yet at times as an audience I felt like Rodgers in that we were spending more time than I wanted with this odd, talented, strange man. I am glad that I saw it.
Frankenstein: This is the new Guillermo Del Toro interpretation film recently released both in theatres and on Netflix. It was at TIFF this past September. It stars Oscar Isaac as the scientist Victor Frankenstein. I will preface my comments to state that I do not profess to be a Frankenstein expert in any way. I have never read the Mary Shelley book, but back in 1994 I did see the version of her story on film with Robert De Niro playing the monster and Kenneth Branaugh as Victor. I truly do not remember it. To be fair, this is 31 years ago! So this review is not going to be a comparison with that film, nor a detailed review of how this film diverges from the original material. This movie will stand on its own.
Del Toro has a certain style of film, and he tells certain stories. There is a Making Of documentary on Netflix as well which is a good overview of the filming process and his creative mind. Del Toro speaks about himself and stories that shaped him, and Frankenstein as well as Pinnochio were two stories that impacted him the most. Not surprisingly these are his last two movies, and both have been on Netflix. But both stories explore the relationship with fathers and sons, along with creators and their creations. Gipetto wanted a son and created one. Victor wanted to extend life or cheat death and created his monster. Del Toro wants to make films about people “who are full of villainy”. That is an interesting lens.
This is filmed beautifully, and once again in Toronto for much of it, in the studios on Kipling and they made and filmed the ship on the Docks area near the waterfront. The sets are detailed and the costuming is excellent. It is a period piece with it separated into three Acts, with the Victor story, the Monster story and then the final Act with them back together. Early on we see Victor’s young life with an overbearing father Leopold, played by Charles Dance from Game of Thrones fame, who berates the young Victor and treats his mother horribly. Victor becomes obsessed with making a mark on the world and science. The acting is good with Isaac, but add in Dance, Christoph Walz as the father of the fiance (played by Mia Goth) to Victor’s brother named William. Jacob Elordi plays the monster, and he has initially a very physical role and then he obtains more vocabulary to speak on his own behalf. The monster has abilities that simply belie explanation from a biological perspective. So on that front, this takes away from overall believability. I was also surprised that Victor in interacting with his creation, decides to treat the monster horribly, berating him for his lack of language skills. He shows no kindness, no joy in completing his lifetime ambition, and this perceived requirement for perfection before showing the world the achievement. So then the monster then becomes more monsterous, and begs the question about nature versus nurture.
Overall this was competent, and shows the love of the material by Del Toro. The movie byline is that “Only Monsters Play God”. There is a desire to create sympathy for the monster with mixed results. The final message reflects onto those who live in miserable cirsumstances and have no real way to escape from it. So where does it fall in comparing with other more recent horror/thriller movies? Is it better than Nosferatu which I would say that it is the closest comparison? I think that they are both decent efforts. This is not a Best Picture nomination for me. I don’t see acting honours in here either. As a movie available on Netflix, it is worthy of an evening to watch a talented director show one of his favourite stories.
Black Mirror: It was recommended to me that I check out some episodes of this series on Netflix. It was a British series at first from back in 2011, but then Netflix got involved in five further seasons from 2016 until 2025. It was recommended to me that there were a few episodes to start me out and see if I liked it. The first one was in this latest season (series 7) and the episode entitled Eulogy with Paul Giamatti. Think of this series like a modern day Twilight Zone with a more technological bent. There is a theme from the few episodes that I have seen which utilizes a technology that will interact directly with our minds and memories.
In Eulogy, Giammati plays Phillip who is a bitter, angry older man who lives on his own. He receives a random phone call with a name that was initially not familiar, and then he recognizes as a former girlfriend. It turns out that she has passed away. He is asked by the mysterious voice whether he has any memories or something that he would like to add to the memorial/wake proceedings. It can be pictures or memories, and to assist Phillip is offered to put on a small metal disk on his temple to explore the memories. Music can help. Pictures help as he can be brought back into those pictures (literally) and talk about that moment in time. What begins as a cursory review for Phillip then digs deeper and we realize that he knows this person Carol more than casually. It was a serious relationship. We come to realize that this was likely the most significant relationship in Phillip’s life and that there are lessons still to be learned. It is so very well done, and I would recommend this to anyone, especially older people, who have a past which covers relationships and lost loves and crossroads where paths were taken and others were not. We can see that the same set of circumstances viewed with both parties in mind, and their attitudes can shape things very differently.
I was then told that if I liked that, which I very much did, that I should watch an early episode in season 1, The Entire History of You and also a dating episode from Season 4 called Hang the DJ. Both were very thought provoking, and shows in a critical aspect of our lives (our relationships) how technology can play a part, in both a positive way, but also negatively. Imagine upon first meeting someone that you could press a button on a machine, and it would tell you the length of that relationship in hours, days, or years. Intriguing. Both are worthy of your time.
Then I was told, if I liked the original Star Trek with William Shatner to check out from Season 4, episode 1 USS Callister with Jesse Plemons and Cristin Milioti, from Penguin fame. Then in Season 7, there is a follow up episode (Season 7, episode 6) entitled USS Callister: Into Infinity where I will say that Cristin Milioti really shines. Together this could be a feature film. There is star power here in the acting but it is also a compelling story.
