August 10th, 2026

The Death of Robin Hood: This 2026 release is a very different type of film regarding the life of Robin Hood. If you immediately think of men in tights and frollicking around the Nottingham Forest, then you would share this with me. Errol Flynn (1938), Sean Connery (1976), Kevin Costner (1991) struggling to keep his English accent and a movie stolen by Alan Rickman, Cary Elwes (1993) Men in Tights, and Taron Egerton (2018). Generally Robin is a principled man who is stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. You are forgiven if you thought this, as I did, and were surprised to see Hugh Jackman as the lead in this in this interpretation.

Set in the 1200s, Hugh plays an elderly Robin Hood who is struggling. He is alone and making his way. The loner. He comes across a young girl who wishes to do him harm. The myth of Robin Hood being “a good man” is dispelled rather quickly. It is a common main premise where a man reflects back on his life (in this case his myth) all the while making his way forward seeking some form of redemption. Early on, there is a battle where Robin Hood is wounded and he manages to get himself with assistance of Little John to a priory where he can be hidden away. He is at the Priory of St Clements, where a kind nurse played by Jodie Comer, as Sister Brigid, heals him taking care of his wounds. She has no idea who this man is that she has helped. There is a leper at the priory who tells Robin Hood that he should keep his identity hidden from the good Sister, and he gives a good reason for it. Things continue.

I wish that there was more to do for Jodie Comer. She has played these supporting roles where she doesn’t get to show off her spectrum of talents (like The Bikeriders, or Free Guy). Hugh Jackman too in this is left working with very little. The basic story structure is predictable and provides no real mystery. Not sure how this would be sold to these A-list stars since it seems to be little more than a pay cheque. The priory is clearly a place for people to meditate on their past and their current thoughts without much challenge from others. So in the end I cannot recommend this, as there are more interesting stories involving Robin Hood and his merry men, including (at times) the Sherriff of Nottingham. Those stories are those to seek out before this. As well there are other better stories about flawed men looking to seeking redemption (a movie like Unforgiven comes to mind off hand) but there are so many others .

80s Revisit: I began talking movies in the 1990s with Alison, and a result there is a whole decade of movies that I didn’t really write about from my youth. I have spent some time this past week re-watching some films that I watched back in the day. I will do some quick reviews of them, since many are familiar with those closer to my age, and many are available on streaming services like Netflix or Crave. Both of which I have. Some of these movies are familiar friends, who I revisit from time to time. But others I haven’t watched in a long time.

Stripes: This movie directed by Ivan Reitman released in 1981 had everything that a young teenage guy would want. It was funny, it involved the army and it had bare breasts! Who could ask for more?! Starring Bill Murray who was just establishing himself as a force in Saturday Night Live. This movie was released after Meatballs and Caddyshack but before Ghost Busters. It has an excellent supporting cast, notably Harold Ramis, the very funny John Candy, John Larroquette and newcomers Sean Young and PJ Soles.

The story is that screw up, and directionless Bill Murray playing John Winger and his buddy Ramis (Russell Zisky) join the Army on a whim after finding life in NYC disappointing. They join a band of new recruits who have a crusty Sargeant Hulka leading them. They need to complete basic training, but are challenged with adjusting to the military discipline. They unexpectedly impress a general and are ordered to head to Europe. The comedy of course is situational with the smart ass Murray dealing with his comrades. There are other SCTV alumni involved like Dave Thomas as MC in the bar they attend and Joe Flaherty. I laughed out loud a few times as once again the situations and comedic timing is good for the duration. Is it believable? Hell no. But it is interesting with how Czechloslovakia is treated. It’s good fun!

Poltergeist: This 1982 film is a classic horror movie, with a story from Steven Spielberg and directed by Tobe Hooper. It stars JoBeth Williams and Craig T Nelson as a loving couple with three children. There is teenage Dana, young Robbie and little Carol Anne. Oh, and the dog! They have moved into a new housing development where Nelson (Steve Freeling) is a top sales person. The actors all look so young. The family goes through everyday life with jobs and school, but then there are a series of strange events that occur within the house. What starts as bizarre but a little bit funny turns pretty quickly more dark. The story proceeds as the family deals with the crisis with increasing intensity in frequency and danger.

This is the movie where the phrase “They’re here!” was first used addressing pending doom, as used by little blond Carol Ann. There were definitely a couple memorable scenes within this movie. For me, there is one with young Robbie which was simply outstanding. You’ll know it when you see it, starting with a parent’s simple rationalization that is meant to clear a young child’s worries. I won’t give away more than that. A fun fact that I just caught upon rewatching was when Steve is introducing his family and we here that wife Diane is 32yo, and then Dana 16yo, Robbie is 8yo and Carol Anne is 5yo. Doing the math, this couple had Dana when Diane was 16yo, so a teen Mom. What works throughout this movie is the love and commitment shown within this family group. From Mom’s devotion to her children, to Steve’s love for his wife and family. Of course this family has the eternal issue for white people, that they choose to live in a house that clearly has many supernatural issues within it, like Amityville Horror. Just leave! But then there isn’t much of a movie. The movie has some startling moments and the special effects are all done very well. Even now they hold up quite well. Absolutely this is worth your time.

Back to the Future: This Robert Zemekis film from 1985 was a massive hit, and starred Canadian Michael J Fox. An interesting fact is some background that Fox was not the first actor to portray Marty McFly, as he was busy and committed to doing his TV series Family Ties. The first actor who was on set for five weeks was Eric Stoltz, from Mask, Fast Times at Ridgemont High and Some Kind of Wonderful fame. The producers found him a little too intense with his method acting as he brought a darker interpretation to the role. Fox was brought in to make it lighter and feel more fun. The results speak for themselves as this movie kicked off a franchise which for me faded with each iteration. The first one remains the classic with Marty driving a DeLorean back to 1955 and meeting up with his parents.

There are terrific comedic moments while Marty learns to live back in the 1950s. Like meeting his Dad for the first time, or relaizing the truth about how his Mom and Dad actually met. For me, it is amazing now to think that in 1985, going to back thirty years to 1955 had such a dramatic turn for the town, from fashion, to attitudes, to high school In the present day, Back to the Future is over 40 years ago! Doc Brown returns from 2015 (!!) where Marty needs to deal with his kids. The DeLorean is then a flying car, and it powered by garbage. It doesn’t seem from my side now that things are so dramatically different from 1985 now now (even while of course there are phones, social media, and hyper-increased technology). I laugh too with Marty’s parents because Lea Thompson for the movie is aged thirty years to 1985 and is around 47yo. They turned the very hot Thompson for the day from 1955 into a very frumpy 47yo in 1985.

So this is all good fun and well worth seeing. The time travel aspects of course are interesting especially when Marty returns back from 1955. I do think that the more interesting sequel would have been following Doc Brown and Marty back to 2015 and addressing the kids, specifically his son for the primary focus. That story became a sidelight to the larger Biff story and he using a Sports Almanac to be a betting king pin and ruining the town. This wasn’t as good and the movie loses its momentum. Part III heading to the wild wild west was even weaker for me. But this first edition was fun for the time and a massive hit. Enjoy.

August 3, 2026 Amadeus revisited

Amadeus: One of my three favourite films of all time is Amadeus, along with Jaws and Shawshank Redemption. Anyone who knows me, or has seen any list I have ever created would know this. I have always loved the 1984 Milos Forman movie that won Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor (F. Murray Abraham) among the eight Oscars that it won. What attracted me on top of the performances which were outstanding was the music, and the creative process (in this case music creation). Set in the late 1700s, Mozart is arriving in Vienna after having been a child prodigy and known throughout Europe having performed before Kings and Queens. He was taken from place to place by his demanding and driven father, Leopold. I knew that the film was based upon the successful play by Peter Shaffer in 1979, which is performed from time to time. I had always expected that I would be having to travel to London UK or maybe New York City to see it. Then earlier this year I saw that Shaw Festival was performing the play Amadeus over the summer a few weeks. I couldn’t buy tickets fast enough.

