February 19th, 2024

Lover Stalker Killer: This is a true crime documentary on Netflix now, which speaks to one of the more bizarre love triangles which took place in Nebraska in 2012. It begins with an auto mechanic (Dave Kroupa) going on the Plenty of Fish app, and matching with a woman Liz Golyar and after a brief time together, he ended it. Golyar was not pleased but he moved on, and later matched with and met Cari Farver. They seemed to hit it off. Then all of a sudden Cari broke things off and basically disappeared, only communicating through text and email. Meanwhile, Dave was still dealing with the aftermath of Golyar.

This is a sobering tale as it unfolds, and shows just how diabolical people can be, going to extreme lengths to be exacting their revenge. Thank goodness that there was this team of police officers who were able to do some serious digging into the details of the online texts and emails that had been exchanged. Without the technology it likely would have remained a mystery. I won’t go into the details because it is very interesting to see what happens and the end result. Typically it is not a woman who is a killer, but there are those Alex Forest characters (from Fatal Attraction) that seem to take rejection never negatively and become unhinged. This was an interesting watch.

True Detective: North Country: I finished this series last night. I am hard pressed to remember whether I watched the original series with Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey, but having re-watched some of the earlier episodes in the first season, I clearly had. Funny that the resolution didn’t stick with me. But McConaughey being the very smart, reclusive ex-cop speaking about the work he did on the case was something I hadn’t forgotten. This latest series with Jodie Foster and Kali Rice there are some bizarre killings that have taken place, and these two police officers are looking to solve the mystery. It takes plenty of time to set the scene with a high tech lab on the outskirts of a small Alaskan town has a very strange occurence involving the scientists there. The locals who tolerate the lab as a source of income, generally do not like the impact it is having on the locals. People are sick, there are more than usual still births etc.

In this final epsiode, it all comes together, and I won’t delve into the details. There is much made about getting access to these caves, in and around the area, which finally is explained. Is it satisfying? Was it worth the time commitment? I am not sure. This overall was a Meh for me. The relationship between the two police officers is complex, and has its own history, along with their relationship with the town, the people and their relations (sisters, family, daughters etc). There is a spritual aspect of the story that Navarro (Rice’s character) accepts but is rejected completely by Foster. The scenes are cold, with plenty of wind and storms that make you feel the cold and how remote these places really are. I have no interest being here in the days when there is no sun. The first season of this series is very well reviewed and thought of even ten years later. This may prompt me to watch the other serasons, because each of them has very good Grade A actors in them.

Love is Blind Season 6: The first six epsiodes of the latest Love is Blind has been released on Netflix. Hosted by Nick and Vanessa Lachey, they put together young men and women in this experiment where they don’t ever get to see the other person until after one has proposed and the other has accepted. They speak to each other in opaque pods, with couches and snacks where they can have “dates” with each other. Only after a proposal do they see one another and see if their emotional connection will translate into a physical and overall connection that can lead to marriage. Marriage remains the goal. These types of shows are mind candy for me. They are innocent and mindless shows to watch for their shock value. I always find the dynamics of a couple and relationships to be fun people watching. These are young people who know what they are getting into when they sign on. They want to be married, or they want their 15 mins of fame on TV (you can spot those pretty clearly) but they are willing to put themselves on full display for the world (flaws and all) in the context of this experiment.

Post the First Meet, then the couples are whisked away in a pre-marriage beach vacation where they can mingle with other contestants (they had never seen the opposite sex contestants) and then see what transpires. Of course there is drama! One of the many artifical realities of the show is when one contestant can have two people vying for their affections and proposing to them with hours of each other! How often does that occur in real life!? Even more strange is that the two people vying for the one are aware of the situation and have no animosity for the other suitor whatsoever. That is at least mature, but one wonders whether if it was truly the “real match” by definition there wouldn’t be any second suitor. The parties can of course get all emotional, and profess undying love for a soul mate that they have never laid eyes on. It’s all in fun, until the tears start flowing, and for some they are flowing all the time. Others try hard to manufacture tears but they just don’t come (you’ll spot those too quite easily) as they have never found a camera that they didn’t love! The second half of this drops later this week, when of course those who were closely rejected in the first round (missing the tropical trip) get re-introduced to the group to provide more challenges for the young couples. Watch at your own discretion (and peril!!).

February 12th, 2024

American Fiction: This is the last of the 10 Oscar nominated Best Pictures for me. It stars the always good Jeffrey Wright who typically in a supporting role (like as Felix in recent James Bond films and in The Batman), but he is good, like in his role in HBO’s Westworld. Here he plays a writer-professor, Thelonious “Monk” Ellison, who is asked to spend some more time with his family from his university, which he doesn’t regard as a way to have him relax and calm down. He lives in LA for a reason while they live in Boston. He has a brother and sister, and a Mom. As a writer, and a writer of colour, he has written some quality books, but not commercially successful books. He sees a new writer promoting her latest bell selling book, with plenty of media buzz and he shakes his head. As a protest, he sits down and writes a tongue-in-cheek satirical story under a pseudonym being as outrageous as he can be. He and his editor (pictured here John Ortiz) discuss it, and it is brought forward to publishers. Things happen after that which provide some insight to Monk.