The “real world” has a new immersive video game, using the metal disk technology on the temple, where game players can enter a Star Trek-like world. The players enter this RPG (role playing game) and create an online persona. This digital version of themselves moves around that world and interacts with others. If you are a gamer, you know very much what I am talking about. These episodes explore what happens when these lines are blurred, and where a nefarious character with questionable scruples decides to manipulate others without their consent. I will leave it at that, because the result is a thrilling and fascinating exploration into the issues that are raised. I am very pleased that I was introduced to this series, and I will continue to review more episodes. I have been told that it can be hit or miss, but mostly quality programming. Check it out.
Death By Lightning: This week’s reviews are dealing with a number of releases on Netflix recently. This one was just released in early November while the others were October releases. This is a four-part series which shows the late 1870s and early 1880s with the political landscape of the Republican Party. This is a few years after the end of the Civil War and also the assassination of President Lincoln. Michael Shannon plays James Garfield of Ohio. He was a Congressman heading to the Republican convention in Chicago where he was there to stand up for and nominate his fellow Ohio Senator John Sherman. He provides a rousing speech for that nomination in his defiance of the existing sitting President Ulysses Grant, who was well supported by the voters in New York State, lead by Roscoe Conkling. With no intention of being a nominee things happen at the convention that were unexpected.
The other main character in the story is Charles Guiteau, played by Matthew Macfayden (Tom from Succession) who is a scoundrel and a charleton, who is a former lawyer who steals from his clients and his family, lies without hesitation and exaggerates his importance and accomplishments. He has been relentless in looking to find a steady job after seeing the Republican convention take place in Chicago. He seeks out the politicians to engage with them to help with the campaign. He backs into a job by pure happenstance. He relentlessly pursues Garfield and the senior staff in the Administration, which nowadays we would call stalking. Macfayden is creepy in portraying this narcissist and it is remarkable that he is allowed access to the White House and the President so frequently, especially given the recent assassination of Lincoln.
I found this slow to get going, and the language used is updated to reflect current venacular including present day profanity. There are some uncomfortable scenes with Guiteau as time as again he takes advantage of people or simply spouts off on various untruths with people who are looking to be cordial and pleasant with him. Garfield is shown to be an idealist, looking to have government “by the people, for the people” as written in the Constitution. He doesn’t like power brokers like New York’s Conkling and wants to end the influence there. He has true faith in a running mate he never chose, but was from New York where influence was necessary. It was a poor choice. I did not know this story, and it was engaging. It was also surprising how democracy can be run, but also how individuals can have their morals overwhelmed by influence of others. It is a weakness in the system, but a necessary one. I like Betty Gilpin as Garfield’s wife as she shows herself to be strong, intelligent and resilient. She is a true partner for James Garfield, supporting, defending and standing by his side. This series taught me a number of things about this time in American history, including that Canadian Alexander Graham Bell could be involved! Imagine that!
A House of Dynamite: This was recently released on Netflix as well. It was somewhat frustrating, which was intentional by the well known director Kathryn Bigelow, that we saw three different versions of the same set of circumstances without resolution. It has a good cast with Idris Elba as the President, Jared Harris as the Defense Secretary, Rebecca Ferguson and Jason Clarke. From the political side it is interesting to see that a foreign power (not Russia or China) has unexpected nuclear capability and decides to make an aggressive, unexpected move. It is surprising that the US relies solely on limited counter-measures to combat this aggressive move and not have further ability to do anything else after that. I understand that conceptually one is trying to strike a bullet midair with another bullet, but to save countless lives it would seem to be simply not enough. I would expect that drones, planes and other missiles could be launched against it. Certainly I would also expect that other countries potentially could assist.
Much is made in the previews and pictures in spport of this movie about Rebecca Ferguson, however her time and role are limited, and mostly to the first of the three sections involved. Others play roles higher up that are more consequential, but that I think was the point because initially the event was viewed as being a mistake, a drill, or not that consequential. In a matter of minutes it gets to be VERY consequential. My biggest takeaway was that there was a reasonable, rational man sitting as the President (Elba). If this situation were to play itself out now in real life, with the current President at the helm, it wouldn’t be so thoughtful of an exercise, and I would expect that the “well done” option would be used by him (as opposed to rare or medium well). That could be wrong, and I have to hope that such a scenario never plays out with this President, but my suspicion is that rather than Elba, we would have a President from Stephen King’s Dead Zone played by Martin Sheen instead as pictured below.
I do think that the advice provided by the generals in this movie was unreasonable, as an immediate retaliatory strike back (in whatever degree or form) wasn’t necessary without seeing more missile launches being sent. Surely there is an understanding, clearly shown in all the faces but not uttered in words, that worldwide annihilation is what was at stake here. As situated, there would be an ability to track down where that original event originated from, even if by submarine. All superpowers would have an interest to bring the perpetrator to justice, if all were innocent and not knowing about the actions of an outlier. The stakes are just too high to be careless about pride and what is necessary in retaliation. I recognize that the whole point was getting to point of impact, and seeing those and their reactions to it without actually seeing the results, but the movie certainly leaves the viewer hanging. It certainly leads a viewer to question a number of things as a result. Let’s hope such a scenario never comes to pass in our lifetimes.