I wasn’t sure what I expected, but I knew the film well enough to distinguish the elements that were used within the movie and those that were new (or at least the original source material). The structure was there, with competing composer Antonio Salieri speaking as an old man about how he professed to have murdered Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, the world reknowned composer, and then he recounting his own history with the young Mozart. It is a compelling story with an ordinary man (Salieri) with some musical ability who wishes to praise God through his industry and music. He was court composer in Vienna, a very pretigious position from a humble boy from Italy, under Emperor Joseph II. Then Mozart comes along in the form of a spoiled, egotistical, profane, man-child. But his music is magnificent and as Salieri discovers is the very voice of God. Salieri feels deeply offended and decides to ruin God’s incarnation. Then the story continues.

The play is quite different from the movie in some material ways. There primarily isn’t as much music in the play. That is unfortunate. I remember hearing the story in the Making Of for Amadeus that the music Director for St Martins in the Fields in London was approached to do the music for the movie, and his response was that he would do it on the one condition: that not one note of Mozart’s music would be touched. Milos Forman agreed. I think through this interaction with the musical director that Forman came to realize the greatness of the music involved. He embraced it. For the play, like the movie, Salieri is the focal point and he has the majority of the lines in it. Salieri in the play is married. Despite this he holds a candle for one of the singers that he tutors. He learns that Mozart has been with his treasured student and he vows to make a move on Mozart’s new wife Constanza. It is an uncomfortable exchange and changes the scene from the movie where Constanza brings her husband’s music for Salieri’s review in order to be considered for the post of tutor for the Emperor’s niece. The Emperor is still a bumbling musical neophyte with a tin ear, but he is also an unwitting ally for Mozart as he recognizes music that is pleasing to his ear. Mozart is still profane but immeasurably talented. The play decides to focus on different aspects on the life of Mozart and him with Vienna. It shows his early success with his operas, but with Salieri’s efforts to undermine his actions. He is successful and to his surprise. He was awaiting God’s intervention which never came. In summary, I was glad to see the play. I liked the film better. It was a very pleasant evening at the theatre to see a production that I never thought I would see near Toronto.

Amadeus: TV series: Unbeknownst to me, there was a new five part TV series released in December 2025 starring Paul Bettany as Salieri, and unknown to me Will Sharpe as Mozart. This series was also based upon the Shaffer play. But it is five hours from a play that was 2.5 hours. So there is a lot of additional scenes and filler which are different from both the movie and the play itself. There is a fundamental shift in this story with Mozart being a little more hurtful towards Salieri. There is more music, which I appreciated a great deal with more scenes about the operas. In addition, there is a new wrinkle with Constanza and Salieri together. They build on the play, with additional factors involved.

There were additional scenes here with Leopold, which I feel were missing with the play. Leopold and his relationship with his son is a key factor in Salieri’s undoing of Mozart. The building blocks of Mozart’s attitude towards the world are started with his Dad, and how they view his talent. The theme of God’s divine hand and the gift provided to Mozart is very key. For Mozart, we realize that this perceived gift is a curse for him. Yes, he can write music like dictation without making any changes but he struggles with communication. He speaks, much like Shakespeare in Hamnet, through his art. He works and drinks far too much, but through his work like Don Giovanni we see Mozart seeking forgiveness from his wife. From his father. Yet he is mostly alone. Ultimately the end is the same, but there is further communication between Salieri and Constanza. In both the play and the series, they don’t use the formula of Salieri speaking to a priest in looking to share the history. I think that the film was very effective with this device. Salieri recognizes his mediocrity with God only providing him the ability to recognize the greatness of another and proceeds to thank God sarcastically. Salieri for all his faults, reflects the reality for most of humanity. In fact he was even more accomplished than most. He wanted immortality and fame. He wanted to be remembered forever. But so very few of us actually have this kind of impact on the world. At one point the Emperor states that he was thankful to have lived in a time of Mozart and his music. The Emperor was thankful for his small part in revealing Mozart’s talents. He as an Emperor still recognized his limited impact on the world and his place in it. This TV series is yet another interpretation. I am glad that I saw it even though I feel as though I was immersed in Mozart and his life for a weekend.

Spencer: This 2021 movie for me was bypassed because I hadn’t heard very good things about it. I am also not a big Kristin Stewart fan, and so it just didn’t appeal. But this was a movie available on Crave I figured that I would give it a shot after some passage of time. The time didn’t help it. Stewart plays Princess Diana, nee Diana Spencer. It covers a few days around the Christmas period in 1991. Diana is arriving at the Royal palace Sandringham House where the Queen and the family are gathering. She has the boys at the Palace and they are teens for William and just likely below that for Harry. William can sense some tenseness with his mother. Over the course of the three days, where there is very little interaction with Prince Charles we see a number of things that have been spoken about regarding the Princess including her battle with bulemia. Cruelly at a breakfast Charles says to his wife that kitchen staff have gone through great pains to make a lovely meal for them all, and it would be nice if she could refrain from flushing it all down the toilet.

The producers have taken great pains to ensure that Stewart looks, sounds and dresses the part. She wears many clothes that Diana had worn, and she has the haircut down. She also has some of Diana’s more shy mannerisms down. What surprises me and is more than a little offputting is the portrayal as Diana as this frail, impertinent, mentally unstable woman looking to be on the verge of a breakdown. She has the staff in the Palace on edge worrying about her, and what she might do next. From leaving her Porsche on the way in to take the jacket off a scarecow, to demanding that a woman who helped her dress is returned from London straight away (where’s Maggie?), to wander aimlessly around an abandoned house nearby. The gifts are exchanged on Christmas Eve with the Queen, and she is upset that the large pearl necklace that she was given from Charles is one she has already noticed that Camilla wears. She has never been in this relationship with just Charles, ever.

She is shown to be a loving mother, when she isn’t acting strangely. She interrupts the boys learning how to shoot pheasant on the grounds as she can’t abide by the boys killing wildlife. Charles for his part stays away, but when pressed will take the less difficult path and relent to Diana’s whims. The Queen is less sympathetic and will notice Diana’s lack of eating at mealtime, or will be mildly upset as she is the last person to arrive for family Christmas pictures. All this is a very small window into the very large life of this Princess. Much is crammed into it, but I don’t like seeing this portrayal of her. I imagine that the boys William and Harry would appreciate this side of their mother being shown to the world, if this is in fact how their Mother was. There is a scene where after a testy dinner for Diana she has gone down to the kitchen refrigerators and started to eat the items prepared for the next day. The head butler stops by the check in on her, which she rightfully rejects the intrusion. For him, he is there to protect the Crown, and the image of the Crown and he reminds her about a number of things (like changing clothes away from windows). The concept is brought home better throughout the series The Crown when we see through all of the Royal Family’s lives that a good portion of them is the State and for the people. It can be a difficult existence despite all the trappings that on first blush appear to be so glamourous. Diana has been gone a long time, and her life was far too short and full of drama. I wish that she hadn’t had to go through all of this, and for her boys’ sake I wish that she had stayed around longer. This movie, however, I do not feel that I should recommend.

At the end of this movie, there is the picture above with Diana wearing an OPP baseball cap. As a Canadian and Torontonian, it was fun seeing the Ontario Provincial Police cap on her! Some unexpected Canadian content!