The question posed is how does an artist be thought of as just a writer, without pandering to stereotypes being propagated in the society, and the white readers in the US who seem to only want to read certain stories from the black writers? How far as a writer do you sell your soul to grab at the money being thrown at you, both in book sales, TV appearances and a possible movie deal for your story? Wright is stickhandling through these issues, all the while dealing with complexities in his family. His Mom’s health is struggling and will require a substantial investment. His sister is tired of being the local person responsibile for the daily health of Mom, while having her own professional life. Meanwhile brother has his own home challenges living in Arizona. Monk has also met a female criminal lawyer at his Mom’s cottage property. So there are plenty of balls in the air. Together they are all addressing his relationship with his deceased father, the siblings, Mom and the locals. It is a good story, well told and acted. The fourth act brings forth some ideas that weren’t introduced early, but you can see them coming if you’re paying attention. Some of the alternatives posed by Monk are creative but at the same time predictable. This movie reflects some prickly realties which caucasian writers/artists just don’t have to address. Perhaps if they are selling their books in a foreign country, they could be lumped in total with all other English authors but that’s the comparison. The brother character is a bit of a caricature, but the others are more real, despite the lawyer seemingly never doing any legal work. I am glad to have seen this, with the other 5 people in the theatre.

The Beekeeper: Newly released and in theatres, this is another in the retired super-spy operative genre who through circumstance is brought back into the life. Think John Wick who was looking to get out of the assassin-for-hire business in a super-secret society, but is forced back into it. I mean, who can blame him with his pooch getting plugged by a Russian brat?! Instead of Theon Greyjoy, actor Alfie Allen for Wick we have annoying little man Josh Hutcherson from The Hunger Games, who is trying to take The Most Punchable Face in Hollywood Award away from Jesse Eisenberg. It’s REALLY close! So in place of Keanu Reeves we have Brit Jason Statham who definitely know the type of movies that his audience want to see from him. He is a local beekeeper, which we learn later is a metaphor for his elite US taskforce, no one bothers to explain how a Brit is part of this group.

So what brings Mr Clay back into the “game”? Not a dead puppy dog. But almost as heinous, a group of asshole entitled hackers who steal from little old ladies and pensioners. And not just ANY pensioners, but Claire Huxtable!! This group of jerks wipes her out, and her charity, and she just happens to be one of few people who have treated Mr Clay with any kindness. Mrs Huxtable has a daughter who works for the FBI and she gets involved. As things progress, the number of body bags rises. I am more than a little surprised at the carnage initiated by Mr Clay. I am not at all surprised at the lack of injuries sustained by Mr Clay as he undertakes his quest of destruction. All the while there is the explanation of his actions from the FBI daughter. I won’t disclose further because why spoil just how far up this goes up. Jeremy Irons has a role acting as a well paid protector of the spoiled brat human punching bag, which you sense he would rather flip the brat over his knee and give him a proper spanking. There is so much senseless killing, and for military and police personnel. The underlying message being that sometimes this is necessary because a queen bee with poor offspring may need replacing. Take from that metaphor what you will. This is brain candy, meant to be entertaining without requiring too much thinking on the part of the audience. To that end, it is successful. I dislike who I am supposed to, and cheer for those that are positioned to provide some satisfying justice. I am pleased in the fact that I didn’t pay to see this in the theatre. If you like Jason Statham, he keeps his shirt on, but he delivers a typical performance for him. No Oscar nominations forthcoming on this.

Ted Lasso Season 3: After a free use of Apple + with the puchase of a theatre ticket I finally finished Ted Lasso. I have to admit that I was underwhelmed with the final season. It was predictable in many ways, and surprising in other ways, like where Nate ends up. Other surprises come with other characters like Jamie Tartt, Keeley Jones and Roy Kent. Ted’s Mom shows up. All the while the other characters are dealing with the fallout of the cliff hanger from Season 2. Of course it is all quite predictable.

There are some preachy aspects to it. There is especially annoying episode (number 8) where each character who has made a decision seems to be whining and carrying on like they didn’t do that fateful decision to begin with. For a team in early seasons couldn’t seem to “win the big one” this team despite the addition of a certified “superstar” make some strides but then give them back. After all is said and done, it ends predictably and with a whimper. There are tears, there are hugs and the parties move on. I finish the series not thinking “why didn’t they win Golden Globes?” but rather “why were they considered to begin with”? There are more impactful series out there, which in my view will be longer lasting. I don’t see this being considered in the same breath as The Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Mad Men or Breaking Bad? Perhaps being a comedy, well a comedy with some dramatic turns, may put it at a disadvantage but really it is the main character of Ted that holds it back. His gosh-gee-whilakers outlook is charming earlier, but then the panic attacks and his uncertainty with his life becomes a little tireseome over time. I didn’t watch the TV series Coach with Craig T Nelson but I see some similarities with it. No one regards Coach as great TV. It seems Season 3 meant that there was more money to spend and they had more roadtrips, notably Amsterdam which was a terrific travel log, but didn’t add much. So this has ended, and with the appropriate number of Golden Globe awards. I quickly moved over to the latest from the producers of WWII Band of Brothers and The Pacific, Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg, with Masters of the Air. It has been really good, and I look forward to watching more.

February 5th, 2024

I managed to get out to the theatre to catch two of the Best Picture nominees which takes me down to a single movie left of the 10 Best Picture nominees that I need to see (American Fiction). Both of these films had unique, almost distracting soundtracks, but added to the overall experience. They are very different, but equally compelling.

