Megalopolis: I have to admit that this is a difficult review. I had watched this movie months ago now, and it didn’t resonate with me. I didn’t like it, that is the ultimate memory that I had about it. Maybe it got sucked up into the vortex of unreasonable expectations since this is a new film from Francis Ford Coppola, the legendary director who had brought forward The Godfather(I and II) and Apocalypse Now. This movie had been many years in the making, and it starred Adam Driver, Giancarlo Espositio, Aubrey Plaza, Laurence Fishburne and Jon Voight to name a few.
What I mostly remember is that this movie took a modern day fable approach using New York City to address characters that are from ancient Rome. The main character (Adam Driver as Cesar Catilina) is brilliant and a visionary architect but he is battling against the Mayor of the City (Esposito). But it was messy in plot and disjointed in execution.
Without going too deep into this plot, Cesar has the ability to stop time and then restart it. This ability threatens the existing order of power within the city, as he has a vision to transform the city into a utopia of sorts. This naturally flies directly in the face of the existing hierarchy. The mayor’s daughter, named Julia, seems to be able to watch Cesar’s abilities (stopping time) but she is intrigued by him. She seeks him out and then understands his vision. Things happen. Cesar’s ability leaves him temporarily and then returns. Julia helps him while seeing what her father is really all about.
One of the more curious characters in this mess is played by Shia LaBoeuf (named Clodio) who is looking to discredit Cesar with the people. The make up and acting on LaBoeuf are disconcerting and the character is wholly dispicable. This is reflective of the story all around with characters who aren’t fully formed do things which seem simple without much explanation beyond the most basic. Stupid and silly turns take place which become increasingly ridiculous to the point where I couldn’t care any further. Ultimately I didn’t care about the people, nor the relationships. I was not invested in it or cheering on a particular faction. I cannot recommend this, and would add my name to many who have been disappointed in this effort. A hard pass for me.
May 19th update: Over the weekend I visited Napa California and went to the Coppola vineyard located in Geyserville. While there I saw some fine memorabilia from Coppola films like The Godfather I and II, Tucker: The Man and His Dream, Bram Stoker’s Dracula and Apocalypse Now. But they also had the following display below:
It was further noted on the luxurious property spanning 1400 acres that he in 2021 sold 75% of his interest in this property for $500M in order to fund the making of this movie. One would argue that it was not money well spent. The property still has some really cool items and history of the legendary filmmaker. The food at the restaurant Rustic was very good.
The Last of Us: Season 2 – Episode 4 (Day One): This episode released last Sunday shows the updated journey of Ellie and Dina as they reach Seattle. There was plenty that transpired between them. But before those details, we are introduced to Jeffrey Wright who a number of years before the present time was a soldier leading a troop into a combative zone and then meets up with the leader of a group in that city. Something dramatic and surprising takes place with his soldiers and we learn where his loyalties lie. Fast forward to the present day and Ellie is still seeking revenge tracking down the perpetrators.
Part of me is wondering where the idea of finding a cure for the disease that turns people into “the infected” has been lost. The whole point earlier in Season 1 was that Ellie COULD be a potential source for a cure because she has been bitten and survived means that she could be used medically. Instead, the battles seem to be between different factions of humans who aren’t infected. One would surmise that if the healthy humans banded together, that they could have a better chance against the infected. One of the things that these two young women do which is surprising is in having a lack (at least initially) with moving around hostile territory, by for example wandering through unknown streets in the middle of the day and in the open. They seems to have no sense of trying to hide or staying hidden. Ultimately the budding relationship between these characters is overplayed, all the while there is a serious unexpected encounter with more infected than expected. Ellie needs to reveal something to Dina which one can expect will have lasting impact. We further learn something about Dina which gives Ellie a new perspective on the whole enterprise and the reason for being in Seattle in the first place. At the same time, Ellie is more powerful now and has shown herself to be able to withstand infected attacks. This is a superpower in this world, and it will need to be further explored.
I enjoyed this episode more than the previous episode. I do think that it was unnecessary to get deeper into the relationship and the musical interlude, but overall this was good. I will continue to watch.
The Last of Us – Season 2: The new season has been released a few weeks back, and epsiode 4 will drop this evening (as I am writing this on Sunday afternoon). Episode 1 was released April 13th, and I was anxious to see this series since the end of Season 1 in March 2023. The audience is forgiven in not remembering the details of what had occurred back then. All I could remember is that the citizens in the community Joel and Ellie were in (Salt Lake City) were managing to survive through the deception of the leaders in charge. Things happened and like any life situation, there are consequences for the actions. Joel and Ellie end up in Jackson Hole. I will preface my review of the early episodes of season 2 with the fact that I am not familiar with the video game, and I had no idea where the story went within the video game sequel. With that said, here we go. Season 2, Episode 1 opens up five years later in Jackson Hole, and Ellie and Joel aren’t really talking to one another. The older adult and parent in me sees a 19 year old young woman asserting her independence, and thinking that her parent/person of authority doesn’t know anything about her or about life in general and she is rebelling. Added to that mix there is a sense of invinsibility for young Ellie. She can be reckless, talk back and disregard her elders. Younger viewers may take issue with that characterization, and that Ellie has been deceived by Joel, although she is not fully aware of it, and she needs to form new bonds of friends and people her own age. So the episode has little to do with the zombies, and more about the dynamic between the principal characters.
I found episode 1 slow, and not very compelling. In a series where the writing and story have been so good this didn’t start off in a manner that I would have hoped. But given the history of the series, and my enjoyment of it, I was going to stick with it.
Episode 2 was worth the wait, and racheted up the intensity heavily in an action-packed story. Very quickly we move on from family dynamics and get into some imminent threats. There is a group from Salt Lake City determined to seek revenge for the actions of Joel in his escape. It is a young group, and the one female leader, named Abby (played by Kaitlyn Dever, notably from Booksmart) has great motivation for any revenge. Of course there is also the real external threat of the zombies who seem to have been dormant but not for long. In very quick order, a scouting mission from the walled town end up, with some assistance from Abby, unleash the zombie hoard. They come in numbers and attack with force. The walled town defends, for which they seem to be well provisioned. Things happen. Both Joel and Ellie are outside the walls, but separately as the zombies descend. Without spoiling anything further, fate intervenes and both Ellie and Joel have consequences for their actions with lasting impacts on them both. A new commitment for revenge is initiated, and heavy losses take place on all side both inside the walled town and outside it. It is a shocking and surprising turn which made the episode feel like a workout. At each turn there were more surprising layers and plot to sink in. My excitement and enthusiam for the series is re-ignited.