July 27th, 2026

The Odyssey: Christopher Nolan’s most recent effort with this classic Homer story is an epic undertaking but well worth the viewing in the largest screen that you can find. I went to the IMAX theatre with bone rattling sound on a Tuesday afternoon which was almost sold out (the only available seats right at the first row). Elsewhere in Toronto, other IMAX showings this week were sold out, so there is plenty of buzz for the over 2.5 hour film. I will say that I deliberately avoided trailers and other reviews before seeing this. I want to go to the theatre with as few pre-conceived ideas as possible and a fresh outlook. Naturally with Nolan for me, I am a fan of his work and I look forward to his releases. This did not disappoint.

This is a story about the life of Odysseus (played by Matt Damon) but introduced through the characters of his son Telemachus (played by Tom Holland) and his wife Penelope (played by Anne Hathaway). Odysseus has been gone from Ithaca for many years, and some believe that he is dead. Penelope is the Queen and she believes in his still being alive but there are many suitors gathered in her castle to look to marry her and rule. So the story begins as then we go back in time as son looks to find any news of his father. Incidentally, Damon for this film is ripped. Nolan chastised Christian Bale in The Dark Knight because Bale was too ripped for that movie.

Within the retelling of the past we hear about the sacking of the city of Troy. Odysseus is Greek with his Greek army and navy, while Troy was a city of Spartans. Many who studied Greek mythology would know about the Trojan Horse which was used to hide troops as the horse was carried into the gates of Troy. Troy of course was also another movie from 2004 with Brad Pitt as the God Achilles telling the story of Helen of Troy who for love of Paris leaves her King and stays held up in Troy. A war ensues. I will note that Homer also wrote The Iliad which pairs with The Odyssey but Troy was more closed tied to Iliad. It focuses on the war, but despite this note that the Odyssey has plenty of war scenes with the sacking of Troy. This movie has a different take for the seige and defeat of Troy, with the consequences that come from it. The victors at Troy look to embark for home but they run into troubles along the way. How the soldiers with their leader manage to voyage through their travels is much of the focus, and using their wits to avoid the perils found within. That is all of the plot that I would share.

This movie is beautifully shot in IMAX and has tremendous sound. It is well acted among the principal actors. Matt Damon has plenty of screen time, and I do like his performance. Ideally I could see a younger Russell Crowe be very good for this role, and maybe now a Michael Fassbender. Damon doesn’t seem to have that harder edge to him that other actors may have brought to the role. But it is still a solid performance. There are a number of parallels between this story and for Gladiator. Much has been made by few who cannot imagine that Nolan has chosen a diverse cast, rather than what they feel should be all whites. It is a ridiculous position in my mind since Homer never made any mention, for example, of the colour of Helen of Troy’s skin. Nolan chose Lupita Nyong’o, without a doubt a beautiful woman but different than Diane Kruger from Troy, to play Helen of Troy, the face that launched a thousand ships. It doesn’t seem out of place at all, especially for a myth, to have all sorts of colours and creeds play the parts from that part of the world. For me, I was luke warm on the selection of Elliot Page in the role of Sinon. The casting of Sinon’s older brother Antinous, played by Robert Pattinson was much better. Pattinson has become an excellent character actor with depth and a flair for embracing darkness and complexity in those roles. From Tenet to The Batman and The Lighthouse he shines. Other excellent casting choices take place throughout like John Leguizamo, Charlize Theron, Corey Hawkins, Samantha Morton and Jon Bernthal. The scenes on water with the waves, wind and weather were well done. Each of the various scenes depicting island challenges are each handled so very well and will have the audience taken back to more myths. It is an interesting choice for Nolan to decide on this topic, with three Batman movies in his catalog, along with one of the best space movies (Interstellar) and other time shifting movies Inception, Tenet and Memento. He has claimed that without the success of Oppenheimer that this would not have been green lit. This seems to be a movie that people need to see and get excited about in the theatres in much the same way as Top Gun Maverick did a little over a year ago. Nolan has cemented his place among the film directing greats and this will add to his reputation. There are of course underlying messages within the story that are timeless. Concepts like the frailty and weakness of humans, and how they act despite the fact that they can be told the consequences of those actions. Others like the punishment for mankind generally for betraying the Gods and their laws but along with it the very personal impact to one man and the choices that he has made for himself, and his family. There is also a commentary into the ongoing ancient passing of leadership only from man to son, without taking into account women. All were well delivered and articulated. A movie can show you ancient times but the message delivered can be very relevant to the times that we currently live under. At the end of my viewing, people in the audience were clapping and cheering. I think this is a much better movie than Troy. I never liked the CGI in Gladiator and the images on screen here were universally excellent. There was no scrimping on the graphics to compensate for an over-extended budget like Ridley Scott had to do. I expect to watch this additional times and see what I didn’t catch the first time. This should be at the top of your summer viewing list.

The Sheep Detectives: George Hardy, played by Hugh Jackman, is a farmer in the country who tends to his sheep. He loves his sheep. He has named each of them, and each night he will read murder mysteries to them. George unexpectedly ends up dead, under mysterious circumstances. Enter his sheep who look to solve the murder. This is the premise of the new release on Prime. It is live action, with CGI for the animals involved. The live actors supporting the story include Emma Thompson, Molly Gordon and Nicholas Braun as the daft local police officer who bumbles his way through the case, his first murder case ever. Hardy’s sheep are voiced by various known actors like Bryan Cranston, Julia Louis-Dreyfuss, Patrick Stewart and Chris O’Dowd. The sheep are all very different from one another and Dreyfuss as Lily is the brains of the operation. Others chip in as well, with others behaving, well like sheep and going along with what the others decide.

This is family viewing, and meant to be that way. There are some family-friendly inside jokes with a live character wanting to take an inventory of Hardy’s sheep and midway through counting them he falls asleep in his car. Lily convinces the other sheep that there was a murder and that there are certain traits that such stories follow. The sheep of course speak to one another but only ever bleat to the live humans in the cast. The sheep do manage to get around, out of their enclosure (it was a significant event for Lily and Mopple to learn from Sebastian how to cross the road off the property (and yes there is a joke inserted here as well). Further they are in the town and listening in to the rambling of Braun and later the lawyer who intervenes and the two children of Hardy (his wife had passed away). Things unfold as they are meant to and the audience is left wondering who the culprit might be. I will admit that my guesses were incorrect as the story unfolds. This was light entertainment with some familiar actors and voices involved. I was surprised to see Comleth Hill (Lord Varys from Game of Thrones) with hair, and playing the local butcher. This was alright, and met with expectations. There were a few smiles and with some decent CGI for the animals. It goes without saying that with talking sheep solving a murder that one’s beliefs need to be checked at the door with the imagination being in full gear.

July 20th, 2026

Je M’Appelle Agneta: This 2026 Netflix movie has just been released. It is Swedish, with plenty of French and has subtitles. It stars Eva Melander, as Agneta, who is previously unknown to me. I knew none of this cast. Agneta is married in her late 40s, living in Sweden with her fitness-focused husband and they are empty nesters. The kids have moved out, and only seem to reach out when they need money. Agneta has a separate bedroom from her husband with a single bed. She loves France and everything to do with it. The cheese, the wine, the language and the people. She feels unseen in her own house, and she recently lost her job. While sneaking French cheese, crackers and wine into her room, she leafs through some Want Ads and sees a position of a caregiver (au pair) in Provence. She reads the ad to be for the care of a young boy. She sends off the email with her resume thinking “there’s no reason not to”. Very quickly she receives a positive response that she has been offered the job. Room, board, and care giver in Southern France.