The Zone of Interest: set in the mid 40s, in Poland, this film focuses on a family with five children, and husband and wife. They live in a pleasant a spacious house with a garden and pool in the backyard. Father heads off to work, and ordinary tasks take place with the children heading to school while the mother does laundry, tends to the garden and entertains friends and her own mother after a time. What’s different in this household, is that the father is Rudolf Hoess, and the location is next door to the infamous Auschwitz prison camp where milliomns were killed over the course of the war. Hoess was the longest standing commander at Auschwitz, having worked his way up starting in Dachau and other camps. The family goes about very ordinary business, including picnics by the lake, and swimming at the pool. There are more unusual activities like when articles of clothing appear and they are shared with the friends. The wife herself, played by Sandra Hueller (also in Anatomy of a Fall) tries on a very nice mink coat, with a lipstick inside. It’s all too normal. When showing her Mother around, who is so very proud of her daughter and the steps to success that she has made, they speak of growing vines to hide the walls of the Camp. No mention is made of anything that goes on behind the walls among the family members, but there is periodic gunshots heard and the ever-present chimneys of the camp that are burning the bodies of the gassed prisoners.

Often I have wondered just how much the German people knew about the exterminations happening just doors away from them. In a series like Band of Brothers where the first of the concentration camps was found, the local townspeople denied any knowledge of what was happening there. The allied soldiers didn’t believe them, and they put them to work at the camp. I think that the underlying message here is a powerful one, which is that this family who lived right next to the camp were able to forget what was occuring steps from where they played, and ate. The mother and father care more about the flowers that they grow, in the garden and on the property, rather than the human lives that are being taken by the thousands each day. Near the end, the underlying message is again reaffirmed as you see the camp as it stands today, with display cases of shoes, suitcases, and medical assist devices stacked high in display cases that are cleaned daily. The message is clear that each of these belonged to people who came through that camp, with children, families, dreams and wishes that didn’t need to be needlessly ended by a maniac with a “Final Solution”, the extermination of the Jews and others who weren’t worthy of the Reich. You don’t learn the details about Hoess and what becomes of him, but he was tried and then hanged. He was hanged at Auschwitz and is the last public hanging in the country. Although this movie is slowly paced, and seems all to ordinary, that is the point. In 2024, we should still and always remember all the lives that were lost and not become complacent, treating it like the everyday event. It was true to the movie that the operation to execute 400,000 Jews in Hungary was called Operation Hoess.

Incidentally, there is a documentary on Netflix about the Adolph Eichmann trial, the leader of the efforts to execute the Final Solution. Eichmann like Hoess show that they weren’t monsters, but calculating human beings who did what they were told. Hoess carried out orders in a job that had promotions, responsibilities and benefits like a nice house next to his workplace.

Poor Things: I had no real idea about what this film was about when I was about to see it. In many ways it is a fable, a Frankensteinian fable, where a “mad scientist” has taken medical science beyond areas that we have today. Set what appears to be in the 1800s, there are elements in the world outside London that shows a far more advanced technology, like the trams in Lisbon and cruise ships. The good doctor, played by Willem Dafoe is scarred badly and teaches at the local university. You learn that he was treated terribly by his doctor/scientist father. At the university he seeks to find a young student to take detailed notes/observations of one of his experiments. Her name is Bella, and we learn that she is a gorwn woman suicide victim who took her life while pregnant. The doctor was called when the body was found and decided to put the baby’s brain into the woman’s body. The rest of the story I will leave to the viewer to watch.

The movie is set is various locations all showing the ongoing development for Bella. At first Bella with the under-developed baby’s brain carries on as a child. But with different experiences and over time, she develops and grows. The movie speaks to how we as adults gain our sense of ethics, and right and wrong, and how we learn over time what is acceptable behaviour in a civilized society.

Those who have read my posts know that I am not an Emma Stone fan. But what I can say is that this is a remarkable acting performance. I say this because there is a physical aspect to the role, in addition to the acting itself. Yes, she has some nude scenes that is completely within character, along with showing a greater sense of herself. She embraces the entire role, with the naivete of a child but also the desire to please and pleasure herself first. She meets up with various people who have an impact on her. If she needs something, then she does what she needs to do. Mark Ruffalo plays one of the men that she meets, and he is transformed by her. The story continues to its conclusion which is satisfying. There is also a religious aspect of the film in which the doctor is referred to by Bella as “God”. As a doctor, and with his skills, this doctor certainly has the power to give life. In some ways there are parallels to David in Prometheus seeking to find his God.

I will be shocked if Emma Stone doesn’t win the Best Actress Oscar. This performance binds the entire story and without it, the movie would fail miserably. This is a movie worth checking out. I am pleased to have seen it.

January 29th, 2024

I was delayed in posting this since I was in the air myself yesterday. I am reviewing a number of series that are actively showing on a weekly basis, and therefore I have not seen the conclusion, and they are not bingeable (if that’s a word!). This cannot be said for Ted Lasso, since it has three seasons completed and I am only finishing up Season 2. I managed through buying tickets to an event (Amadeus film performed with a live orchestra) to have a complimentary Apple TV subscription for 30 days. I am making the most of it!

Masters of the Air: This was recently released this month, and is from the same producers (Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg) who had previously brought the excellent Band of Brothers (2001), and the less compelling The Pacific (2010). I have previously reviewed Band of Brothers, and I have read the Ambrose book on which it is based that I highly recommend. The producers in each instance have excellent production, with real life stories then depicted on the screen. They are looking to replicate the real stories of those who were involved. Ambrose naturally takes it from an American perspective, which summed up is that “the Americans won the war”. It is to be conceded that the American involvement in WWII post Pearl Harbour was a tremendous help to the Allied forces, in manpower and equipment but it is safe to say that the British, Canadian and other Allied powers made the American participation possible. Without the Battle of Britain, Dunkirk, and various other battles, including the British and Canadian participation on D-Day itself the outcome could have been very different. In Masters of the Air, the first couple of episodes follow a new group of recruits in the Army Air Corps flying B-17 bombers. It stars Austin Butler (yes Elvis actor) along with Caleb Turner and Barry Keoghan (from Saltburn) this time with a thick New Yorker accent. They are pilots, and after training are being put into bombing sorties from England. Like the predecessor series, you follow a group of young men (mostly) and their stories, as pilots, crew, bombers, navigators both officers on the ground and in the air. Some of the scenes are extraordinary. It is well shot and well crafted on screen.