Onto episode 3, where the aftermath of all of the actions from the previous epsiode are digested. For the second of the three episodes the pace slows to take a breath. A plan is hatched which requires town council approval before it is done, given the resouces required for it. A passionate plea is made to the council and a decision is made. It is difficult to speak at length about episode 3 without addressing episode 2. But suffice it to say that a path is before the characters and another journey is to be undertaken to Seattle. For me, I find it interesting that despite the significant zombie external threat that human beings find ways to attack one another. There seems to be limited capacity for cooperation and coordinated effort to meet this common enemy. Certainly there is little effort made to research about the zombies, the plants that cause the disease and looking for a cure. Naturally the viewers know that the potential solution could be Ellie. But it is a thought that is pushed to the side given the issues that are most current. We’ll see where this season continues to take us.
Your Friends and Neighbors: Episode 5 of this new series with Jon Hamm continues with the well-written premise of a recently unemployed hedge fund manager steering himself through his divorce and two teenage kids, along with his other well heeled neighbors. There are also married and newly divorced couples, school, and work people to deal with. He has decided to begin stealing from his neighbors and using a local fence to move the product. He begins with watches, but then expands what is available. Along the way he meets up with people who can assist with his activities, and these are necessary people. As would be expected, many of the neighbor’s houses have security devices and this can pose a challenge.
Then he needs the fence, along with others who may be avilable to help move the stolen goods. Of course, he never really knows who he can trust and what their ultimate motivations are. His ex-wife, now with her new boyfriend struggles with her current situation and she may be having some doubts. His manager with his wife are making substantial changes to his house and he requires a significant influx of money. There are some comedic moments, but like White Lotus (or so I have heard) it is rich white people acting badly. No one is free from bad behaviour, and the audience shares in the Hamm voiceover as he talks through his own actions. Episode 5 ties back into the very first episode in dealing with Hamm in a house that isn’t his and finds a man dead inside. This isn’t Mad Men, but it has some fun moments, and I enjoy trying to flash forward and see where they might take this premise. So stay tuned.
October 8: This movie is advertised as a documentary. My viewing of this movie, executive produced by Will & Grace’s Debra Messing, who is Jewish, is that this promotes an interpretation of the actions and subsequent consequences and results of the attacks on October 7 last year in Israel by Hamas. Hamas attacked October 7th killing 1200 and taking 58 people hostage at various locations. This part of the world has been in a stalement between Israel and the Palestinians for decades. The excellent movie Oslo from 2021 addressed attempts to bring peace to the region with talks back in 1993. One ongoing theme is that two wrongs do not make a right. Another theme for me for both sides is that the actions undertaken by a ruling government are not to be automatically associated as those of its people. Hamas is NOT the Palestinian people. The ruling party in Israel is NOT all Jewish people, and not all Zionists (for those looking to make that distinction).
The actions undertaken by Hamas on this day (October 7) are taken from that day forward and do ignore the ongoing and historical occupation and conflict within the region. Both parties in my limited view and understanding are not coming forward with clean hands. Far from it. To be clear, nothing justifies rape and the killing of innocent civilians attending an outdoor concert. Nothing. At the same time, how many ongoing actions of discrimination and oppression must any group accept? When is the breaking point. Nobody wins in a war of absolutes where there is no compromise or recognize of the others’ right to exist.
I am not looking to become overly political. Rather I am reviewing a recently released movie. I am mindful of a movie, however, that seems to take a very political attitude and only at the end mentions Gaza. The pictures and attitudes within US college campuses is most shocking to me. There are protestors openly chanting about the killing of Zionists and Jewish people. The universities are said to be too biased towards the Jewish perspective. Simultaneously we see that the rape and killing of Jewish women at the concert on that day has not been condemned by organizations like UN Women. Yet other atrocities against other women have been condemned straight away. I note that a number of the universities shown have more recetly had their federal funding threatened to be removed like Columbia and Harvard.
This is a very complex situation and this movie for me has limited its scope to black and white issues. One can disagree with the actions of any government and not criticize the people and their religion. One can further take a strong position for an issue, however by ignoring the wider context and historical background, it can turn the complexity into simple choices which for me don’t reflect reality. In the end as the credits rolled, I had learned a few things and better understood one perspective. I respect it. I see the threat which can be seen in campuses and social media. Isn’t the starting point to recognize that life is better than death? That parties have a right to live, and live in peace? That without that fundamental understanding, then any hope for a lasting and meaningful resolution isn’t possible. As a movie I think this does a disservice with avoiding bringing forward the larger issues and the perspective of the other side. I will remain hopeful that the political hawks who want death to the other side can be silenced and replaced with more moderate people, and poltical leaders can reflect the wishes of the majority of their citizens. But we can hope.
The Two Popes (revisited): With the passing of Pope Francis this past week, I decided to re-watch this excellent movie starring Academy award nominees Anthony Hopkins (best supporting actor) and Jonathan Pryce (best actor) from 2019. I found it more emotional, as I in retrospect could see how Pope Francis became an agent of change within the Catholic church. Hopkins had a difficult task, in humanizing Pope Benedict who was a more hardline conservative, and traditionalist. The interplay between the two men showed how their overall attitudes about the role of the church, and the traditions within it were compelling and telling. Fundamentally, the church was losing parishioners. The church was not changing with the times and growing, realizing that people were not the same and the message was getting lost. A sermon to an empty church doesn’t get heard. The emotion also came though with the realization of Pope Benedict that he was no longer the right man for the job. Sure he could hear some of the negative feedback on him, but he recognized that a popular Cardinal who engages with the people will carry a message that is more likely to be heard and followed.