It should be noted that Agneta doesn’t speak French. As she leaves, her husband warns her emphatically that she will be lost there and quickly looking to come back home with her tail between her legs. Undeterred Agenta leaves on her adventure. She arrives in the small quaint French town and finds the bar that she is to meet up with Fabien. Quickly she learns that the her care is for an older eccentric gentleman, named Einar, who isn’t look for anyone to assist him. This is not what she was expecting. Einar is single, sometimes forgetful and has lived a full life. He is gay, but had a son from a previous life of his own in Sweden. Einar is fluently bilingual and has his own issues to sort through. Agnta learns this over time. There are lessons to be shared by many of the towns inhabitants. The Bar Chez Fabien is a gathering spot each Friday and we learn why it is important for Einar. In it, there is a slice of small town European life. Einar brings his life attitudes to Agneta and admonishes her for not having lived for herself. She is always focusing on others; her husband, her children, her job. None of these things makes her feel fulfilled. Things happen with the expected and unexpected.

I think that Eva Melander does an excellent job in this role. We can see how she opens up and blossoms when given the proper outlook and encouragement. Even though she looks upon herself as unremarkable with no adventurous in her life, others are quick to point out the heading into unknown France, with no working knowledge of French and no people that this is an adventure. Challenges are put before her as well as others, and they all grow as a result. One of the lessons learned is the time honoured “you’re never too old to learn”. For Agneta it is a sense of belonging and being with her people. That she embraces herself and all that she is and recognizing the value in this. I recommend this movie and not just for the scenery in Provence, with the purple lavender fields among the hillsides. We care about Agneta and those around her. The characters aren’t just caricatures there to provide broad strokes of a type of person. Rather they have more fully formed backgrounds and issues to be dealt with. For those who don’t like subtitles, well what can I say? Get over it. If you don’t then you are missing a lot of quality movies that don’t have to come from Hollywood. This, in these times especially, is a very good thing.

The Thing: This John Carpenter classic sci-fi horror movie is from 1982. I have never seen this from beginning to end, and I wanted to see what all the fuss is about from back in the day. It stars Kurt Russell as MacReady, a helicopter pilot who serves on the remote US outpost in Antarctica. Others on the crew are Wilford Brimley (Cocoon and The Natural), Keith David (Platoon) and Donald Moffat, who is well recongized from those times. I will note that this movie mirrors plenty from the 1979 classic horror movie from Ridley Scott Alien. There is a crew alone in a remote place with an inhospitable environment who must deal with a deadly foreign presence. First their task is to identify what the heck is going on. In this instance at the outpost a helicopter flies overhead and tries to shoot what appears to be a wolf or a dog from above. It runs out the dog belongs at the US sight and there is a confrontation with this Norweigian crew on that helicopter with the US team.

The crew quickly gets grossed out, as does the audience, by a slimy sticky mess with hair and teeth looking nothing like they have ever seen. An autopsy reveals that the anatomy of the mess before them isn’t unfamiliar. It is Earth biology, even though they are not suspecting anything alien at this stage. Wilford Brimley is the doctor/science officer and confirms this. MacReady decides to visit the Norweigian site and see what is going on there. It is unusual for people to go squirrelly after a short while in the isolated ice. The Norweigian site is destroyed with bodies and burning environment. What transpires is very similar to the Alien script. They discover that this presence can imitate the life around it and clone itself to it, also similar to Invasion of the Body Snatchers, except pods and sleeping is not required.

I think that this remains iconic as the make up and effects used were cutting edge for their day. In many respects, they still hold up well. I was squeamish in watching some of it, which was getting higher up on the Gross Out Meter. The humans quickly turn on each other, as they cannot tell who has been “infected” (or gets “imitated”). There is an excellent scene with Russell tying up a few others of the crew in chairs with rope and then performing an experiment before them to see if they have been infected. It involves having a petry dish of their blood, and then putting a red hot wire into the blood. It not infected, the blood just burns. If infected the blood reacts aggressively! The hilarity ensues when a couple of guys aren’t infected, but remain tied when another crew member is found to be infected and basically explodes beside them! They jump and scream and demand to be untied. The fear being seated next to this freak show is real. Ultimately the creature realizes that it has no way out from this camp, and wants to freeze back again into the ice. It wants to infect people and take over the world. MacReady has done a good job at keeping it isolated. In the end, the audience is left uncertain with what remains to be done. This was decent but I had that lingering feeling about the substantial similiarites with Alien were a bit much. Some of the make up technology for sure is from that time with other movies like Scanners or The Fly or American Werewolf in London.

July 13, 2026

Disclosure Day: Steven Spielberg likes to explore space and extra terrestrials in his movies. The two most famous examples would be E.T. as well as Close Encounters of the Third Kind. In both cases, the alien(s) are not ominous, scary, violent creatures who are looking to dominate the human race. Speilberg did that in his version of War of the Worlds with Tom Cruise. Rather, they are scientists and peaceful looking to communicate with the inhabitants of this planet filled with life. This latest movie, with a story from Spielberg himself like Close Encounters, E.T. was Spielberg’s concept but written by Melissa Matheson. It has been over twenty years since War of the Worlds (2005). In this movie, it begins with a high tech heist from a young tech guru named Daniel, played by Josh O’Connor looking to keep a vast sum of data with incriminating video away from big IT company, headed by Colin Firth. First and his team of Security personnel will stop at nothing to prevent this heist. Big IT company goes so far as to kidnap Daniel’s girlfriend Jane, played by Bono’s daughter Eve Hewson.

Meanwhile, Emily Blunt plays Margaret Fairchild who is a bouncy, enthusiastic weather woman for a local TV station in Kansas City. She has a boyfriend, and we learn that she gets antsy in one place and looks to move on. She feels as though she has been looking for her happy place to find peace. Something unusual happens and she takes on an uncanny ability just by looking at strangers. What does it mean? Why is this happening to her? She is emotional and scared about these new abilities. Things continue to unfold. Daniel needs to better explain what is happening, why she was kidnapped and why he is being chased. He shows her his reasoning. Things progress and the two main storylines with Daniel and Margaret come together.

I enjoyed this film. It was decent and kept my attention. There are aspects of X-Files in it, along with some wonder of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Add to that some aspects of Contact and the vision of Carl Sagan, as well as religious overtones and siblings. Some of the CGI was not realistic, especially when the wildlife scenes were involved. For whatever reason, ever since seeing the trailer, I was wondering what on earth that Emily Blunt had done to her face. She looks all puffed out. Such a beauty, who doesn’t need this at all. She delivers a performance with more crying and emotion than she likely would want to do daily. O’Connor is very good too. I would be remiss without mentioning the work of Colman Domingo who plays Hugo. There was part of me that was thinking that there was more going on with Hugo than was shown early on. Viewers will have to see for themselves how it all shakes down. Certainly I think that Spielberg has a wide view of the universe, and shares much of the attitudes of Sagan and others who feel that we are not alone in all that space. Further the human-like forms of these beings also shows the nature of humans and how we deal with what we don’t know. This theme is common. I am glad that I did not pay a premium for IMAX or bigger sound. It wasn’t necessary. This is more a human chase than a space movie.

Extinction: I had seen bits and pieces of this film a couple pof times, but then decided to sit down and watch it from beginning to end. Sometimes when I catch things in the middle they are different at that time than when I watch from the beginning. This was such a case. I think that this was more interesting when I had seen it from the beginning. In truth this movie was released back in 2018, and it never crossed my radar in the theatres. It’s not really surprising as it does not have a cast that makes you race to the theatres. I had expected this to be standard dystopian fare with some threat of invasion, and elimination given the title, by an external force. The focus is on a man Peter, played by Micheal Pena, with his family. He has a wife, Alice played by Lizzy Caplan and a couple of kids. Now I like Michael Pena, and he is a really good supporting actor in movies like The Martian, and was good in a more shared primary role in the police movie End of Watch. He can be a good comic relief and he is generally engaging. In this instance, his performance was meh.