Only two episodes in I could quibble about Austin Butler’s hair being too long, but I am far more focused on the overall quality of the production and the stories told. You care about these young men, and realize that many are in their late teens and twenties. They put themselves in harm’s way and many pay the ultimate price. I remark that these young men were brave beyond measure, doing what everyone felt had to be done. They care about their buddy, and their crew. They see unspeakable things, all the while trying to make a positive contribution to the war effort. Butler and Turner both play majors, and are leaders in this group. Like Captain Winter in Band of Brothers, you see their leadership style and how they handle these stressful situations. It is compelling. It is exciting and one wonders how it will all shake down for these men as the war goes on. Definitely worth viewing, especially for those who have any interest in WWII.

Ted Lasso Season 2: I liked season 1 of this Jason Sudekis vehicle series where he plays a positive talkative Amercian football coach in the UK, brought in to help bury a soccer team. He has a squad of players, an owner who obtained the club in a divorce settlement with her billionaire jerk ex-husband and some assorted other local characters. I have spoken about the premise before.

This season continues on with the stories of the characters involved. We also too get to see more vulnerabilities about the Ted character himself. For all of his “gosh-gee-willakers” outlook on life and being authentic to a fault with all those that he meets, he is also flawed as everyone is with layers of complexity to his personality. He suffers in his own way, and it impacts his job and those around him. No one in this series escapes issues, which is to its credit. Some issues are more obvious than others, like owner Rebecca’s own insecurities of being left by her husband and owning this team. The Ex enters her life from time to time just to torment her. In a funny line, and this show is quite funny, after Ted and coaching staff meets Rebecca’s Mom he says:

“…I love meeting people’s Moms. It’s like reading an instruction manual as to why they are nuts!!!” So very true.

And we are all flawed and nuts in our own way. I really enjoyed the Christmas episode. I think like other quality sitcoms, this program works because it can make you laugh, but then shortly afterwards can make you tear up. Like M*A*S*H, or Cheers or even Ricky Gervais’ After Life. I will continue to watch this and note that sadly this show was always seemingly the bridesmaid and never the bride in award season. It is good. It is worth watching.

True Detective: North Country: Full disclosure, I have not seen the prior seasons of this series, even the well reviewed initial season with Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey. I am reminded that I need to do that. Interestingly there aree some tie ins to that season with this new season starring Jodie Foster in the lead role. Set in Alaska, but filmed in Iceland, this series follows a detective trying to uncover some mysterious deaths. Here at a mine in a remote part of Alaska, a group of scientists disappear without explanation, and then locals are trying to figure out what is happening and what has happened.

Foster is, like others in the community, dealing with her own issues as they head into the dark season up there, with the sun not making an appearance. It is difficult to disclose much more without giving some of the surprises away. It is well written, and the people acting interact with the skepticism of those who have known each other a very long time. They have history. it comes back to haunt them. There is certainly an element of supernatural going on, as they trudge around with sets that feel like The Thing has been resurrected. One underlying message for me is that people are people. Each has their own needs, many with that well studied hierarchy of needs. As an audience you can feel the cold, and I wonder about the pierced cheeks and whether that metal stud makes it feel that much colder out. Without any prior knowledge of the prior seasons, this one for me must stand on its own. I will continue to watch and see where it lands. It is all very odd for the moment as we are four episodes into it. More to come, but worth a watch.

January 22nd, 2024

Ferrari: Still out in the theatres, I managed to get out to see this yesterday afternoon in a fairly empty theatre. Here is yet another story that takes a very famous man, and then more closely examines his relationships, while paying lip service to his accomplishments in business, engineering, racing and the automotive industry. If you are going into this movie thinking you are seeing Ford vs Ferrari from the Ferrari side, you will be deeply disappointed. Interesting that movie with Matt Damon and Christian Bale is a really good companion piece to this one because the timing is very close, errr somewhat with the Ford win at Le Mans coming in 1966, while this movie starts in 1956 as Enzo Ferrari and his wife Laura start their company in post WWII Italy.

Enzo Ferrari is played well here by Adam Driver. I prefer this performance to another Italian icon Driver played Maurizio Gucci in The House of Gucci, that I didn’t like very much. Here he seems to be channeling the man with many issues swirling around in his mind. The opening scene has him waking in bed with a woman, tousselling a young boy’s hair and then arriving to another house where a woman awaits him angrily. The angry woman is Ferrari’s wife, Laura, who accepts Enzo’s philandering, but their agreement is broken when he isn’t home before the maid arrives. It seems the romantic spark between these two has waned. Laura is still the bookkeeper for Ferrari and knows the financial situation of the company. It is a precarious time for the company as they are spending more than they make, since they are a racing company which pays for the racing by selling cars to the public. They only sold 96 cars in that previous year. The company needs an influx of funds from a partner, who won’t demand management oversight, telling Enzo how to run his company.