I love the scene pictured above. I love this scene because after sharing a simple pizza and Fanta, these two men entered the Sistine Chapel and gave a thrill of a lifetime to a room full of tourists. Can you imagine the Pope showing up out of nowhere in this most holy place? Ultimately these two men, who have fundamentally opposing views on the direction of the church, can still respect one another deeply and grow to become friends. They share a difficult job and can be thankful for the other. Pope Francis was a simple man who led a remarkable life. He shunned the opulence of the leadership within the church, and he remained committed to the poor. He couldn’t ever understand how a world with so much could still have a billion people who are malnourished or starving. His final wish was to be buried in a simple wooden casket and in a smaller church. I am saddened by his loss, and it will be interesting to see how the next conclave will decide who should lead the church going forward.
Yellowstone: I know that I am late to the party for Yellowstone. It is a product of me being unwilling to purchase yet another streaming service, in this instance Prime. So despite seeing the odd episode on a flight, which is always just a tease, I waited until this was released on Netflix. I liked the first season, and season 2 was the continuation of this series that is still Succession on a ranch. The performances make this very watchable with Costner playing the elder patriarch of an established family (John Dutton) who has a massive cattle ranch in Montana. He has a number of adult children, who have their own issues. His wife passed away long ago in a horse-related accident on the ranch which still impacts him and one child in particular. This season has a number of battles for John Dutton to address, both external as well as internal. It seems the external developers and political impacts on him are mounting.
So this was engaging and very satisfying overall. It made me wonder where season 3 can go, but that answered very quickly with yet another external force looking to abut and possibly infringe upon the Dutton property. You manage to get rid of one threat and then another shows up, and that is a recurring theme. The story I think effectively brings forth for indiginous issues as their is a Tribe leader, but also one of John’s son’s who has married an indiginous woman with a young grandson, who Dutton adores. Like a medieval king or godfather, Dutton juggles the issues around him, putting out fires and identifying those that he can trust, and who can carry on the legacy of this ranch and the land that it is on. I haven’t provided many details of the plot for this season, but I don’t think that it is necessary. I think one can view the interaction among the characters and see where it leads. What I will confirm is that this journey is worth the time. I will continue into season 3.
Margin Call: Released in 2011, this movie stars Jeremy Irons, Paul Bettany, the disgraced Kevin Spacey, Demi Moore and Zachary Quinto (known best for his portrayal of Star Trek’s Spock). The cast is quite good. This movie addresses the 2008 housing and mortgage crisis within the US taken from the perspective of an unnamed Manhattan investment firm. The opening sequence features a sombre group of suits entering the floor of the office, and systematically tapping many employees to release them from their position. A downsizing is taking place, and it is starting with the principal manager in the Risk Department, played effectively by Stanley Tucci. Despite his years of loyal service, the laws don’t protect his rights and he is given a shockingly short period to consider a rather inadequate severance package. He exits, handing his young underling Peter Sullivan, played by Quinto, a USB drive and says “be careful”. The intrigue quickly escalates as Quinto pieces together the work that Tucci started.
Sullivan brings his findings to his manager, played by Bettany, who then follows the chain of command to bring it to Spacey’s character who is the head of the traders within the firm. In a matter of hours, the senior-most people of the firm are meeting to establish what their strategy will be given the findings of young Sullivan. At a high level this involves the packaging of various mortgage products into a bundle and then selling them. The same story is addressed by the Brad Pitt film The Big Short. In this story, it becomes very personal as those who are by nature sales people have to make decision impacting themselves, their firm, but also the greater market. There is a poignant exchange between Jeremy Irons the principal and Spacey who is struggling with the ethics of the direction the firm seems to be leaning towards. He is a long-time corporate guy, with over 25 years, but this is something very different, and this is just the beginning. As a manager of people, this is a no-win situation where there is pain to be inflicted on many levels and no one will get away unscathed. Life can be full of tough choices. Seventeen years beyond these choices and decisions this still is a telling film. Well acted, and told from this different perspective, it is good viewing for those even remotely interested in the financial markets. It is on Netflix.
Comeback: 2004 Boston Red Sox: This is a three part documentary on Netflix. For me as an avid Boston Red Sox fan, this holds a special place near and dear to me, as it shows the historic comeback of the 2004 Red Sox down 3-0 games to the dreaded and hated Yankees in the American League Championship Series. What it does really well, though, is setting the stage and backstory of this point in time and reflecting back on the Red Sox and what happened with them in 2003, and the turmoil swirling with the general manager, on field manager and players. There are many interviews with important participants like Theo Epstein, Jason Varitek, David Ortiz, Johnny Damon (later a Yankee), Kevin Millar, Pedro Martinez, and Curt Schilling.
Pictured above is one of many instances where emotions rose and exchanges took place. A-Rod took exception to the Boston pitcher who hit him, and then Boston catcher stepped in after one too many f-bombs thrown in his direction. The Yankees Roger Clemens, a former Red Sox legend, responded with his own version by going after Manny Ramirez. The show also shows the Don Zimmer intervention in an on-field altercation with Pedro Martinez.
For me I am fascinated more with the team dynamics and the challenge of putting a competitive team on the field. It was the tweaks of players and potential players, along with the glue players that made this possible. Your stars need to have that support and love of the game, especially at times of pressure that allow them to perform. Adding in 2003 Kevin Millar, brought in a character guy who kept things light, allowing the team to bond as a group. I had forgotten about the Red Sox trying to acquire A-Rod from the Texas Rangers before he became a Yankee. I had also forgotten that current Dodgers manager Dave Roberts was on that Red Sox team and stole a base at a crucial time. David Ortiz was a beast. I had also forgotten about the turmoil surrounding star shortstop Nomar Garciaparra, who had been offered to the Rangers along with Manny Ramirez and pitcher Jon Lester. He was pissed at the offer and his play the following season reflected it. Ultimately at the trade deadline in 2004 he was moved to the Chicago Cubs. History will show that the Red Sox came back from a 3-0 deficit and went on to win the World Series, ending the Bambino Curse (when the Red Sox owner traded superstar and legend Babe Ruth in 1918 to pay for a Broadway musical). The Red Sox went on to win the World Series again in 2007, 2013 and 2018. As a fan, this series in 2004 was the beginning of a new era for the Red Sox. Thank goodness!