Ballad of a Small Player: This is a new movie with Colin Farrell, directed by Edward Berger. Set in Macau, which looks remarkably like Las Vegas, Farrell plays Lord Doyle who we learn is on the lam and a gambling addict. His game is baccarat, but he seems to fare worse than James Bond ever did. He explains that money can change hands very quickly and fortunes gained. The object is to have two cards which together add up to 9, but not over. Face cards are zero. He has a binging personality, which can be from his gambling, his eating habits and the places where he stays. He is on the lam from taking a wealthy person in Britain for a substantial sum, and he is pursued by an investigator Cynthia Blithe played by Tilda Swinton.
At a low ebb in his fortunes, Doyle meets up with Dao Ming who explains that he is playing against “Grandma” who has very deep pockets and plays with her husband’s money. Dao Ming plays herself, but also fronts money as a loan shark for other people. It seems her debts could also be quite high. The plot continues. Doyle becomes more desperate and in that hour of need, and meets up again with Dao Ming who comforts him and they discuss at length how they are very similar people. I won’t carry on further with the plot, except to say that Doyle is faced with a difficult decision. The rest is in many ways more fantasy (perhaps) than reality but certainly Doyle is a believer. In the final act, we are left seeing the choices that Doyle makes and wonder what exactly that he has learned about himself, and how do we expect that he will carry on.
I think that Farrell plays this well and shows the manic side of Doyle well. You can see the addict of any kind who will stoop to any level or means to get another hit or to play another hand. The gambler is always convinved that they are one good hand, one win streak away from turning their luck and life around. Rarely does it seem to come, because generally once on a winning streak, the gambler wants more and more. In the days of gambling available virtually everywhere, in casinos and on the phone, this is a good lesson for many to see. There is a reason why there are so many apps, and casinos in places around the world. There is a reason in Ontario that the government sets up the casinos, and that is because they make money. They profit off the human vices. Those who get as deep as Doyle does in the whirlwind can find that their lives get turned upside down. It was interesting to view and took an odd turn but was not time wasted.
Bugonia: Not sure what I was expecting as I went to the theatre to see this, but it wasn’t what I saw. Yorgos Lanthimos is not known for starightfoward storytelling, so I knew that this would be different. Some previous efforts of his have worked for me, like Poor Things, The Lobster or The Favourite. Others haven’t worked, like last year’s Kinds of Kindness. This effort stars Emma Stone once again, who won the Oscar for Poor Things, and Jesse Plemons, who was in Kinds of Kindness. The story builds upon a number of themes, and takes those themes and follows up with something that is quite over-the-top fantastic. Lanthimos is not subtle, but he makes you think and dig deeper as an audience. Seeing this literally will be a frustrating exercise. I cannot delve to much into the plot save for the basics which are established early.
Stone plays Michelle Fuller who is a high tech CEO who heads a company working on various advances in medical and other areas. She is driven, featured on national magazines, and hands on working on a new diversity campaign for her company.
Plemons plays Teddy who owns a farm in a remote part of the US. He lives there with his cousin Don, who follows Teddy closely as they work together. Teddy is the brains of the operation and he has a unique view of the world which has been shaped by his own direct experience with notably his mother, but also through research of stories and opinions on the internet. Teddy believes that something is strange, citing the situation with his own bee hives and the plight of bees, and he is planning on doing something drastic about it. He and Don decide to kidnap Michelle Fuller.
The story continues from there to its conclusion. Along the way, there are significant and substantial unexpected turns. For me, a day later I am still processing those twists. I have concluded that the themes that are touched upon include isolationism, incel culture, social media, truth vs fake news, conspiracy theories, technology moguls directing and shaping the world, extremism, political violence, global warming, climate change, indigenous people, evolution, survival instincts and many others. Although there was some laughter within the three-quarter full theatre, much of it was uncomfortable. It was NOT hilarious. In fact it was much more disturbing than funny. The pendulum swings within the story on who to believe are dramatic to say the least. This isn’t a movie for everybody. It is a physically demanding role in particular for Stone. Plemons has lost significant weight and I think he and Leo DiCaprio (One Battle After Another) are vying for the nomination for Most Greasy Actor in a film. Still he plays this with conviction and I was impressed. This doesn’t need to be seen on a big screen and will do quite well on the smaller screen. I didn’t leave the theatre, like Poor Things, and feel that the Best Actress award is given to Stone. I think that there are other performances that will take the spotlight, but this does not take away from the effort involved in bringing this movie to the screen. This was released on Halloween, and grossed $5.03M over the weekend. Movies don’t have to be all about box office, but the number does show you what the people are paying to see. I am glad that a Lanthimos is out there to stretch our minds and make us think rather than find a new way to re-do Anaconda, which is top of mind as the trailer with Paul Rudd, Jack Black and Thandie Newton was shown before this as a preview. Anaconda is a hard pass for me. Bugonia is worth a viewing.
La La Land: Back in my January 9, 2017 post, after watching the Golden Globes I had the following to say:
A quick sidebar about the Golden Globes last night. La La Land was nominated in 7 categories and won every one. It became the movie with the most Golden Globe wins ever. I have to say that I have little interest in seeing this homage to Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, nor particularly in the whole musical on film genre. Best Picture Oscars have been awarded to Chicago and The Artist and other such films but for me they are not all that intriguing. I certainly do not need to see them on the big screen, especially in this instance with Golden Globe winner Emma Stone who I really don’t like much.