The two women in Enzo’s life that we explore in any detail, are the wife Laura and mistress Lina. Laura is played admirably by Penelope Cruz who shows her own pain as she continues to be with this man who clearly has become distracted by something newer and fresher. She and Enzo have history, including a son together, which binds them in many ways which is explained further. The other woman is Lina Lardi, played by Shailene Woodley. As much as Cruz excels with Laura, I think that Woodley is completely miscast in her role. Her accent fluctuates badly, and I get no sense that she is in any way Italian. Audience members would be forgiven for thinking that Enzo had an American mistress. He didn’t. Both of these women have to endure being involved with Ferrari and his own challenges. I think that the Cruz portrayal shows her torment, but still underlying love for him and the company that she has helped to build. She is business savvy to the point of recognizing that she in the 1950s can’t be at the table negotiating with Ford or Fiat for the company she half owns. There are plenty of twists and turns. The race which is the focal point of the movie is the Mille Miglia which is a 1000 mile race across Italy, where the winner, much like Le Mans, will have a huge boost to the sales of cars to the public. There is a parade of astounding vintage Ferraris and Mazerattis here, which remind me of the line in Ford Vs Ferrari where Christian Bale says at Le Mans when he sees the Ferraris arrive “…if this was a beauty contest, we have already lost”. The sound of these cars as they race around a track or on the streets is incredible. I note that Enzo Ferrari as the chief of his company isn’t driving a Ferrari, but then again as a race company he can’t practically do that. I enjoyed this. It was worth seeing, even in the moments when it slows to a crawl. Like Maestro, I think that there could be more time spent on the accomplishments of the man, and less focus on his personal life, but that was the story that they wanted to tell.

Bob Ross: Happy Accidents, Betrayal & Greed: This is a documentary on Netflix from 2021. Recently released again, it outlines the life of the well-known public television landscape artist. Bob Ross was most famous for his ability to create an oil painting in thirty minutes or less, and his his belief that anyone would be able to paint like he does. To that end, after a stint in the Air Force, he decided to teach people how to paint. He had earlier seen the German born public TV artist named Bill Alexander. Ross sought out Alexander to discuss painting and Ross became a protege of Alexander. I remember seeing both on the TV during my youth. I was always amazed at how quickly their paintings came together and the layering of the colours one on top of the other.

Like many artists, Ross was focused on his art, and cared little about the dollars and cents. He engaged in a partnership with Walt and Ann Kowalski. Ross was married three times. But the first marriage brought his only offspring along, a son named Steve. Steve also became part of the business, and was a talented painter in his own right. He was on the show, and also taught various classes. The show was the very popular The Joy of Painting (think by no coincidence, the books The Joy of Cooking or The Joy of Sex). It ran from January 1983 until May 1994. Along with the popularity came along items for sale, like brushes, paints, books which generated plenty of revenue. Ross died at the age of 52 in 1995 from cancer (lymphoma). Without giving too much away, a number of things are shown in this documentary which could be new to viewers. First his trademark afro hair was created, and not natural. Ross was a big hairstyle fan from early days, and this one seemed to resonate with audiences. Second, after becoming successful he incorporated Bob Ross Inc (BRI) with his partners, and the company owned all the intellectual property for Ross personally, and generated all the wealth. Third, that son Steve has gone through more than any son should given his father’s fame and wealth. Fourth, his death was kept very secret, with no friends and family in attendance in the hopes that the general public was still under the impression that he was still alive. Finally, before you decide to buy a Bob Ross puzzle, paint or other labelled BRI product you may want to consider where that money is going. This was interesting and I think that there are valuable lessons for those who enter into business with others, and being mindful of ownership and where the money goes, in addition to the value of Wills and documenting clearly your wishes upon your passing. No matter how old you are.

Equalizer 3: Crave has this out for streaming. In retrospect I don’t even think that I had seen Denzel Washington reprise the role, made famous on TV, in the sequel The Equalizer 2. In the long list of movies that didn’t ever have to be made, or where there wasn’t any demand from the public for more comes this movie. It seems that Denzel Washington wanted a paid vacation to Italy, and chose this vehicle to have that happen. The story is a predictable one as the one-man hit squad with assassin’s skills has to step and right a perceived wrong. In this instance, in this quaint little town on the coast of Italy there are heavily tattooed muscle who terrorize the local population. It isn’t fully explained but there is a brother with his younger brother who is the instigator of a plan to make money while funding terrorist activities in his own country. It doesn’t make a lot of sense and even less when I try to explain it.

Washington has stumbled into a situation at a villa in Sicily where he felt obligated to right a wrong from an ordinary man in Boston which turns into a much greater undertaking. Rather than taking it all on himself, he makes a phone call to a CIA phone operative, played by Dakota Fanning (who has come a long way from I Am Sam with Sean Penn).

Together he gives her hints so that she may show herself to be a crack investigator, and he can try and bring peace to his small world. He likes his small town, and they begin treating him like one of them. But they have this issue to deal with, and eventually Washington is able to ignore the problem any longer. It all meets a predictable end, with a mailed in performance from Washington. I cannot recommend this, and even wish that there was more scenes of the scenery around Italy. I don’t feel the need to watch the sequel still, even having bypassed it for this one.

January 15, 2024

May December: This new release has two strong female Oscar winners with Natalie Portman (Black Swan) and Julianne Moore (Still Alice) in the principal roles. The story is roughly based on the well publicized Mary Kay Letourneau situation with her as a married teacher with four kids, falling in love with a Grade 7 male student. She was jailed for it, but later released. Upon her early release, she goes back to the young man and returned to jail but she ended up pregnant and delivering the baby in prison. The situation raised many questions. This story has a much older Moore with her younger husband, being approached by an actress, Portman, who wishes to portray the wife for a movie. Portman is there in town to do research for the role. To that end, she conducts interviews and asks direct questions to those involved and taking notes.