The Amateur: just released this weekend in theatres is Rami Malek in a this spy thriller that he executive produced. It is generally a basic revenge story. It also has underlying themes like “don’t just a book by its cover” or “be careful to not underestimate those for whom you don’t know very well”. Husband, Charlie (played by Malek) is married to Rachel Brosnahan and they are quite happy. Charlie is a guy who works in Data and Encryption for the CIA. His office is on the -5 floor of this offices in Virginia. His superiors think that they have a pretty good idea of his skillset.
Charlie’s wife flies to London for a conference while he stays back. He has never flown overseas before and he chooses to focus on some work items. At work he as been made privy to some documents that weren’t meant for his eyes, but they seem to implicate some of his superiors. He keeps that to himself. I give nothing away that the trailers don’t already that his wife is killed in London by a small group of mercenaries. She sadly was collateral damage as they needed an escape route. Charlie is infomed of this tragedy by his superiors while at work. Charlie is understandably very upset and uses his considerable skills and clearances to piece together what happened during the attack and the names and profiles of those responsible. Charlie wants action. He brings this to his superiors looking for action which unbelievably for him doesn’t come. The rest of the film shows Charlie’s training and efforts to hunt down those who had a hand in killing his wife. There were four of them. Laurence Fishburne gets involved as his operative commander and trainer.
This didn’t suck and I am glad that it didn’t. I was engaged and there were some good dramatic moments. I note that the trailer for this gives away more than it should. It does the movie a disservice. Malek plays the geeky introvert well but also is able to show a good range of emotion, including exacting vengeance using his skills. Caitriona Balfe from Outlander fame is involved too in helping Charlie out. There is more than a little Jason Bourne in the plot which isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It moves along well. I found that the conclusion was not as satisfying as I had hoped that it would be (perhaps it is that idea that revenge and retribution would include physical pain and antguish on those who have caused that pain). Also is it completely believable that Charlie is able to wonder from place to place (London, Paris, Marseille, Istanbul, Madrid and Russia) and seem miraculously find the individual at the bar or cafe or shipping dock, all without speaking the various languages? But never mind. Despite this there is an open door potentially for a sequel, although I would think that any writer would be hard pressed to find another better motivation for Charlie than is already given here. Perhaps they lean more heavily in the John Wick franchise and get Charlie a cute dog. This was a fun evening out and entertaining.
Mufasa: The Lion King: In the wisdom of Disney, and a recent run of movies with a lack of innovation, there comes a prequel to the well established animated film The Lion King. Rather than a sequel following the offspring of Simba and Nala, they chose to tell a prequel about Simba’s father Mufasa (who was voiced by the late James Earl Jones). To say that this is “animated” is true, yet it is not the same animation from the original, but rather it is the more realistic looking computer animation with characters that then speak and dance. Disney gave a similar treatment with success for the re-telling of the prior animated film Jungle Book. Of course, Jon Favreau re-made the original Lion King in this format back in 2019.
In truth that’s not exactly accurate, since the beginning of this movie has Simba and Nala as well as their daughter cub Kiara, along with familiar comedy relief with Timon and Pumba, the meerkat and warthog. Rafiki is brought back to tell the tale of Mufasa while Simba and Nala are away from Kiara. The young cub gets the hear the tale of her long deceased grandfather Mufasa.
For me, what is disappointing is that there doesn’t seem to be any new ideas or stories to bring forward. Certainly Disney has been retreating over the Star Wars world with plenty of sequels and tangental stories. Later this Spring the almost doomed-to-fail live version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves is set for release. But that is review for another day. On point is me on a flight choosing to watch Mufasa when I do not need to have Disney + nor to pay in a theater. I am thankful for that. Overall I find the story a weak one where more parental death (it seems) leads a young Mufasa to be an orphan who during a flood is washed away to new lands where he is found by a young lion cub. He is saved but the King of this new pride, named Obasi, doesn’t believe in taking in strays. Obasi believes that strays are destined to betray the true leaders and royal bloodline. His son is named Taka and he through an act of charity allows Mufasa to be his new brother. Obasi also later states his belief in deceipt being part of any king’s arsenal, so there is not a great degree of integrity in this pride of lions. Soon enough, there is an outside danger of a group of pure white lions to this new pride. The story continues. For me, none of the songs are particularly memorable, unlike the original Lion King with the music from Hans Zimmer as well as Elton John and Tim Rice. Since the audience knows that Mufasa will be a father of Simba the suspense is set aside. The question becomes how does he overcome the larger and more powerful threat to him and his family. Mufasa gains some familiar friends along the way. The beginnings of the cast for the story of Simba are created, for example Zazu, who was originally voiced by Rowan Atkinson and then later John Oliver (now voiced by Preston Nyman). The original is a more superior product with better music and a better story. In truth, the story was Hamlet in its base, and this story doesn’t have the same pedigree in its beginnings. I cannot recommend this but for filling a couple of hours on a flight it can be useful. Incidentally, this was playing at the AVX screen at the local theatre and two tickets were $48!!! Just wow. I saw no perceptible difference from the AVX experience versus the other “normal” screens in the theatre. I can easily tell the difference with IMAX, but not AVX.
Your Friends and Neighbors: Apple has just released this new series, or at least the first couple of episodes. It stars Jon Hamm as Andrew Cooper, as well as Amanda Peet (who plays his ex-wife), and Olivia Munn among others. In it Hamm’s character seemingly has had a bad stretch of luck. His wife has left him, sleeping with the ex-NBA star neighbour, and taken half his wealth and house. Then he is approached by a 28yo young woman in a bar where he adeptly explains why any relationship with her and him (in his late 40s) would not work. There are consequences for him at work shortly thereafter in this encounter. This sets Cooper down a path where his high burn lifestyle needs to be fed by some additional income. He makes some questionable choices.