Peter is having some troubling dreams as he sleeps. He sees his wife and children in more and more disturbing scenes. It is disconcerting to him, and he doesn’t want to trouble his loved ones with what he is battling. But he can be distracted, and despite his best intentions to be a good day he can have moments where time slips by. Things happen and there is an event that turns the narrative on its ear. This becomes the crux of the whole movie and I won’t spoil it for the viewer. Suffice it to say that there is a more modern philiosophical direction in how it goes. I think that much of it stems from the costuming involved with some of the characters. You will better understand what I mean should you watch. This felt like a one premise story, and once you understand it then the earlier aspects fall in line. I didn’t feel compelled to watch it again, as I have other stories that take such a turn. The effects and production value was decent but not outstanding. All in all this was a time filler but I wouldn’t recommend. Do you care about this family? Yes I suppose so, as the audience believe that they care for one another and the children. Maybe that is the real point because when there are people who aren’t from where you are, or don’t look like you, do you still have the capacity to have empathy for them? Like Deckard in Blade Runner, where he is expected to retire replicants without thought or feeling towards them, how far do you extend the sympathy? It’s difficult to say that this “ends as expected” because the turning point was earlier and could impact what the viewer would expect from that point onward.

July 6th, 2026

House of the Dragon Season 2: In anticipation of the latest season 3 of this Game of Thrones prequel I decided to revisit the final episodes of Season 2. I thoroughly enjoyed Game of Thrones and read the books as well. In addition I read the book for A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms and watched that first season. I have to admit as I revisited the last few episodes that I couldn’t recall whether I had seen the final few episodes at all. I am convinced that I did not. The key storyline is the amassing of a more formidable force for the Princess Rhaenyra, who believes that she is the rightful Queen of the rhelm (this is Team Black). This arises from a number of fronts. First, her husband Daemon, played by Matt Smith, who is the brother of the dead King and her Father, is in Herrenhal and looking to gather soldiers to support an attack against the forces of Aegon II, the son of Alicent and his brother Aemond. Yes I find all the names that are remarkably similar to be quite confusing. Daemon has his own issues, including that he should be the rightful King himself, and not a consort to the Queen, and he is suffering from visions and illusions while at Harrenhal.

On another front, Rhaenyra is looking to find more riders for dragons. She has dragons, what she lacks is true blood Targaryans to ride them. You see, dragons will only be ridden by those with dragon blood that they choose. They are powerful animals that are a deciding factor in any battle. Dragons against soldiers is an easy battle. Dragons, which have various sizes and abilities, is a different story where numbers are important. The largest and fiercest of the dragons is ridden by Aemond, who is a violent and cruel leader. So there are episodes to address this challenging task.

So I finished up in preparation for the pending season. Episode four in this series with a battle with various dragons was the best of this entire series (first or second). As with Game of Thrones, there were surprises and betrayals. The quality of the CGI was very high and the second season built on the slower first season, which I did not enjoy as much. There is intrigue with family members along with the childhood friends Rhaenyra and Alicent who had major differences, but they also share in a desire to avoid needless bloodshed with innocent lives. As was discussed in Game of Thrones, it makes little sense to have a crown to a society that has been wiped out. Who wants to rule over ashes?

Meanwhile on the Green side, with Alicent and her offspring battling among themselves while looking towards continuing in the line of succession that they believe that the King stated to Alicent as part of his dying wish. But her adult children have issues with one another, including their own ideas about who is best positioned to be a leader. This intrigue of course comes from writer’s George R R Martin’s interest in the British crown and tales from Henry VIII and others. He creates a believable world, which is intentionally complex with many characters and families. The exploration of bastards in this season is a good one, as clearly these places explored have plenty of sex and family shenanigans. Shakespeare in King Lear wrote: “Now, gods, stand up for bastards!” This series has taken up this cry literally! The results for the Queen are mixed, at least so it seems at this point. Overall this season was more satisfying, even though the issues with Daemon fall flat with the continued visions for him, along with a visit to the Weirwood tree (“truth tree”) with the assistance of a local witch, Alys Rivers who for me is one of the better characters.

I have to admit that I am not clear who I am cheering for. There are true villains like the eye-patched Aemond, but others are not so clear. I am aware of the fate of Rhaenyra from a quick explanation of a dungeon in Kings Landing from Joffrey with Maergery Tyrell. The writers certainly are leaning towards putting the viewers in a position to want to see her succeed in her ascension to the throne. How much is one prepared to lose to achieve in order to obtain what they feel is their birthright? Your friends? Your family? Your children? Your ethics and morals? All this is explored. In short, there were genuinely exciting episodes in this season where plenty took place and the dragons were front and centre unlike season one that was far more about backstory and explanation of the characters with their loyalties. All in all it was good to revisit this and I look forward to Season 3.

Born To Be Blue: This romance/documentary about the later life of jazz singer and trumpet player Chet Baker is presently on Crave but was released in 2015. Ethan Hawke plays the title role, and his muse started off as an acting partner in a movie about his life that they were both filming. Her name is Elaine and she is played well by Carmen Ejogo. Much like the flawed character Lorenz Hart in Blue Moon, Hawke is dealing with a person struggling mightily against addiction which greatly impacts his ability to perform. In this case, we find Chet on the floor in jail and being picked up by the movie’s director. He is filming the scenes for the movie about his life. Hawke is very effective in portraying the charming but flawed musician. We learn that he came from humble roots as an only child on a farm in Oklahoma with a father who had some talent but holds some resentment towards his son who he feels has disgraced his family name.

Baker was gapped tooth missing a big tooth and later has major jaw issues due to a beating by an unpaid drug dealer. It seems that talent means little to those who profit from addiction rather than ticket sales. Baker has alienated all those people around him, in addition to his parents like his manager and fellow performers. When asked by Elaine early in his courting of her about his addiction he responds “I’ve got some habits”. After his beating he needs to rehab himself physically to play the trumpet with his repaired mouth and teeth. It’s painful and takes time. All the while Elaine supports him. He performs yet again in a studio where he first became noticed, and he sounds like his old self. He sings “My Funny Valentine” while looking at Elaine and he manages to parlay this into another opportunity with record and concert promoters present in New York City at the Birdland Jazz Club. Fellow famous performers Dizzy Gillespie and Miles Davis are in attendance. Things happen. We learn that like any true addict, if left to his own devices and provided with difficult choices, an addict will generally make a poor choice. The audience if left to wonder, like so many other artists who struggled, just how great that they would have been without it. There is so much on the line too, with Baker in particular with Elaine. Baker argues that “all I want to do is play” and “I don’t want a career”. We can see the painful dilemma and how it impacts Baker. Hawke is excellent in portraying this. Hawke gives an excellent performance, and this laid some ground work for his Oscar nomination in Blue Moon last year. I will say that Ejogo (who in real life was married to Jeffrey Wright from 2000-2014) was very good here too. Her young actress showed initial resistence to Baker’s charms but quickly fell for it. Even after seeing Baker hit bottom time and again, she says one thing and yet does another. A moth to the flame. It is sad to see addiction rule a person’s life especially those who have talent and can provide such joy with their art. This story effectively tells such a story. It is to be noted that Baker lived until he was 58yo in Amsterdam.