I have to admit that I am not a big Natalie Portman fan. I am a bit surprised at the direction that is taken by the Hollywood actress. I suppose that the argument can be made that she is a method actor and needs to immerse herself in a role, and that would include looking upon the young man (now in his 30s) as a person of interest. Do this man need saving? Does he need a new direction in his life? How would an actress be a person who should be influencing these decisions. The outward stance of Moore’s character is a bit surprising as well as she seems very focused on protecting herself and defending her decisions. A number of those positions are those of the real Letourneau when she was interviewed about her unusual family situation. She still lives in the same town as her ex-husband and her children from that marriage. Two girls. Along with children from her new relationship. Overall, it is a story that moves slowly and has turns that don’t make a lot of sense. It is a challenge when mixing a real life story with more fictional elements that the overall effect can be muddled. I think that the acting talent is wasted. I don’t feel anything for the main characters, but I am amazed at how well adjusted that the children are. As young people, they are well spoken and connected with their parents, even if Dad isn’t that much older than they are. In the end, it was slow, not engaging and not something that I can recommend. It was a disjointed story that doesn’t capture the essence of the source material. I will note as an aside, that in real life Letourneau died from cancer at age 58. The actual 60 Minutes interview with Letourneau and her husband is an interesting watch.

The Holdovers: This movie is another movie about teachers and their students in a long line of films with this theme. Directed by Alexander Payne (Election, The Descendants, Sideways, Nebraska) he tells a story set in the early 1970s at a New England prep school as it heads into the Christmas Break. Paul Giamatti plays a history teacher who isn’t much of a team player in the eyes of the school administration. He sticks to his own values. The result is that he draws the short straw to remain at the school with the unfortunate few students who don’t have places to go for the holidays. He is not married, has no family and no children of his own. Among the students includes Angus, a student who expected to be with his Mom in the Caribbean but she disappoints and goes with her new husband instead. The few students are also left with the head of the kitchen, played by Da’Vine Joy Randolph who had lost her son in the Viet Nam war, from which she is still reeling. Together these misfits are gathered in the smaller gym area (to save on heating costs) for a prolonged babysitting session.

Situations present themselves, and those involve boil down to the three pictured above; teacher, student and chef. They attend a party, the young man wants to go for a road trip and they have some issues to deal with, including an unexpected sidetrip. Giamatti is good in the role, and he embodies the frustrated school teacher who has never quite hit his full potential. There is a story behind that, but much like the Robin Williams character in Good Will Hunting, he has choices to make. The young man is troubled, and we can see his struggles. He is smart enough but has a temper and acts impetuously at times to his detriment. Finally the cook, has plenty of real world insight and keeps the two men in check. Her “hmmmmm”s throughout show her recognition that those around her don’t always understand how to are perceived and the unintended consequences of what they are doing. Ultimately the resolution to the story is satisfactory, for me anyway. I like these characters, unlike with May December and I think that each develop and grow from their interaction with one another.

Talk to Me: In recent years there have been some decent thriller, horror, suspense movies. Movies such as Hereditary or Annihilation or Jordan Peele (Us, Nope or Get Out) have all been better than the hacker and slash movies that were post Exorcist era. This Australian movie is a decent addition to these films. The premise, like many in the genre, is that some teens are looking to explore the paranormal/after life. To that end, they have found a ceramic hand which when used with a candle, and a phrase it is supposed to “open the door” to the netherworld. Apparently the hand was passed down, and these guys have come across it.

As Mom (played by Miranda Otto from Lord of the Rings) is off at work, the kids gather in the house to have the ceremony and get their camera phones ready to film the results. A family friend volunteers to try first, and she is successful. The daughter, Jade played well by Alexandra Jenson, with her much younger brother (played by Joe Bird) are looking on. I think that this movie captures the current age well, with the phones and kids seeking the sensational. As the situation escalates, the thought process on how to resolve the real problem is an interesting one. This story is engaging and compelling. The audience wonders how there is a solution that works. There are also some stunning visuals with some shocks, expected and unexpected. That is the point of these tpes of movies. They are escapism, meant to allow the audience to experience some surprises and be scared a little in the safety of their own home, like a roller coaster ride. I liked this. It moved along well with a good pace. The stories around the various young people were not contrived and added to their stories. Like any good thriller there will be times when one says to themselves as they watch the action unfold “you will regret doing that” or “that can’t possibly be a good idea” with some predictable results, and some not. Well worth checking out.

January 8th, 2024

We are getting into Award season, and with the close of the 2023 calendar, all the released movies for Oscar consideration have been released. I have read a number of Best of 2023 List, there are a few that popped up fairly consistently, along with the Golden Globe nominations which were released on December 11th – that there were a number of films to catch up on. It was a busy week and I have a few films to review that are already watched that will be moved to next week. So have an eye for May December, and the Australian horror film Talk to Me.

Are You There God? It’s Me Margaret. Judy Blume was a very popular writer when I was in grade school. I remember having Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing, read to us in class, and the exploits of young Fudge in the early 1970s. This book on Margaret, was one that I never read, nor had read to me. It always struck me that this was a book “for girls”. It was a coming-of-age story I had presumed (or had been told) for a near-puberty girl and I just wasn’t interested. This movie stars notables Rachel McAdams as the Mom, and her Mother-in-law played by Kathy Bates. Margaret is played by Abby Ryder Fortson who I had not heard of before. She does an admirable job as the lead in this.