For me, I have little sympathy for his ex-wife, and she seems to feel that she has the right and ability to chastise Coop for the choices that he is making, and she doesn’t know about the latest activities by him. No one is lily white in this series, and they all have their own flaws. Hamm isn’t a great father, and his own moral compass is off when it comes to his business. With or without a non-compete agreement, presumably he would have the ability to get a job that would be close to the earning potential of the last job. Apparently he doesn’t see it that way. His former boss, played by former LA Law scumbag Arnie Becker (Corbin Bersen), has no loyalty nor sense of honour for a loyal employee. But much like American Beauty, where the outward appearances of these predominatly white, privilged, entitled assholes, we begin to see the decay in the underbelly with people without any sense of morals, ethics, or care for those around them. It is all about how much more can I acquire, and get ahead of those around me. There isn’t for me a lot of humour, so far anyway, save for the odd time where I shake my head at the choices being made in the situation that presents itself. I will stick with this for a few more episodes and see where it leads.
Sing Sing: A preliminary note that this is a prison movie, and it is NOT Sing Street or other similar musicals. Rather this is a movie, released in 2023, is set in the New York State maximum security prison of the same name. Geographically it’s thirty miles north Manhattan on the banks of the Hudson River. It couldn’t be further from NYC. It stars Colman Domingo, who is excellent along with others many of whom have actually are alumni of this program within the prison. The program is rehabilitation through theatre performance by the inmates, as decided by the inmates (by committee). The opening scene is Domingo, playing an inmate Divine G convicted of murder delivering a soliloquy on stage. He finishes this production that the audience doesn’t know, but in short order, that team gets back together and thinks through their next production and the actors that they will need.
The team decides through the suggestion of a new member, who has his own backstory and activities in the yard of the prison, to perform a comedy. They ask a director (also an inmate) to write a screenplay incorporating various plays over time and string it together. The details are not nearly as important than the relationships and how these inmates are interacting with each other. Notably Domingo doesn’t get the role that he was hoping for, and despite the sleight, he of course movies forward. We learn that he was instrumental in getting this program started here. He is hoping for a review of his case, because he has found new information which would have an impact on it (much like Andy Dufresne in Shawshank).
I like this movie. Much like Shawshank, there is the friendship and relationships among the inmates. The principal inmate befriends and assists the new player in the play who has a checkered past and doesn’t feel as though he has earned a second chance. This is in contrast to Domingo. I liked the story and the acting especially by the former inmates and participants in the program. This isn’t quite as good as Shawshank, but then again this is a Top 3 movie for me of all time. Still it brings a humanity to these inmates who are generally dismissed and ignored by society as they are the shunned criminals. But they are also people and seek fulfillment for the days that they have ahead of them. I think that this is a quality installment in the genre.
Mr and Mrs Smith: I had hestitated to watch this Prime series (only 1 season) because I was feeling that this was a series based on or a remake of the 2005 film with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. It isn’t that. Rather it is a spy series, but with two people looking for a job to pay bills who are placed together as an impromptu team. They don’t know one another. They need to play as a married couple, and then complete missions that are assigned to them. Like Charlie from TV show Charlie’s Angels, they get terse, short notes about their next assignment. The notes come from computer instant messages as opposed to a live phone call. Nevertheless there is a lot of room for interpretation of what is meant. They are rarely shown until the end (sometimes) what it is. A premise such as this will live and die with the actors involved. Do you believe them, do you care about them, and are you engaged enough to be interested in their exploits. The two actors are Donald Glover (as John Smith) and Maya Erskine (as Jane Smith). There are eight episodes in Season 1, and I can tell you that there is another season coming.
As discussed above, the series will be successful based on the chemistry between the characters. There are some notable guest stars for some episodes like John Tuturro in the early episode where the couple must follow the high bidder from a silent auction. Things don’t always go as planned. There is chemistry brought fairly quickly to these two newly married people despite their protests at the beginning to not have any romantic involvement. It is early days in this and I will stay with it for a couple more episodes. There were plenty of accolades for the actors for awards. Notably there were Golden Globe nominations. At this point I am not seeing it, but I will reserve thoughts on that until I have seen more. So stay tuned on this front.
Adolescence – this is a new four-part series on Netflix, and it is quite remarkable in its execution (directing, acting and story) in bringing forth a review on modern day parenting with teens in the Western world. In what starts as seemingly a Law & Order style arrest for a heinous crime, and what would likely be a legal criminal case where the audience is taken into a defense of this young 13-yo boy, instead turns into a much deeper review into issues of the day with raising children through this act. The heinous crime is the murder of a young lady, around age 13yo herself. The opening scene is the police takedown in full armour, bashing down a suburban family home front door at 6AM to arrest the young 13yo boy, Jamie Miller (played remarkably by Owen Cooper), mom and plumber Dad and and older sister all inside being shocked at the incursion by force. Jamie is handcuffed and put into the back of a police cruiser with the police with him and encouraging him to request legal representation. The rest of the almost hour-long episode, is the formal arrest of Jamie, with his Dad acting as his adult accompanyment. Jamie throughout, even when the legal representative arrives to provide advice, pleads his innocence and that he hasn’t done anything, even to his Dad who asks for his best promise.
Then the police come in, and through an interrogation bring forth their evidence against Jamie, with Dad, defense lawyer and Jamie there. This culminates in a video from CCTV where in a parking lot the offense takes place. It is a turning point for all viewing it. I cannot recall ever seeing the details of an arrest made so clearly from filling in forms, to fingerprinting and mug shots.
The next episode follows the two principal police detective partners at the local school where Jamie and the young woman named Katie attended, and they searching for more imformation but importantly for them and their case, the murder weapon. They visit the classrooms, interview a few students, including Katie’s best friend and some of Jamie’s mates. Clearly this isn’t an average day at the school, with police visiting and also a student being murdered the night before, which is well known amongst the student body already, and another under arrest. But we see a classroom setting that seems chaotic, and very different from classrooms that I remember in the 70s and 80s.
The third episode is an incredible acting performance by both Jamie, but also a therapist, played Erin Doherty a few months later in a detention centre in a stark room. The child therapist is required to provide the court with an independent report on whether Jamie fully understands the nature, quality and consequences of the criminal act for which he has been accused. There are two people in the room, asking each other questions and answering for about an hour. It is gripping. The therapist seeking to better understand this young boy, and his hesitancy at revealing more about himself and his life. She also wants to better understand his idea of what it means to be masculine, what it means to be a man. Their interaction informs us about many things about Jamie, and reveals some further important information.