That was eight years ago, and I had chosen to stay away from this. But then in August 2017, I did manage to see this for the first time. My thoughts then were as follows:
The story is a simple one; aspiring actress is frustrated by the whole Hollywood scene, when she meets frustrated jazz pianist (Gosling) who wants to revive the dying jazz clubs and music. I did like the bright and colourful costumes and sets. They showed joy and positive energy when so much around us can be down and dark. There are a couple cute scenes. The music I felt was good, with some catchy songs. Still this didn’t excite me, and I wasn’t enthralled. I found the singing ability lacking, and in some cases hard to hear the voices of the leads. They aren’t singers. Not in a Russell Crowe or Peirce Brosnan horrible way, but not accomplished singers. And perhaps that is one of the frustrations, is that there ARE triple threats out there who can sing, dance and act. Ryan Gosling has confidence in what he is doing, it is true, but I don’t pretend that he is playing the piano. Some of it, yes but much of it is done by others I suspect. His dancing was competent but he wasn’t channeling Fred Astaire. It is a bit forced. Like the relationship between the leads. They don’t have electric chemistry together. Alison’s description about Emma Stone’s face is right on point. The math just simply doesn’t add up. She is not very attractive; she doesn’t have a killer body; she is not a singer as we have established; she is a decent actor. Her turn in Birdman as the daughter was one of her better performances, and garnered her a Supporting Actress nomination. She is quirky and simply just doesn’t do anything for me. That she WON the Best Actress award for this just floors me. If you have seen Elle, Isabelle Huppert who won the Golden Globe had a better performance. I suspect Stone won for her song performance when she auditioned for the movie in Paris, and that song about her aunt. Still I remain perplexed. In the end the romantic in me was not satisfied with the ending, but then again that was a twist that was to be expected I suppose. It made sense. There are paths that we all choose to take and they direct our lives and have consequences. The same holds true here.
I decided to re-watch this once again, as I had completely forgotten that I had seen it. Directed by Damian Chazelle this film won six Oscars, including Best Actress (Emma Stone), Directing, Cinematography, Music, Song and Production Design. It lost out to Moonlight for Best Picture. Ryan Gosling lost out to Casey Affleck. Watching this once again eight years later, I was initially wary about the opening number of the freeways in LA in a traffic jam. Despite that start which was Meh for me, the movie progresses into the main storyline is with Sebastian, played by Ryan Gosling, and Mia played by Emma Stone. Sebastian is an accomplished jazz pianist who has ambitions of opening a jazz club in LA, despite the fact that it is recognized that jazz does not have a lot of young listeners and is fading away in popularity. He meets Mia who is an aspiring actress, struggling with auditions and her many roommates. All of them want to make it in LA. Upon meeting Sebastian, Mia confesses early that she “hates jazz”. Sebastian decides to explore that further by taking her to a jazz club so that he can explain the genre of music. Mia is in the early days of a relationship, but she thinks about her interactions with Sebastian. She dumps her boyfriend at a restaurant, and meets up with Sebastian to see Rebel Without A Cause, which she has never seen. They start to date.
The movie is split into seasons (Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter). We see the couple and how they look to support each other’s dreams. With encouragement, Mia takes Sebastian’s suggestion to write a play for herself and perform it rather than doing other people’s work. He chooses to entreat his former college buddy, played by John Legend, and play keyboards in his pop band. Jazz gets set to the side. The money is good and is a steady job. It is not taxing to his skills as a musician. Things happen and the fourth season shows the results of their efforts. There is a dynamic scene where Sebastian finds Mia and tells her about an audition that she has been invited to by a well-known casting director. The scene is effective in showing Mia’s struggles and how so many of these auditions have disappointed her in the past. She is tired of being hurt.
I was most impressed by Gosling, who played all of the music on the piano, from someone who was a beginner and took three months to learn all of the pieces, by rote (no reading music). This running contrary to my initial reaction that he couldn’t be playing the piano parts. Well I was wrong and he does an amazing job knowing this now. He worked with a coach two hours a day, five and six days a week. The results are incredible. Oh, and he also had to learn his lines, and do the choreography for the dance numbers! I can only marvel at that kind of commitment and talent. There were no hand doubles, no professional pianists filling in for Gosling. True, he is not a singer, but his dancing was very good and he is approaching triple threat talent. I also have to give credit to Stone. She embodies this role, and you can see the emotional toll that her struggles for success take on her. She also shows her connection with Gosling throughout. Add to this roles after this, like Poor Things where she won another Oscar, and she has grown as an actor. To say that Isabelle Huppert is more than a little unfair. So once again, I was wrong. The production design is first rate, and the music is an excellent accompaniment. The music and musical numbers add so much to this and give it an uplifting emotion. It is another character.