June 29, 2026

Dust Bunny: This 2025 film familiar stars Mads Mikkelsen and Sigourney Weaver, along with a precocious 10yo girl Sophie Sloan. Putting this up front that this is a fantastical weird tale with the focal point being the little girl named Aurora. She begins in her bed screaming afraid of what seems to be an animated dust bunny in the literal shape of a little bunny hopping on her floor. Her parents come to her door and tell her that there is nothing to worry about and to go to sleep. Aurora sleeps on the fire escape. She shortly notices a neighbour walking outside on the street. It is Mikkelsen, who plays Resident 5B, no name, and he is dressed quite strangely. She carefully follows him to see what he does. He does some amazing things to attack and also protect himself from what she sees. Afterwards she gets back to her house. In her sleep she is awakened by terrible noises. She covers her head with a blanket while they continue. In the morning, her house is empty. No parents. The creature she feared is under the floorboards.

The house looks like it is from the world of Edward Scissorhands. Bright colours. Aurora has a strange way of riding what looks like a ceramic hippo and she moves around her apartment punting it like a gondola in Venice. She believes that her parents were murdered and she wants to hire an assassin to get rid of the murderer. To do this, she attends church and steals from the donation plate. She writes a short letter to her neighbour seeking to engage his services with enclosed money. She goes to speak to him directly. Mikkelsen tries to be very logical with the little girl. The whole scenario to him seems ridiculous, the rantings of a little girl. There must be explanations to the parents’ disappearance. He doesn’t agree to assist Aurora, but he goes to speak with Sigourney Weaver, who seems to be like the John Wick character Winston Scott played by Ian McShane. Weaver is a person who seems to run and organization that protects its own and hires assassins to deal with problems. They talk. Things happen and they become more and more bizarre as it continues.

This is quite dark. We learn more about Aurora and her past. Aurora had wished for her parents to go away. They did. There are some new revelations. Bad people come. There is an elaborate shootout. This for me is a preposterous story but fun. It is well acted. The little girl is snarky and convincing. The last act is quite incredible in the same degree as it is outlandish. This isn’t for everyone, as many people will have their Bullshit Meter go beserk, and that would be a fair reaction to the situation. But I was glad that I watched this, because from the title and the opening sequence, I thought that this was going to be ridiculous. It delivered on the ridiculousness, but at the same time that it was a novel concept. So it was fun to see.

One Life: I remember seeing a story about an elderly British man who was on a British TV show where he was surrounded by people who knew him but he did not about them. His name is Nicholas (Nick) Winton, and is played by Anthony Hopkins. He lives with his wife and he is a pack rat with old documents. This is a movie based upon a true story. In a flashback, we go back in time to 1938 in Prague to where a young Nick Winton is among people in a changing Czechloslovakia environment; the Nazis are in power and have made noises about crossing the border. The local Jewish residents in Prague are afraid and living in squalor. Nick realizes that he needs to do something, anything to help these people. He speaks to his mother, played by Helena Bonham-Carter in looking to find foster homes for these children in Britain, and he needs her help with the government immigration authorities.

The challenges that they face are daunting. But Nick is determined. In much the same way as Oskar Schindler, Nick needs papers, people in Britain to host these children and willing parents where he is to succeed. We all may live in uncertain times, but these people 90 years ago lived in a time of life and death with millions of people who will be murdered in a few short years. They didn’t know this at the time, but there were ominous signs. Signs that Nick decided to act upon because he feels that he can assist. A rabbi that he speaks to warns him “don’t start what you can’t finish”. Nick needs VISAs and money.

Fast forward in time and all the people assisting with the mass evacuation were about to have their life change with their last train on September 1 1939. The Nazis stopped the boarding of the train by the children on that date. Winton was already back in the UK helping on that side. As Nick aged, he did not know what happened with the children that he and his fellow good samaritan’s assisted. He did speak as an older man with Robert Maxwell’s French wife about his story and she was fascinated by it. She told him that she would speak to her husband about it. Now Robert Maxwell’s name has a lot more negative stories attached to it including business and pension fraud with employees and his daughter Ghislaine who is tied up with Jeffrey Epstein. Back then he was a powerful media mogul including television and the newspapers. He was involved in producing the TV show That’s Life. The story went in print first and then they brought a woman who was one of the children to sit beside Nick. They had an emotional first meeting when he realized who she was and who she represented. The show that aired was so popular and brought so many viewers to watch that other children that Nick saved came forward. They decided to have a second program and surprised Nick more than he could have expected. I will leave the surprise for viewers to find out for themselves.

We learn that over 15,000 Czech children were sent to the concentration camps. Less than 200 survived. Nick and his team managed to save 669 children. Most of their parents were sent to Auschwitz and other camps and were not heard from again. From modest beginnings, Nick who is just one person, managed to have an incredible impact on so many lives. He didn’t do this for glory, prestige, fame or to be on TV but because he saw children in pain and was compelled to help. This is a feel good story reflecting turbulent times and is a reminder that people can be good, and good people can do remarkable things. This was worth watching.

June 22, 2026

Jerry & Marge Go Large: This is a new release from Netflix, but was released in 2022 on Paramount+. Jerry Selbee (played by Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad)) is a serious, fact based, math focused man getting ready for retirement from his company of over 30 years in Michigan. His wife, Marge played by Annette Bening, awaits this next stage of life. The family celebrates Jerry’s retirement with buying him a small engine motorboat for him to enjoy fishing, which they think he wants to do. He doesn’t. Jerry himself is struggling. His job gave him purpose, and a place to go along with mental challenges. While at a local diner, Jerry is reading the back of a lottery ticket with its Odds and Terms and Conditions. He quickly maps out on a napkin a peculiarity. As he has calculated, the game can be guaranteed to be a winner. It just requires a sizeable investment. He and Marge live on modest means, and he is reluctant to share his plan with her.

Things proceed and Jerry and Marge think of this as a retirement activity/project that they can do together. Jerry has larger plans his discovery with respect to his struggling Michigan town that has been strained to even find funds to repair a concert venue for a popular music festival. He is determined even after the State of Michigan discontinues use of the lottery he identified and only Massachusetts was continuing with it. Bring on a road trip! Of course there are obstacles put in their way to continue the plan. It should be noted that are doing nothing illegal; they comply fully with the rules. They just purchase a great number of tickets from terminals, which takes time. The principal obstacle is a cocky Harvard student with dubious scruples as he endeavors to do the same thing.

Did this suck? No, it was innocent fun with predictable results. Bryan Cranston has certainly carved out a niche for himself with clever, aging and skilled person with limited means. The movie only at the end discloses the value of money won the the group/town in Michigan. It is a surprising number. In many it is odd that the people of Massachusetts were involved in resurrecting a small town in Michigan. Even when the lottery commission was engaged they had no issue what was happening, as it was within the rules, and these winning tickets had raised the profile of the lottery and it was played a lot more. A win-win scenario. This is a feel good story, but basic with people who are easily identified as good and villains. I do have some minor quibbles about a movie showing retirees who struggle without work. As a relatively new retiree, I simply don’t get it. The other quibble is with the tangental story about Jerry not being very interested sexually with Marge. I will say quite simply that this is not the case with all people (men) of retirement age. Enough said on that topic. Your life won’t be changed by this movie. But on a rainy, miserable night at the cottage it could be a distraction on Netflix.