The final episode is back at the family house with a few more months advanced from the third epiosde, and it shows the impact that all of these events on the three remaining members of the family in the house. Together each of these epsiodes do far more than just examine the guilt or innocence of Jamie. They explore a system (legal, school, and family) and environment currently and how they are impacted by social media, the economy, changes in school, the family unit and smaller towns. It examines parenting, and the discipline of children in a world where the children are impacted on so many fronts. And where the stock answer given by any teen to an inquisitive parent is “I’m fine”. Questions arise: What does a 13yo boy think is appropriate sexual contact with a similar-aged female student? What about sexting, the sending of naked images of students in this age group? How about incels, which is a newer concept that there are many young men who have had no sexual experience due to external factors (presumed) which likely can be permanent and then they will potentially act out. How much responsibility can we put on the child, the parents, the systems in this horrific situation? The writing is excellent, the ability of the actors to act in these episodes is first rate.
What I haven’t spoken about so far is that each of these episodes are directed with a single camera, in a single shot that drifts from one part of the scene and then into others with no cuts. There are a couple of drone shots, but otherwise all of the scenes with the actors are done in single shots. The camera circles around the actors and shows them interacting. This is most effective in the therapist episode 3, but also episode 2 in the school, from classroom to classroom to hallway and then outside. It all adds up to compelling television, with deeply emotional issues that every viewer can relate with. As as adult and parent, I am more sympathetic than ever to a classroom environment that is drastically different than what I experienced in the 80s. Before social media, before cell phone and the ability to take and send a picture at any time. Bullying and cyber-bullying are taken to a new level, and readily seen on any person’s Instagram account. It is yet another layer of complexity, in a school environment that always had different cliques, but they are divided up very differently than in the past. It is excellent. It is watchable, compelling with believable and sympathetic people looking to do the right thing. These are not easy times, although no times really are easy, and each generation has its own challenges to face. Seek this out and check it out. I highly recommend this.
Chariots of Fire: This Best Picture from 1981 I had remembered this solely as a story of a British runner at the Olympics who refused to run a race on Sunday, the Sabbath Day. But there is a lot more to it than that as there is the competition between the two principal actors. Both run the 100m dash. One is Scottish Catholic and NOT British, Eric Liddell (played by Ian Charleston) and the other Jewish British, Harold Abrahams (played by Ben Cross). World War One has ended and the Olympics are to be held in 1924 in Paris.
As young men, Abrahams enrolls in Cambridge and quickly tries to establish himself, building the repuation as a fast runner and a winner. He shows that he is a fast runner by completing a run around the courtyard before the courtyard clock tolls twelve. Meanwhile in Scotland, pious young Liddell is well known for his running but his sister frets about his soul by running instead of focusing on God and religion. Eric convinces his sister that he honours God to do some running in competition. In a head to head regional race, Abrahams is soundly defeated by Liddell which sets his confidence back. Abrahams only wants to win, but he recognizes that he may need some help to improve upon his raw running skills. He approaches a well known coach, played by Ian Holm, to make him faster. Holm sees promise in him and agrees. Both young men are successful in being invited to be part of the British Olympic team.
It was at the Olympics the issue of the race heat for the 100m set on sabbath arises for Liddell and he steadfastly refuses. The British Olympic Committee is not pleased and looks to strong arm him to change his mind. Instead of running the 100m dash heat, Liddell ends up running another race instead, the 400 metre race on a weekday and won the race. He broke the Olympic and World records in the effort, which stayed in place for twelve years. Abrahams ran to fight discrimination, as well as to show coached athletes can be better, without any bending of the rules. Both men succeeded in their goals. Both won gold medals.
This won Best Picture and it has a terrific score from Vangelis. Add in solid performances, some good costumes and sets and this still is compelling to watch still. The religious aspects don’t resonate with me but I respect the conviction of the runner. I am less sympathetic to the sister’s attitude in looking to prevent the running to begin with. Surely he was given a gift of being fast which is something that should be explored to its fullest while he can?
Notably it was executive produced by Dodi Al-Fayad, who died with Diana Princess of Wales in Paris in August 1997. Well worth a watch.
Everest. From 2015. Starring Josh Brolin, Jason Clarke, Keira Knightley, Jake Gyllenhaal, Sam Worthington, Robin Wright and Emily Watson, which is an impressive cast, this movie tells the true story about Everest expeditions in May 1996. In 1996, the idea of commercializing treks up the highest peak in the world was just being more fully explored. Jason Clarke plays New Zealander, Rob Hall who had set up a company (Hall Adventure Consultants) to bring high-paying clients to venture to the summit with him and his team. Hall had previously climbed each of the Seven Summits (including Everest) before he had formed this company, so he was a seasoned professional climber. The Seven Summits are the highest mountains on each of the traditional seven continents and include (with some disagreement): Everest, Mont Blanc, Kilimanjaro, Denali, Puncak Jaya, Aconcagua, and Vinson. This should not be confused with the seven highest peaks in the world, mostly in the Himalayas including K2, Kangchenjunga and others. There of course were other teams on the mountain in 1996 and at base camp at the same time as Adventure Consultants including Jake Gyllenhall’s (playing real life Scott Fischer) who was an American mountain guide.
The early part of the movie introduces you to Clarke and his team and those people who were to be going up to the summit on this adventure. Each brought forth their own story including a teacher from the UK and a married adventurer (Brolin) who only felt alive on these mountains. Clarke we learn has a wife, played by Keira Knightley who is pregnant with their first child together. She is due at any time.
What transpires is a story about the challenges faced in bringing this troop to the summit from base camp to intermediate camps and then the summit. We learn that the mountain and its weather can be very unpredictable. The teams are told that windows that open to the summit can close quickly and that times outlined for ascent and departure are to be strictly enforced, meaning no matter where a particular climber is on their climb up, if at the chosen time they weren’t at the summit, they are to head down. Things happen with this group and the weather turns dramatically against those on the mountain. Lives are lost.