Some of the scenes are whimsical and dream-like as above shows (literally dancing in the stars). It is pure joy to see the two actors make it all look so effortless. If the aim was to introduce the movie musical back to audiences, then this does an excellent job. Funnily enough eight years later, not much more has happened in the musical form with notable exceptions like Wicked. Here, the audience cares for the two protagonists and lovers. We care about their stories, their sacrifices and support for one another. Sometimes things don’t always work out, and turn out as you might expect. Sometimes “giving all that you have got” for a dream means that there is nothing left for anything else. This story is an homage to LA as well and a fitting one. I wish that I had not been as stubborn about this, but I am glad that I came to my senses and re-watched it since I clearly didn’t remember it well. Seek it out if you can and enjoy in all that this movie brings to the screen. Old dogs like me can learn from past mistakes and attitudes and find new things to like about an older film. I note that I have seen a lot of Emma Stone this week.
Springsteen: Deliver Me From Nowhere: My first memories of Bruce Springsteen include Christmas 1980 when my step-brother requested The River, and my Mom when she saw the album cover wondered who “that ruffian” was on it. For me, I remember trying in vain for tickets in 1984, lining up outside a TicketMaster sales office in a record store at a Toronto mall, for the Born in the USA tour. Most recently I saw Bruce perform in Buffalo with the E Street Band in March 2023. It only took forty years to get there! There is an autobiography on Bruce out there entitled Born to Run published in 2016 which is unread by me. It might have helped me be better prepared for this film.
This movie starring The Bear‘s Jeremy Allen White, deals with the time in the early 1980s after The River was released but before Nebraska. Bruce is already very successful having released in the past five years albums Born to Run (1975), Darkness On the Edge of Town (1978), and The River (1980). Bruce concludes his tour in Cincinnati and then looks to head back home to New Jersey. Bruce’s manager Jon Landau, played by Jeremy Strong, looks to move forward into a new album, more material in which to keep the ball rolling. Bruce is exhausted and looks to decompress for a while.
Bruce stays in a house by himself in a remote part of New Jersey and he will come into NYC to the Power Station music studio to record his tracks. From his earlier rock tracks, music that moves Bruce at this house is more acoustic and deeper, more personally impactful. He remembers back to his childhood, where his Mom, played by Gaby Hoffman, encourages an 8yo Bruce to go to the local bar and retrieve Dad, played by Adolescence‘s Dad Stephen Graham. Dad and Mom argue a lot, much about his drinking and staying out. Bruce is scared of Dad, and as he grows up more than a little sad about him. Mom seems always on the verge of a meltdown. Bruce writes his songs back in his room. He records using a simple TEAC machine plus an echo machine. He puts his tracks on regular cassette tapes. The story continues. It is a dark story, and also shows Bruce being introduced to Faye who is a single Mom who works at the local diner. They begin a relationship, but it is one that those who know Bruce he didn’t end up marrying. His first wife was actress and model Julianne Phillips. Jon Landau hears the new works like Atlantic City and Nebraska and feels that they represent a new more personal side of Bruce. Bruce is committed to those songs in particular. The movie chronicles the recording process and Bruce’s relationship with Faye.
I am fascinated by the creative process, and by those who have the ability to create. Springsteen, despite what Donald Trump says about him, has been creative his entire life. He wrote songs not just for him but others like Manfred Mann, Patti Smith, and The Pointer Sisters. I like that they show Bruce just noodling on the guitar, and then writing out the words on paper. The words seem to flow first for him according to this. But also he wrote a number of songs from Born in the USA, like Glory Days, I’m On Fire and Born in the USA at the same time as those from Nebraska. It is quite a difference in attitude and genre. Born in the USA is more commercial with catchy, poppy hits. One would think that these would come from a different place. Yet Bruce is so committed to Nebraska and those tunes that he decides to shelve those for Born in the USA. There is a moment in the final act where his Dad is at a concert of his, and he requests that 34yo Bruce sit on his lap. Bruce responds “I have never done that” to which I was instantly thinking, “but you wrote about sitting on his lap (in that big ole Buick) in the song My Hometown“!! This as I mention is a dark movie. It doesn’t have a lot of pace. We see the struggles but some realizations for someone who by all accounts “has it all”. Money, fame, accolades and a creative outlet, along with people who support him, especially Landau. One need look no further than Bruce’s words on his Rock n Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony to see what Landau has meant to him in his life. I was also interested to see the technology at work and how they were creatively able to put music from a cassette onto old school vinyl. It was a fascinating insight into the business of music. So this is a movie that I was glad that I saw, it provided me with a new understanding and has encouraged me to learn more about the Boss and his music. From that standpoint, it is mission accomplished.
House of Guinness: I have been to Dublin. I have been to the Guinness factory. I will admit to enjoying a pint from time to time. I will say that I agree with the adage that says that the Guinness tastes better the closer you get to Dublin (although Cork was really good too). But this drama on Netflix from Peaky Blinders‘ Steven Knight isn’t a beer story, it is a story about family and succession in 1868 in the year when Sir Benjamin Guinness passed away. His adult children Anne, Arthur, Benjamin, and Edward then are tasked with the legacy of a business as directed by their father. Like the HBO drama Succession each of the children have their skills, and not all of them involve knowing how to run the beer business. Sir Benjamin Guinness the father was a head of a brewery but also a noted philanthropist as well as someone active in government, as he was the Lord Mayor of Dublin in 1851 and represented Dublin in the House of Commons in London. He was a difficult act to follow.