For me, I was surprised how much these film was dealing with religion. Odd I suppose, given that God is listed in the title, but I hadn’t expected all of these family issues surrounding religion. You see, Margaret is a product of a mixed marriage between a Jewish father, with a Catholic mother. This is covered at length, with some questions for me as a non-religious person wondering “what’s the big deal all about? Do you create tension in a family and grandchildren over this?” I have a short answer of “no” to that. But this movie has plenty which I suspect is more likely than my quick off-the-cuff response. So is this worthy of multiple listings from the Roger Ebert site Best of 2023 listings? I don’t think so. The Rachel McAdams portrait was pretty straightforward, the husband more cliched while Bates was more of a caricature.

This film doesn’t make me think, and certainly didn’t stay with me. I think that the ultimate resolution for the religious issue, however much it may be expected, is disappointing. I think to myself “is that it?” So can I recommmend this? No I wouldn’t be going out of my way to be seeking it out. I am glad that I didn’t pay for it.

Saltburn: What makes for a memorable movie experience? It’s a valid question. Especially in a home viewing experience, what makes for a memorable movie? What makes it good? For many blockbusters, you want to see amazing visuals and special effects, with great action to make the large screen experience worth while. Of course add in a great story with known actors and this can be a story that you can talk about afterwards. Recent examples of this include Top Gun Maverick and Mission Impossible. Other movies can be successful, for me anyway, in that they stay with me, and make me think for the days ahead. I had very little knowledge ahead of time for Saltburn, but I had noted the cast and thought that this could be good. I like Rosamund Pike, and I am intrigued by Irish actor Barry Keoghan. I think that he plays some bizarre characters, like in Killing of the Sacred Deer, and The Banshees of Inisherin where he not only looks different but his actions and expressions are questionable.

This movie for me like with The Lobster, or The Killing of the Sacred Deer, seem to work in an alternate reality. It seems more like parody with commentary being made generally about the human condition. This is certainly true here. This movie also borrows more than a little from The Talented Mr Ripley, with the interplay between these two characters. The story itself unfolds with a clearly smart Barry Keoghan (a character named Oliver) explaining to the student tutor/assistant at Oxford University in his early days how he had read absolutely everything in the reading list over the summer. Oliver is prepared. Oliver looks a bit geeky, and he is treated as one of the nerds. He has a difficult time finding a place to eat in the cafeteria. Contrary to his experience, he notices popular and handsome Felix Catton (played by Euphoria’s Jacob Elordi) making friends, being popular with girls and generally getting on very easily. The school year ends, and Oliver has managed to get into Felix’s world of friends. He gets invited to Felix’s home for the summer. He enthusiastically agrees to go. To say that Felix’s home situation is strange and bizarre in this palatial home bordering on a castle is an understatement. Felix has a Mom (played by Pike) and Dad, along with a sister. Other friends along with servants stay in this castle. Then there is Oliver, as a plus one inside this family. Strange things happen including a couple of things from Oliver which are incapable of being unseen. Oliver manages to get himself well entrenched in al of the lives of the people in the house. So this heads down this path which I found to be odd but still compelling in the sincerity into which it was being presented. But in the end, it turns. Sure there were some indications that this was a possibility but it still comes as a surprise. But upon reflection, after credits have rolled and I slept on it, I still came back to it.

Do I recommend this? Not for everybody. I wouldn’t recommend this to my parents. They couldn’t get over the language and a number of the images. They are not looking to have this put before them. So it’s a hard pass. But for those who look for movies to be comments on society, or on the motivations of those in a society, then this can be a thought-provoking experience. This stayed with me, and I re-evaluated the actions of Oliver with a different lens given that ending. It may be viewed differently now upon a second viewing. So it’s interesting in looking at the same actions differently. With that in mind, this is how I can recommend it in that light. We’ll see if the Academy agrees with me, and feels as though one or more of the performances get a nomination. But it is an intriguing film. Barry keeps on leaving me wondering about him.

Anatomy of a Fall: Another one of the films that was identified positively is this French (with subtitles) movie about a couple with a young son who live in the mountains and the husband ends up falling from the upper window and dying from his injuries. I learned that I don’t want to ever be tried in a French court. This film did win the Palme D’Or at Cannes, which is a prestigious award. But more on this…

The husband’s body is found by the son first, having fallen from the upper floors, and then the Mom is called. Mom arrives and calls immediately for the police and assistance. Her husband is dead. Then the questions begin. Sandra Huller plays Sandra who is having to deal with the loss, but then all the questions. Her son also gets questioned and the relationship with her husband is questioned and turned inside out. It certainly appears as though with son out walking the dog, and no one else around, that the death/fall seems a bit suspicious. The situation moves into the courtroom. The son is a character unto himself, who through a situation earlier in his life, which is explained in far more detail, has not had a normal upbringing. The parents have done their best to try and accommodate for him.

As a lawyer I find a number of the activities of the prosecution quite different than how I was taught in Canada, these include allowing one of the witnesses to be sitting in the courtroom to hear testimony of other witnesses and also having a re-enactment of the alleged facts of the case with the witnesses themselves being participants within it. What?!?! That is quite shocking especially if the court or jury is deciding the truth of the situation based upon this evidence, which seems to be changing as it goes. How is this possible? What stands out for me was the writing in this movie, and in particular the dialog between the husband and wife at a crucial point in the proceedings. It is raw, and real, and shows tremendous insight into a couple and how they interact as they work together, from raising a child, to careers and working towards building a life together. Without sharing more, there is a further aspect with the son that is in many ways troubling and scary at the same time. I will note that this film won the Golden Globe in writing and also Best Non-English Language Film just this Sunday evening. I can definitely agree with that award. I do recommend this, especially for the lawyers who would be interested in trials in other countries.