An Officer and A Gentleman: Directed by Taylor Hackford, this film was released in 1982. It is now available on Netflix. It is a favourite of mine. Zack Mayo, played by Richard Gere, is a young man without direction in his life. Through a flashback we see that his Mom died when he was in his early teens. He is placed with her birth father, who is a seaman in the US Navy stationed in the Phillipines. Father, played by Robert Loggia, self-admits he doesn’t want the job of full-time parent. Zack very young is put on his own devices, with no parental supervision and left to the streets. It shapes him and pushes him to think that there has to be more than this life. He decides to enlist in the Navy and seek to become a naval aviator. What follows is Zack’s quest to complete the thirteen-week Navy Aviation Officer Candidate School. Within his other wannabe aviators includes some interesting people like young woman Casey Seegar (played by Lisa Eilbacher) and Oklahoman Sid Worley (played by David Keith). Their drill instructor, whose primary role is to weed out the unsatisfactory candidates is the excellent Master Sargeant Foley, played by Best Supporting Oscar winner Lou Gossett Jr. One of the things that can trip up the Officer Candidates, as explained by the good Master Sargeant is local women, who are setting their sights on being with a naval aviator, who will ultimately become a successful and well paid commercial airline pilot.

Enter Paula, played by Debra Winger and her co-worker and friend Lynette played by Lisa Blount. These two meet Zack and Sid at a base dance and hit it off. The rest of the story shows over the time within the course how candidates can be tripped up and thrown out. It is intense with tests of intelligence, strength, physical fitness, leadership and character. Lou Gossett shines throughout as the tough taskmaster who is quick to point out the flaws in his group of recruits. Zack and he go toe to toe throughout with vulnerabilities shown on both sides. I also think that this film works so well because Winger and Gere have such good chemistry. Zack is a street smart loner who learned long ago to stay away from emotional attachment. Paula falls hard for Zack which is obvious as she looks at him. We learn about her history and how her family has been directly impacted by the Navy program there in Washington State. She and Zack talk well, frankly and honestly. They build their connection, with Zack doing his best to push her away, while she is coached along to stick with her stated goal to enjoy the time that she and Zack can spend together. As is discussed, 13 weeks is not a lot of time to have someone fall in love with you. However, equally important is how the program requires support from many sides for each of the candidates. Everyone grows here, learns something about themselves and is able to act on it. Both Winger went on to do many other popular projects. I remember hearing that Richard Gere said that he had two movies that he made “for the money” and this was one of them along with Pretty Woman. He should think about doing more movies for money. I am also reading that Paramount Pictures is looking to re-make this movie with Miles Teller starring as Zack Mayo. I don’t think that they will be able to match the many aspects of this film that worked. Most importantly I don’t see Teller having similar chemistry with a female co-star. Time will tell but I would remain skeptical. Apparently on set there was tension between Gere and Winger. Winger called Gere “a brick wall”. It didn’t show on screen. John Travolta turned down the lead role in this movie. This is well worth your time, and would show a glimpse into the training that pilots have to undertake before become Maverick in Top Gun!

June 15th, 2026

In anticipation of seeing the latest Steven Spielberg film, Disclosure Day, I wanted to look back into a couple Spielberg films, but also some other alien-related films where there is a warmer tone to it. We have seen many alien invader movies where it is all terrifying often creating a dystopian world. As such, I am turning back the clock 40 plus years (scarily enough) with ET The Extra Terrestrial (1982) and also Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) and then John Carpenter’s Starman (1984).

E.T. The Extra Terrestrial: This movie was yet another phenomenal summer blockbuster from Steven Speilberg who became the master of the genre. I likely don’t have to detail out the plot itself, as this story shows a suburban family with a newly separated Mom (Dee Wallace) with her three young children Michael (Robert MacNaughton), Elliott (Henry Thomas) and Gertie (Drew Barrymore) finding an alien left behind from an exploring ship when Peter Coyote and his investigators scare them away quickly. The story unfolds with the alien, E.T., befriending 10yo Elliott and connecting with him emotionally living and learning about everyday human life. E.T. wants to return to his planet and join his fellow aliens, who seem to be most interested in plants and trees and the natural world. Humans are terrifying.

This movie still works so well. It is emotionally engaging telling a story of everyday life turned upside down by the infusion of this strange alien, who learns quickly drinking in all the human trappings (newspapers, TV, games, and people). He eats plenty of Reese’s pieces (an amazing marketing coup for Reese who took the place offered and turned down by M&M). E.T. is voiced by Debra Winger, and he physically has kind eyes (Spielberg has stated they were modeled on Albert Einstein) and he is funny and cute waddling around, playing with youngster Gertie while drinking beer and using his skills to make a communication device. There is drama about the faceless human adults seeking out the alien, all the while E.T. and Elliott have school life, Halloween, trips to the woods and venturing around a new housing development. E.T. learns from us, makes tools from our ordinary items, and wants to escape the government workers trying to examine him, prod him, and make him a specimen out of a space man. Peter Coyote has a scene with Elliott where he says that he has waited his entire life for E.T. to arrive on Earth. But he was glad that E.T. ran into Elliott. There is genuine real emotion between E.T. and Elliott and you can feel the love in the family unit (like Mom reading Peter Pan to Gertie on the bed). Elliott experiences and feels as a 10yo boy, and we feel it along with him. There is a deep emotional moment too at the end. Spielberg showed that not all aliens are scary; sometimes it is the humans who are far more scary. Further he showed that humans and aliens can work together with each other and learn. Sometimes it takes an alien to shine a light on the lessons we as humans can learn in dealing with one another. If you have never seen this, see it. I saw it on Crave most recently but in the theatre before. I cannot speak about E.T. and ignore the excellent John Williams score which adds so much to what happens on screen.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind: Released shortly after Star Wars in 1977, Spielberg followed up his friend George Lucas’ effort with this summer blockbuster in 1979. I have done a previous review of seeing it on the 40th anniversary in 2017. See my Labour Day posting. I won’t detail more about the plot but this is always a movie worth re-visiting. This pre-dated E.T. so some of the themes are similar. There is a family breakdown with Roy (played by Richard Dreyfuss) and Ronnie (played by Teri Garr) with their young kids. Roy works for the elctrical authority and one night has a bizarre experience in his truck. He believes he saw an alien. He wants to know more. The story unfolds at a micro level with Roy’s family but also a macro level with US federal authorities looking to investigate a series of strange events throughout the globe including ships and airplanes long since lost from many years before. The two stories combine in Wyoming at the Devil’s Tower.

Once again Speilberg reveals that aliens do not always have to mean humans any harm. I will choose to ignore the Tom Cruise film War of the Worlds which has the opposite premise, but I can assure you I am aware that it is out there. In this movie the aliens despite initially being quite scary, especially with the very young little boy Barry being abducted from his mother, are found to be curious and musical at the same time. They have a mission themselves and look to communicate with us. They are various shapes and sizes living in a massive ship which seems to be just visting for a time. The focus is more about the aliens calling to specific humans, while the US government looks to take control of the situation and block out anyone who isn’t affiliated with the military. French expert Claude Lacombe played by Francois Truffat points out to the military brass that the perceived intruders were contacted on a psychic level to be there by the aliens. They were invited! Despite the military’s best efforts, Roy ultimately sees what his purpose in all of the was. Another terrific Spielberg film which is must viewing.

Starman: This 1984 film stars Karen Allen and Jeff Bridges. Allen has never looked so radiant as the grieving Jenny Hayden from Wisconsin who has recently lost her carpenter husband Scott in a workplace accident. One night after crying herself to sleep watching old videos of Scott, there is a meteor that strikes in a nearby wood. An entity emerges from the meteor and flies over to Jenny’s lakeside house where it finds a photo album with a tuft of Scott’s hair. Jenny awakens from her sleep to noise in her living room where she finds what appears to be Scott. She is confused by all of this, all the while the alien being posing as Scott learns about his new environment. In basic structure, the story of Starman and E.T. are similar. Starman wants to return to his planet. He needs to be in Arizona in three days time or he will die. His only assistance are some small grey golfball sized orbs that he carries with him that can perform supernatural tasks. Jenny is taken against her will in her orange Mustang for a memorable road trip. Geeky Charles Martin Smith is from SETI (Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) is part of the government trying to track down whatever was in that hollow asteroid, later learned to be a ship. We learn from Smith that in the original Voyager space satellite that there was, among other things, a gold record with greetings from Earth and some basic understanding of humans, our technology and our language. The alien was invited to come and we aren’t being very hospitable hosts.