I don’t recall this movie being released, and looking back on it 10 years later it has a very impressive cast. It is well told, and well acted. The scenes on the mountain, while some are clearly sound stages, are convincing. As someone who likes a good trek, I have no interest whatsoever in taking on this mountain. I don’t feel like Sir Edmund Hillary who wanted to climb Everest “because it was there”. No thanks. It all seems so very precarious, and that your life is hanging by a rope or a seemingly $10 ladder joined together with other $10 ladders with you wearing spiked hiking boots in freezing temperatures in high altitude. One false step and you can be finished, and there are still bodies left up there that have never been recovered. All to get a photograph of the summit; a selfie! These days, long lines of people queuing on Everest to get the Bucket List selfie is out of control. I just don’t feel the need for such risky travel adventures. Clearly these people were willing to pay big money to put their lives at risk for this moment. Sometimes Mother Nature has very different ideas. This was worth viewing.
Queer: If Daniel Craig wanted to distinguish himself from James Bond, his most well known role, he has certainly being successful in this goal. The 57yo actor has acted in Knives Out, and then this release which has been garnering him a number of acting award nominations, notably the Golden Globe and the SAG Award for Best Actor. I had heard about this film based on those awards. Set in the 1950s in Mexico intially, Craig plays William Lee, an American ex-pat living there to avoid arrest for his personal preferences. He has money, and lives a life of casual leisure. In his small town he is known for frequenting the bars, he has a problem with alcohol, and also enjoying the company of younger men. Lee is a bit awkward around people, and he has limited success with those men he meets, unless he ends up paying for their company. He has his head turned by a young American man, Eugene Allerton (played by Drew Starkey). Allerton seems to have a job, but there is plenty of flexibility for him in how and where he spends his time. The two cross paths many times as Allerton meets up with and hangs out with a woman, while Lee does his wandering with no particular purpose.
The rest of the film explores the relationship between the two men, and the complex interplay with them. Told in three distinct sections, with an epilogue, the sections explore very different themes. While as the title suggests there is an exploration into being homosexual, there are other themes like addiction (alcohol, drugs and sex), and wartime use of drugs for telepathy, understanding of people and their motivations which ring true as well. I found the third section the most confusing as the scene shifts to Ecuador and the search by the two men to find this plant used, apparently, to try and improve the human capability for telepathy. The two men head into the jungle, and meet a woman and her partner who are in their own camp. She has some research she has been protecting rather dramatically, but she also seems to have some indight into the plant Lee seeks. Craig’s character isn’t very likeable, and he describes himself at times as “disembodied”. That’s an interesting word for it. His life and lifestyle. He seems to be a man in search for a purpose, and one that has eluded him up until now. I don’t recall the word “love” being used between the characters, and in fact young Allerton has his own path of discovery into himself to address. Allerton plays nurse and provider of addiction facilitation for Lee from time to time. All the while continuing to follow him. There are steamy sex scenes which are decidedly not James Bond material. Seeing Craig in this light shows the acting chops are there as he explores his post-Bond career. Being married to Rachel Weisz, who has an Oscar of her own from the 2006 Best Supporting Actress in The Constant Gardener might also be encouraging him to take on these different and challenging roles. I do think that there is an attitude that Weisz is the more “serious actor” and that Craig cranks out the bubble gum Bond films that generate enormous sums of money. As a movie, I scratched my head over the plot, including a number of dream sequences and some basic visual effects, and the direction of the film. I can’t recommend it for any of those things, but seeing Craig in a 180 degree change in what he has be known for, this is intriguing. I will also note that in a small role in Mexico Jason Schwartzman looks almost unrecognizable.
Love is Blind Season 8: This season has concluded as they move on from Minneapolis. The flawed premise in rushing people who never lay eyes on one another, to get engaged and make a very quick decision about marriage continues to repeat itself time and again. It seems very odd to me where those who are newly engaged, so complete strangers, are upon meeting then sharing a room in a lovely beach resort, and then moving in together back in their hometown. Family are brought into it, and ultimately can be attending a wedding for which they may not know the outcome. How strange is that?!
In this season, some wrinkles that were new included a couple that gets engaged and then the guy’s sister pushes him hard not to get married and his friends were told his fiancee had dated some other guy and they questioned her motivations. Huh? In another couple, presumably they had not talked in the pods about their religious and political views. Not sure how that doesn’t happen. Hell in the US there couldn’t be a greater political divide than there is now, unless we’re back into the 1860s and the Civil War. But in Yankee-land Minnesota that wouldn’t be an issue. George Floyd’s murder took place there. All that to say, the end result with the ceremonies was dropped last week along with the Reunion which had plenty of drama and fireworks with people you would look at and think “what did you ever see in one another?” More seasons are to come of course, and more around the world. This remains forgetable mind candy showing the elusive search for love in the 2020s!
Oscars 2025: The Oscars took place last Sunday, and I have to admit that the results were more than a little surprising. I had felt overall that the films generally for 2024 for these awards were not a strong as in previous years. I don’t think, despite the results, there was no clear cut Best Picture. For me, as a theatrical release, I think that the Best Picture to see in the theatres would be Dune Part II, as a visual spectacle it was stunning. As a story, I think that Conclave was more compelling in width and breadth, and in terms of gravity of a story that Nickel Boys was the most substantial. One could argue that The Brutalist also was an Oscar-worthy movie overall, for me I found it too long, with the second half weaker than the first. Anora I suspect was viewed by most on a television screen or smaller monitor. But as a story, it was quite pedestrian.
From Kieran Culkin to Mikey Madison, Wicked for Cinematography and others I was feeling that the Academy missed the mark, in a Shakepeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan kind of way from 1999. My brother, who won my Oscar Pool for the third time in a row summed it up well after his win with “Voting for and giving away awards to movies hardly anyone has seen, and no one will care about in the future”. I have been losing faith in the Academy over the past few years, and so with any art, one has to simply enjoy what we enjoy, and not worry about awards. I do think that nominations are good, as someone who saw ALL Best Picture nominees and it got me to see a really great surprise with Nickel Boys and also I’m Still Here. I would not have seen this otherwise.
Joker: Folie a Deux: I had heard all of the negative press about this movie and the almost universal condemnation of this sequel to the original Joker (2020) with Joaquin Phoenix in the Oscar winning performance, so I had avoided it. But recently on an airplane, it was on and I decided to watch. For me, I was scratching my head as to the whole concept for the film itself. From the “That’s Entertainment” song ringing in my ears, to the trial of Arthur Fleck at the television appearance in the original, and the pushing and pulling of Fleck versus The Joker as distinct persons living in the same body. One of my first observations was the weight loss from Phoenix and how utterly scary it was.