Each of the children have their own issues, with Edward played by Louis Partridge and Arthur played by Masters of the Air Anthony Boyle being the primary focus. They run the brewery as partners who don’t always see eye to eye. Being in Ireland, there are aspects of Protestant and Catholics, Irish and British, the aristocracy and the workers all joined in together. For a business that is looking to grow and expand, there is domestic and international challenges to bring forward and address. But the story is about people and not a business. People who had passions, and loves and desires beyond their own station. It seems this is still a time when women aren’t allowed to be heads of companies, and that being in love with someone not of your same class, or of your same sex is something which can bring disrepute to the family name. So much is done to keep the secrets hidden. I liked the series and this first season which is clearly set up for a second season. Leadership isn’t easy, and not being true to oneself isn’t easy either. We saw a lot of this in the HBO series The Crown with the life of Queen Elizabeth and her family. Certainly there are sympathetic aspects of their lives, but there are also horrific acts and situations that are perpetrated. All that to say that this along with The Diplomat most recently were quality and interesting television to watch in between baseball and hockey games! I look forward to season 2.
Love Is Blind Season 9: This was a trainwreck. From the beginning to the end. This was a waste of time. From strange men, who find new ways to be deceptive, to the women who seem to be focused on things like their botox injections it just didn’t get any better. The wedding episode was dropped this past week with predictable results. For me, I have to admit that I just fast forwarded through talking to cut to the chase. Yawn. Not worth your time. I am hopeful that producers find a way to screen better “contestants”.
A Big Bold Beautiful Journey: I saw the trailers for this starring Margot Robbie (playing Sarah) and Colin Farrell (playing David) in the romantic comedy with some fantasy undertones. By fantasy undertones I am meaning that a mythical car rental agency (manned by Kevin Kline and Phoebe Waller-Bridge – go figure!) and they are looking to help out Colin Farrell. They rent David a 1994 Saturn, and they insist on him taking their version of GPS guidance, and he proceeds to head towards a wedding. At the wedding he sees across the aisle in the church Sarah. They have a first conversation later outside the church. Romantic comedies live and die with your connection to the couple and how much that you cheer for them. For me, my initial reservation about this couple was the age discrepancy (he is 49yo and she is 35yo). Yes, it’s a movie, but it was a first impression. She early on says to him “I am afraid of hurting you. No matter how this plays out, I’ll end up hurting you”. They part but not before she asks “do you want to marry me?” That was very weird. Especially after what she had just said to him.
The initial premise seemed to work as the GPS within the car seems to know a lot more about David than you would expect. He later is asked about whether he is interested in a “big bold beautiful journey” to which he hesitantly responds “yes” is a maybe voice. Then he is taken to a Burger King and meets Sarah one more time, and then her 1994 Saturn won’t start. It seems that Sarah ended up at the same car rental agency. They start to travel together and have stops along the way that have random doors, like pictured above which takes them to various places in time and place. Over the visits we learn about some of the life issues that these people have experienced. They, like everyone, are flawed and we learn about both David’s idealism and Sarah’s issues. One stop is with David in high school, with him performing in the school play as the lead. David reveals there one of the early romantic relationships that he had and how it has impacted his life going forward. The rest of the scene for me was just too contrived. The story continues.
In the final act, they decide to take this in an unusual direction involving parents which is as far as I will describe it. One involves going to a place with an unusual view as seen above. Where exactly are they – clearly it appears to be from space – but is this necessary and does it make sense? The scenes with the parents don’t really work for me, save for the one conversation where a parent suggests to an adult child (who they THINK is MUCH younger) that they need to be “content”. I think that is sage advice where consideration should be made towards how you yourself feels with a potential partner. So you need contentment with you, how you feel in your life, in order to be able to bring someone else into your world. I will make a further comment that I am not so sure how one can fully embody another person without a full knowledge of that person’s life experience. But in the end, despite things concluding as you would expect, it still falls flat for me.
The Diplomat Season 3: I finished this latest season on Sunday. I think that this is one of the most well written series out there currently. The actors are universally good, and notably Rufus Sewell as Hal, Allison Janney, Ato Essandoh (as Stuart) and Ali Ahn (as Eldra Park) in addition to star Keri Russell.
The level of drama between the US and Britain grows in each episode. In culminates with the cliff hanger. I will note that there is time that passes between some early episodes of half a year. This will explain the new romantic relationship for Kate as the US Ambassador to UK. One of the things that troubles me is how Kate as the Ambassador is put in a position and meetings where she becomes a rogue element. More senior people than her voice concerns and make decisions and then she does her level best to look to influence those decisions in other ways. As a senior leader herself, she should know the value of people who work for her doing what she asks them to do. An actor who is actively working to countermand your decisions, would ensure that you are not viewed as reliable nor a team player. There is a point in this season when a comment is made to Kate that “if you are trying to do two jobs at the same time, you can only do them poorly”. I also feel as though Kate in her position should not be viewed, nor the implication made that she has gotten into her position by “sleeping her way to the top.” There are many women in power in this show which I embrace, but I do think that Kate has shown her affections along with men who provide her with status or inside information. It’s not necessary but keeps the story moving. But I still regard this as an excellent season and some of the best TV out there. Worth your time to watch, and certainly worth the time to catch up if this isn’t a series that you have watched before, and catching up for two seasons is not an inordinate amount of time to spend. I had slowed down my watching of Season 3 since I didn’t want it to end. Enjoy.