January 1st, 2024 (Happy New Year)

The Crown: Season 6, the final season was released by Netflix in two separate releases, the first in late November and later in December. The first four episodes this season focused on the death of Diana, played excellently Elizabeth Debicki. The final six episodes deal with the aftermath of the death. with the very good episode focusing on Prince William (Episode 5). Later there is Episode 8 that deals with Princess Margaret, the Queen’s sister and her death. Finally the last couple episode deal respectively with William and his relationship with Kate, some insight into Prince Harry and then the finale with the Queen herself, and I felt that this was simply an excellent conclusion to this well acted, well researched, series which I will miss.

I won’t delve deeply into the plot, and certainly not into the final episode, because I think that the last two episodes certainly were really good at bringing this series full circle. From back in the earliest times, the then Princess Elizabeth (Lizbet) after the abdication and the ascension to the throne of her father unexpectedly, we see them upon his death, and in the early days of her marriage to Philip that she is made Queen. She takes the position of sovereign very seriously, embodying the role. She had mentors sure, like the Prime Minister (Winston Churchill) but also her family including the former King. But she makes the position her own. As the longest reigning monarch she herself was the institution. She deals with various Prime Ministers, plenty of political intrigue and many world events. She met everyone in positions in power from all across the western world. I was just as impressed by what more recent events were not included in these final episodes. None of the more recent issues with Meaghan and Harry were explored, as they shouldn’t be. The princes understandably have a difficult relationship with the Crown establishment given their Mom’s experiences. The underlying theme is one of the continued importance of the Crown and its evolution (or not) having an eye towards tradition while at the same time being mindful of changing times. If a monarch wants to remain relevant, then they must evolve with the times and the people. This is clear in the struggle between the Queen and Philip sometimes. It is also evident with the next generation with now King Charles and Camilla and then later with Prince William and Kate. For me, overall I was most impressed by Claire Foy as the young Elizabeth the most. I also really liked Vanessa Kirby as Princess Margaret, Matt Smith as young Philip and then Josh O’Connor as Prince Charles as a young man. Each performance was stellar above and already great cast. This is some of the best TV that can be found without sci-fi and guns and shooting. It has been consistently excellent even as the cast has grown older and changed. Enjoy. I certainly feel as though I could easily re-watch the early seasons and see the parallels with today.

The Highwaymen: This movie was from 2019, starring Kevin Costner and Woody Harrelson. I don’t particularly remember when this was released. I think that it is having a ressurgence due to the popularity of Costner in his latest role in Yellowstone, unseen by me as I don’t have Paramount +. This story is based upon the true story of the lawmen who were sent by the Texas Governor to hunt down and kill the fugitives Bonnie and Clyde who had become celebrities in their own right in the early 1930s. The Clyde Barrow gang moved throughout the south central US states like Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and others, evading the law. The Governor of Texas was tired of the reports and wanted action. She is convinced by other lawmen to ressurect a couple past Texas Rangers (Costner and Harrelson) to investigate, track and take out the outlaw couple. There is some internal lawmen intrigue as the Governor also wanted her own State police and investigators to be ahead of the Rangers.

Eventually, the two Rangers cross State lines and continue along in their quest. It seems that they are less encumbered than the State police. The Rangers while having differences of opinion, and clearly different ideals on policework, manage to make real progress. The ending is straight out of what I have before in the movies in the 1967 version with Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway. Suffice it to say that the Rangers and other lawmen didn’t make any mistake when it came to the outlaws. Funny how in the aftermath, the funerals for the two were well attended with Bonnie’s by 20,000 people. Interestingly the death car, which had some legal questions surrounding it, is still on display at a casino in Primm Nevada. Even without cellphones, people at the time of the death were grabbing at clothing of the two outlaws and looking for some kind of souvenir. The Costner and Harrelson characters remained friends long after the manhunt. This movie was decent and Harrelson is a quality addition to the films that he participates in.

The Killer: I am a Michael Fassbender fan. I think that he embodies his roles fully, and he has been nominated twice for Oscars (Best Supporting Role in 12 Years a Slave and Best Actor as Steve Jobs). In this recent role, he plays an assassin. A murder for hire assassin in much the same way that John Wick would be hired, or any number of assassin films that you can think of. This story is a pretty standard fare revenge movie. The Killer is methodical, and recites his own series of rules in how to remain focused in the work that he does. He has set him up across the street from an apartment overlooking to street. Things don’t always go as planned, however much our Killer wants it to go that way. This situation then begins a fresh series of events for him.

Our Killer is basically seeking to find the bad guys who entered into his personal residence and assulted his female partner. One of the more memorable aspects of this film was a fight scene involving a dog and a bad guy. He had tracked down the bad guys to this point and this then takes him for a further meeting. As mentioned I feel that this was fairly standard stuff. The writing and story aren’t particularly original. I like what Fassbender does to his unnamed character. He self professes to be average, with no uniquely definable skills but one feels as though that isn’t necessarily the case. He doesn’t get emotional and treats his job with the seriousness that is demands. I wouldn’t seek this out, but it was on a list I saw for Best Films of 2023, and I was curious to check it out. I can say that I don’t feel as though it was worthy of the high praise.