For me, Jeff Bridges steals the show with an outstanding performance incorporating physical motion, movement and then words as the alien becomes accustomed to the human body that it is inhabiting. He is conversant in other languages, and watches every move that Jenny makes on their journey. He is learning about humans, which he regards as a primitive species. But we also have our positive aspects, like eating and connection. The alien means Jenny no harm, and as she learns this she also becomes more engaged with trying to help him. Emotionally she is compromised as the alien looks and can act like her dead husband. Escape turns to assistance as she is invested into this journey. There are some genuinely funny moments with the alien learning human speech and gestures. He doesn’t pick up on sarcasm very well. He is much more literal. In the end there is yet another emotional scene which works completely. The audience cares about these two people, and we care that the alien is able to complete his mission. Both he and Jenny have grown and learned from one another. The alien, like E.T. is not scary and is not out to hurt us. In fact the cooperation shown between those involved shows that being kind, thoughtful and committed to a task can accomplish great things. Bridges was nominated for his role, but sadly was also in the year that Amadeus was released and both F Murray Abraham and Tom Hulce were also nominated. Had this been another year, I think Bridges wins the award. Once more, we learn that aliens don’t always come to Earth to harm us. Starman is also on Crave. Absolutely this is a movie that I would encourage people to see.

June 8th, 2026

The Boroughs: This 8-part series has been released on Netflix. It is from the Duff Brothers who have previously brought us the ever popular Stranger Things. Rather than being set in 1980s small town with high school students, this tale is set in New Mexico at a retirement community with 70-something actors who are living within it. Starring Alfred Molina (73), Geena Davis (70), Bill Pullman (72) and Alfre Woodard (73) as the older residents it is a creepy story and mystery that these aging stars look to figure out. Episode 1 has Molina, playing Sam Cooper a retired aeronautical engineer being driven to the Boroughs community by his daughter (played by Jenna Malone) and her husband and children. He can’t drive. We learn that his wife selected this community, but before they moved in she passed away from a stroke. It haunts Sam throughout.

I admit that I like this more than I thought that I would. It helped that Alison texted that she was on the last episode and she had enjoyed it. It’s not to say that I don’t have a mind of my own about what I watch, but it is a good endorsement from her. I am a little uncomfortable watching actors who I have known many years playing people in a retirement community when they aren’t that much older than me. Let’s put it this way, they are closer to me in age than I am to 40yo! That is a scary prospect. Still I don’t need to see a 70yo looking to have sex on camera, just sayin’. There is plenty of nostalgia here, with references to Geena Davis in her Thelma and Louise or some references to Coccoon where the aliens provide a life burst for the elderly citizens. What does work is how the characters have more full stories, and have interactions with others that we learn over time. The older people use their life skills to assist in sorting through this colllective problem, whether it be engineering, medical or others. Sure the Head of Security is appropriately creepy as there have to be villains and they’re really not to difficult to spot. I don’t want to give much more away because there are some surprises along the way and it adds to the enjoyment. Things develop and create more intrigue as we learn more about the situation in this community. There is more to all of this than simply a “monster in the walls” as was brought forward early on. Throughout I was wondering what is the motivation of those involved and what is the bigger story. This kept me entertained, and although I could have done without the final stages of it as it was just a little too clean from my standpoint. The truth is that none of us get out of this life alive. Some are just lucky enough to be given longer times than others. Despite love and other motivations, there becomes a time when taking advantage of others (in particular without their knowledge and consent) is something that just doesn’t work well.

Pressure: This true story film starring Andrew Scott, Brendan Fraser, Damian Lewis and Kerry Condon addresses the crucial few days before the Normandy D-Day invasion, operation Overlord and the task of the leaders to agree upon a day. Andrew Scott plays UK/Scotsman James Stagg who is the Allied Forces Chief Meteorologist. He is newly appointed at the recommendation of Winston Churchill and leaves his very pregnant wife behind to work at Southwick House. There he finds the reliable US weatherman friend of Commander Eisenhower Irving Krick played by Chris Messina. Fraser plays Eisenhower. Damian Lewis plays zealous British General Montgomery and Kerry Condon plays Eisenhower’s wartime secretary. Plans have been worked on for months, along with deceptive activities to keep the Nazis guessing about the location for any land invasion into Europe. Thousands of soldiers are ready, planes set for support and an armada of ships ready to invade. The moon phase and the tides have all been taken into account. The last real question left is the unpredictable weather. Northern Europe in June can be very unpredictable with ever changing weather. Eisenhower just wants an answer on whether to go or not. His generals all have their own talking points for recipes for success (waves on sea and clouds above). The story begins with a near impossible request to forecast out 2-3 days in advance. What doesn’t help for Stagg, is his American counterpart Krick who relies on historical weather charts to predict future weather (like June 5th 1925). The tension builds.

History quickly tells you what happened back in 1944. The drama shows the stresses exacted on the participants where thousands of lives are at stake, not including the success of the war effort. A failure can mean many more long months of looking to re-invade the continent. The Germans failure of defeating Britain in the Battle of Britain, and their struggles against the Russians meant that the war was not trending in their direction at this point anyway. But this was a crucial operation.

I enjoyed this movie. I liked seeing the thinking process for James Stagg as he needed to provided a data driven prediction to allow the generals to make their decisions to proceed along with reasoning for his forecast which he sees as being unpopular in this audience. The secondary date for optimal moon and tide presence was June 18th, and this was universally unacceptable for the secrecy of the location. It also would not do for the thousands of troops standing at the ready. I do think that the casting of Brendan Fraser as Eisenhower and Damian Lewis as Montgomery were mistakes. Yes, they have some star power but neither looks much like the men they are playing.

Physically Eisenhower was not a heavyset man, unlike Fraser as he was filmed for this. For Eisenhower too I also don’t believe that the address to the troops made June 6th by radio was him yelling into a microphone. Rather I would suspect that there would be a quiet confidence that he would portray to his men as they undertake a perilous mission. Montgomery as played by Lewis physically bigger (Lewis much larger) but he comes across as fixated on his troops being capable of anything, even without naval and air support. He rants about there being one and only date and nothing else is acceptable. In truth, as is pointed out, if the wave swell is too high, there won’t be any troops to be landing on the beaches to fight. Further, a low ceiling/clouds would take away the necessary air support to assist in the landings along with paratroopers working from behind. Montgomery was a smart general and would know all of this.

Andrew Scott is always excellent in his roles, and he shows well as a serious professional realizing the gravity of what he is doing. All of this despite personal circumstances that would distract even the most focused person. There is a scene at the church before the invasion that shows his struggles with the weight of the advice he has provided. I do think that a general should likely focus more on the associated risks, and in human terms how many of his troops he could stand to lose given options of his choices. Kondon plays an important role as a go-between for the Commander and these men who have a tremendous impact on his decision. Kondon notes how an earlier shown practice of the invasion went so horribly wrong (Exercise Tiger) and the impact it had on Eisenhower. She and Eisenhower are close and he relies on her for insight into those under his command.

This is a topic that I am most passionate about, and I have visited the Normany beaches twice. If you have the chance, go visit as it is a stunning place which emanates historic importance.