John Candy: I Like Me: Canadian comedic icon John Candy passed away back in March 1994 while working on the movie Wagon’s East at the age of 43 years old. It is surprising to me that it has taken 31 years to bring this documentary forward. Ryan Reynolds is one of the producers and it is directed by Tom Hanks’ son, Colin. The movie brings together outstanding comedy performers like Bill Murray, Catherine O’Hara, Eugene Levy, Dave Thomas, Steve Martin, Dan Aykroyd, Mel Brooks, and Conan O’Brian among others. It also shows John’s two children, Jennifer and Chris and his wife.
In typical documentary fashion we go through a chronological history of the man, beginning at the end at his funeral, but then going back to his earlier times. He was born on Halloween in 1950. He has an older brother and his parents. A lifechanging moment for him was when his father passed away from a massive heart attack at 35yo when John was just 5 years old. That shaped his life going forward as those around him never really talked about it, as that generation of people was known for doing. John loved football but an injury ended those dreams. Then he stumbled into theatre in high school and was later encouraged to try out for the newly opened Second City in Toronto. The original Second City comedy store in Chicago was expanding. From there his talent blossomed to the point where Stephen Spielberg came to Toronto to speak to John about a part in his movie 1941. The movie continues with his career highlights, including his many roles working with director John Hughes which coincided with his connection with Hughes offscreen.
What sticks out about John is how he was so genuine, and authentic with those around him. He was heavy set in stature which stood out upon first glance but his depth of character and caring about people became more memorable for those who knew him. Bill Murray hopes jokingly early on in the interviews that someone “will come up with some dirt on John” because he couldn’t. He did struggle with his weight to be sure, but the discussion turns more on John’s belief that dying early was hereditary in his family and he felt that he was on borrowed time. His older brother had a heart attack working as a member of a film crew John had arranged for him. Despite this, he didn’t like going to doctors and never seemed to stop his love of smoking, drinking and eating well. The comedic genuis and timing remained throughout. Sharpening his skills on Second City and later SCTV he created so many memorable characters. From the Schemgie brothers, to Dr Tongue 3-D horror films to Johnny LaRue and the Fishin Musician he could work on many levels. Movies came calling and he preferred them. There is a touching scene at the end of the movie which I won’t spoil. But suffice it to say that the Canadian from Newmarket made his mark on the world in a most profound way even if he was taken from us far too early. I enjoyed this movie and I would encourage you to see it. It can be found on Prime now.
Splitsville: This new release starring Dakota Johnson and three others that I am not familiar with, seems to be a pet project for these actors. Playing two separate couples, both married we see a change in their relationship over the course of the movie. Johnson is married to Paul, played by Michael Angelo Covino who also directed the movie. We learn that their marriage is an open one, but that the husband isn’t really as receptive to its openness when his wife talks about her recent relation. The other couple is Kyle Marvin playing Carey and his wife Ashley played by Adria Arjona, have been married 14 months and we see them at the beginning singing in the car on a trip to visit the other couple. Carey and Paul are best friends. There is a bizarre incident on the drive, and then Ashley confesses that she no longer wishes to be married anymore. Carey is caught fully blindsided. He up and runs away leaving the car and his wife behind.
There are a couple of funny moments early, but it quickly goes into the strange and stupid downhill really quickly after that. There is a rather bizarre fight sequence and we quickly learn that two of the people in these marriages are pretty repulsive people. The details are unimportant but the crucial fact for the audience is that they aren’t really likeable people and you are cheering for them and hoping for them to get themselves sorted. Rather, we things happen later on one feels incredulous that this is a course correction that one felt was necessary or even believable. Pity the young child who seems to have a way of taking things that don’t belong to him, all the while he gets conflicting and dyametrically opposed advice from the adults around him. All in all, this was a movie where I had seen a preview and thought “this might be worth checking out” especially since the other romantic movie with Dakota Johnson Materialists was quite enjoyable and thought provoking. This is NOT that movie. So this is a hard pass, and you can thank me later for giving you back 1:40 of your life! You’re welcome!
The Diplomat – Season 3: The latest season of this excellent series has been released on Netflix. I have watched the first three episodes and they pick up exactly at the moment of the end of Season 2. There was a surprising ending to last season and this continues on with the excitement and the intrigue. The series stars Keri Russell as Kate Wyler, who was the current US Ambassador to the UK, but had ideas of being in a higher level position within the Administration. She is married to Hal, played by Rufus Sewell, and they have a complex relationship. During this season we learn more of the backstory on just how complicated it is. Both are in the civil service. He is very experienced and was once the Ambassador to Lebanon. He has a way of speaking when he shouldn’t and pissing off all the wrong people. The relationship is more professional than romantic, and Russell is the partner with the higher profile job as the season begins. Hal, it seems, can’t help inserting himself and creating trouble along the way. This causes tremendous stress for Russell and those around her.