Next I thought, ‘what a tragedy to lose all that weight for this movie”. Just because you have added Lady Gaga to the cast, doesn’t mean that you should be making the film a musical, or even having musical numbers added. I can appreciate that she can sing, but it doesn’t move the story along really. Rather, for Phoenix, who is not a singer (not in a Russell Crowe (Les Miserables) or Pierce Brosnan (Mamma Mia) level of bad) and he did the biopic for Johnny Cash in Walk the Line, but this wasn’t good for him nor the character.
Then the trial aspect is explored with Fleck speaking with his lawyer, talking about multiple personality disorder and whether his troubled past made him not aware of the actions that he was taking. Enter Lady Gaga, Harley Quinn, as fellow inmate in Arkham, who seeks him out because of his actions on TV, as well as a made-for-TV movie that is referred to about the live air shooting. His fame and following is enticing for her. She disagrees with the legal defense of “I was not of sound mind when I did these acts” but thinks he needs to show his more chaotic personality, intent on tearing down the State from the outside. The singing continues with various numbers some of which are in dream states for Fleck. It is all rather confusing. Since her breakout performance in the re-make A Star is Born, Gaga has struggled with following it up with House of Gucci and this performance. Neither of which were compelling. Of course THIS Joker was never meant to be in the Christopher Nolan Batman universe. Other than being in the DC Universe, and having Harvey Dent as prosecutor, it really has nothing to do with it. The original was a turn on the Scorsese film The King of Comedy, right down to Robert Deniro, but this without the same underpinnings has lost its way, and floats in a no man’s land of obscurity never really finding out what the main message and the story should be. Maybe, those who are media sensations can also fall from grace just a quickly as they arrived. The mob doesn’t want realism, they want sensationalism. When you don’t deliver, you are dismissed. There are other stories that can can tell that tale better. In short, I agree with the negative reviews and I cannot recommend this.
Nickel Boys: This movie was the last of the Best Picture nominees that I needed to see. I had honestly not heard about it, nor seen any promotions featuring it, so I went into the viewing expecting that this would be a movie without much Oscar pedigree. I had no background nor any knowledge of the source material, which is a Pullitzer prize winning book by the author Colson Whitehead. This is a movie which speaks about the not-too-distant past (starting in the early 1960s) in the Southern US. It details the story of two young black men in a Reform School in Florida called Nickel Academy.
I will preface this explanation with a credit to the director for finding a way to tell a story effectively over time using what is for the most part a first-person account of the action. Initially it was a little disorienting, because I wasn’t clear on whether the view was from a person with a camera versus with their own perspective. I learned that it is a perspective thing. Over the course of the film, the perspectives do change which is helpful, as well as it assists in filling in some plot points. It is also used to better introduce us to the main character Elwood Curtis (played by Ethan Herisse) and also Turner (played by Brandon Wilson). Much of the earlier images have a feel like a Terrence Malick film with short snippets and close up shots. Add in some timely news items of that time with Martin Luther King and you can see how the times impact the story.
Elwood is a bright 17yo young man, who has a loving grandmother. He does well in school and is offered a chance, by a teacher, to visit a school in northern Florida which is tuition free and for people of colour. On his way to the school, he has a fateful hitchhiking pick up from an older young black man driving a nice car. He quickly is in the back of a police cruiser and being dropped off at the Nickel Academy. He along with other boys there, in this segregated school, are told that there is a hierarchy of actions which will lead to their being deemed fit to be released. But it becomes evident early that this is a forced labour camp with little schooling and reforming going on. The boys who misbehave are whipped. Family members are not allowed to see the boys. It all feels a lot more like a prison with no real way to ever escape.
In Canada, we have more recently been told about residential schools for our young indiginous people, taken away from their parents, family and heritage with a view towards making them more able to “integrate” into the mainstream white society. It is a national disgrace. I am reminded that horrible things have been happening in the world as long as man has been around. In the southern US, this movie poignantly shows the life of young men being forever changed in a government, State sponsored institution. A young man whose only mistake, not even a crime, was to be in the wrong car offering a ride, has his life forever changed. We can see the impact that is has had to him and those around him. It is a very sad commentary. This is especially true when the new US administration speaks to “merit” being the sole criteria for jobs and advancement while here circumstance greatly shapes this young man’s life. The end result of Nickel Academy is not unlike the residential schools. I think that this is a worthy film for nomination. It is a good story, effectively told which speaks to a situation that I knew nothing about. Imagine being the grandmother in this situation? How utterly helpless you would feel! Even when she tries to do something about it, she is taken advantage of. How sad! Images of space, and advancement in technology in space highlight the fact that in many ways a lot of these institutions that aren’t helping can still exist, or that as we explore space, we don’t explore what happens in our own backyards with our children. I recommend and enjoying this experience. Check it out if you can find it.
Love Is Blind Season 8: I find it most interesting that some of the greatest drama introduced into this season revolve around social media. The dating world is challenging enough with finding a person that you are compatible with, with all of its social, monetary and other challenges. But add in your online presence and it adds a new dimension and one which you may have no control over. We have five couples who seem well connected going into the last two epsiodes dropped friday, and we learn the one couple has a contestant worried about his choice having been on a “date” with a guy before the show began. She is, in fact, single, and single people do this. But his level of insecurity, and disbelief in her makes it feel more like an excuse for him, while making her feel terrible about something that she is not responsible.
Then the second couple has a distraught ex-date from 4 years before posting some viral video where she is looking to torpedo the character of the guy who is entirely committed with his new person. It’s all rather bizarre for those who clearly want to have Likes and Friends on social media ahve an issue on whether someone followed them, before the show, and then later unfollowed them. If you don’t share so much on social media, then perhaps this isn’t an issue. Seems the issue is on the person with the profile than those who follow. But I am old!!
The merciful conclusion will be dropped on Feb 28th. Then we can all move ahead with our lives!
Mondays With Robbie 