Allison Janney plays Grace Penn who is the Vice President in Season 2. There was intrigue on whether she would continue in that job at the end of the season. Janney is excellent. The rest of the cast playing both US and British personnel are all very good. From those supporting Russell in the Ambassador’s office to the British PM, and his supporting staff they all contribute to make this an engaging, exciting, very watchable series. The writing is excellent with clever storylines and good banter. The viewer is kept wondering where this will go next, and it remains a surprise often because we get the sense that the characters themselves don’t know which way they are leaning. Jobs are at stake for people who are ambitious and smart and work incredibly hard. Mistakes too are made and they must be dealt with effectively. Overall this Emmy nominated series takes its place alongside other political thrillers and holds its own, with Russell leading the way showing the challenges of the jobs she undertakes, but also the chess match of doing them effectively while also a woman in those roles. It isn’t lost on me that she has always needed to be smarter and more cagey then the men that are around her, most notably her husband. Janney explained to her in Season 2 about being a woman in powerful positions and how they are judged differently than their male counterparts. It’s true. All of it. I will continue to watch, but I am mindful of watching too quickly and then being over this season so quickly. I like the pace, the dialog, the performances and interplay among the cast. This is currently one of the best shows on TV in my opinion.
Anemone: When the greatest living actor decides to return for a film, any film, then I will choose to seek it out. In this case, it is Daniel Day-Lewis, taking on a passion project undertaken by him and his son Ronan. Newly released I wanted to see this in the theatre. I saw a quick interview from Ronan where he talked about working through the script with his Dad, and then also directing his first major motion picture. Ronan had a self professed photography background and you can see it from the images in the film. The movie stars DDL as Ray Stoker, with Sean Bean as his brother Jem, and Samantha Morton as Jem’s partner who is raising teenage son Brian. It is a good cast. It tells an Irish story.
The movie starts with young Brian who is at home, and Sean Bean’s Jem tells him that he is going away for a few days. He embraces Mom, Samantha Morton and then heads out. Through the beautiful Irish countryside Jem seeks out the elusive, reclusive, quiet Ray, his brother. Even upon meeting very little is said between the brothers. The movie itself is sparse on dialog and much more about shots with silent characters, either panning in as a close up, or panning back. There are some beautiful shots, certainly those with the sky and oncoming weather. It takes time for the movie to get to the point. It seems that both brothers have military backgrounds, and years before they were dealing with the troubles in northern Ireland. Ray has stories to tell, and this is the strength for DDL. Day-Lewis embodies Ray, and takes his time in telling the stories that have profoundly impacted him. He has a number of soliloquies throughout which provide the background but also the desire for his brother. I just wish that there was more. There is plenty of brooding and quiet as men are wired to do it seems, but that doesn’t take away that as an audience we want to better understand it all.
Certainly there are some universal truths involved with relationships between partners, brothers and family but also fathers and sons. Add in some environmental turmoil, and the situation can turn toxic for those involved. Everyone has scars, and however much one feels that they can relate to one perspective, another party can view it quite oppositely. Boys grow to men and have particular relationships with their parents. Sometimes despite that history, they can unknowingly also have negative impacts on their own offspring, and can channel a parent that they didn’t feel served them well at all. Welcome to being a parent! The pace of the movie was slow. Some actions weren’t always explained. There was a Magnolia-like moment that takes place which in my interpretation was nature, viewed as a safety net by the humans, then having a sudden turn. Religion is also explored in depth and most starkly between the brothers. I am glad that I saw this. I don’t see this as a popular film for the masses, but for those who want to see more of a legendary actor it provides a taste to whet the appetite.
Love is Blind Season 9: The latest season of this franchise was dropped by Netflix October 1st. Nine episodes have now been released (the last three dropped October 8th) with the last two to be released on October 15th. The format remains the same, couples talk in pods with each other, without seeing one another to establish a relationship and become engaged. Only then do they get to meet one another. They then head off for a tropical vacation before returning to the real world of their cities. This latest group of hopeful romantics (or 15 minutes of fame TV wannabes) is from Denver. Note that there are some spoilers included below. You have been warned.
I cannot in recent memory think of a more disheartening group of people to provide cringe-worthy television than this crew. My goodness. I don’t even know where to start. From the first ever proposal in the first episode that I can recall, which is just shocking in its own right, to the later virtual pronographic descriptions used by a temptress (Kacie) to enshare her man (poor Patrick) for good. But then, just moments after setting eyes on her prey, confessing that she just “can’t proceed with the experiment any more”. Apparently love is definitely NOT blind for her, and her desire to find her “Chad”. A Chad is a good-looking, successful man with the three sixes; six feet tall, six pack abs, and six figure income. Now you know. But the men are also as disturbing if not more. From liars who blantently hide with a wink the number of tattoos they have, to another who professes his love to two separate women literally minutes apart and to the emotionally crippled man who can’t seem to stop crying while being passive aggressive with his fiancee at the most inopportune times. It all amounts to a train wreck, where I am genuinely shocked that in previews for the coming two episodes, there are actually couples who will be putting on wedding dresses and tuxedos! Really??!! It is a forgettable season with unlikeable people involved. A couple of seemingly genuine people were dissed earlier by those playing the multiple people juggling act (“my Number One just did [insert offensive act or speech]”). They should consider themselves very lucky to have dodged a bullet with those who chose otherwise. From my perspective, if you are so torn about which of your opposites might be the right one for you, then the answer is, neither! You’re not ready to be heading into marriage if there isn’t some true certainty for you. The fact that you bring your families and friends into this is quite shocking. So in the end, I cannot recommend this and you are welcome from being saved from almost eleven hours of mindless TV.
Mondays With Robbie 