November 29, 2021

Get Back: Peter Jackson a couple of years back did some work to take World War One film coverage and colour it, add sound and make it more relatable to today’s audiences and the result was the excellent They Shall Not Grow Old. He has turned his sites from New Zealand now into unseen raw coverage of a proposed documentary film for the Beatles in their writing new songs for what became the Let It Be album and the famous outdoor office roof performance from January 30th, 1969. I have not finished the series, three episodes and the first one is over two hours long. It chronicles the days leading up to the performance in early January 1969. I am forewarning viewers that this is a sizeable investment in time, watching the four members of the Beatles interact during rehearsals and early days. A couple of early observations: Paul seems to be the driving force to try and get the material completed, and come up with new ideas. His off-the-top guitar playing with rambling lyrics in a matter of minutes to ultimately begin the song Get Back is quite simply miraculous. I marvel at the creative process, and this is an excellent example of someone creating on the spot. I think generally Paul and John would work together on their own and bounce ideas off each other in their earlier days. Having a camera there to record everything is a little forced, but over time the guys tend to just be themselves. Some of the dialogue can be hard to hear and understand with the accents. Still it is compelling. I cannot see this early what Yoko Ono does on any level. She occupies a chair near John, but says nothing, sometimes reads or looks like she does some craft. She may have been emotional support for John, but creatively in this setting she does absolutely nothing. George is frustrated by this process, and you can see what eventually builds up to his departure from the band during this time. He is creative himself and talks about songs that he has developed but they all seem to be, in his words, much quieter songs. He seems angrier with Paul and he gripes about any show, and seems uneasy in his role as third wheel with Paul and John. He will “just play whatever [Paul] wants [him] to play”. Then Ringo is adding nothing creatively but has the daunting tasks of keeping up, and adding rhythm and beat for the songs being developed. John early on is fixated on working through the song “Don’t Let Me Down” and there is time spent trying to finalize that. For Beatles fans, this is a must see. For more casual fans, you can watch a creative process taking place in two weeks for writing an album that has iconic songs like Two of Us, Across the Universe, I’ve Got a Feeling, Long and Winding Road and of course Let It Be. Utterly remarkable.

Peter Jackson talks about John and Paul relationship – “how utterly painful this was for Paul”

Succession and The Crown: Discussion about how females are treated: I was re-watching the end of Season 3 of The Crown with the episode about the disintegration of Princess Margaret’s marriage to Anthony Armstrong-Jones but also the latest episode in Succession and the treatment of the women in these series. Margaret as the younger sister of Monarch Queen Elizabeth had plenty in her life impacted by the perceptions of how it will impact the Family and the Crown. She was unable to marry her true love Peter Townsend, who was divorced (because his wife cheated on him) because of the whole abdication of the Crown by Edward VIII. She has a tumultuous marriage with Mr Armstrong-Jones who openly is having an affair before the whole world, but no one seems to care about that, including her sister although she did encourage a reconciliation. But then Armstrong-Jones amazingly attacks Margaret for an affair with a younger man who has finally brought some happiness to her world. It seems her Family and her position will just not allow her to be happy. She wanted a meaningful role, in the same way that Phillip did and it just doesn’t come. The Queen is a strong character and develops into a force politically which many acknowledge in this third season, like Edward VIII himself when he was about to die. But Margaret is left to the sidelines to deal with her unfortunate station. In the latest episode in Season 3 of Succession, at Kendall’s birthday party, we see how Shiv is being turned aside in the family as Roman becomes more of the relied upon sibling to execute Dad’s wishes. Roman begins showing his true colours as he gains in confidence while Shiv becomes increasingly frustrated with her seemingly back seat role. Her husband, Tom, who has been fixated on his pre-determined path is given really good news, but he remains unable of moving forward. That marriage is an interesting one, and Shiv has seen her position relegated to secondary status. This season is fairly slow moving but it it brilliantly written with tremendous dialogue. Part of me thinks that the underlying premise is to explore how it seems first generations of wealthy families generate the money, and then the later generations fritter it all away. The story is not unlike the Vanderbilt story with Anderson Cooper just recently reviewed. But it is these female characters that in their time, Margaret was a completely different generation, while Shiv is more or less today, reveals that not much has changed for them and how they are viewed. Both women are extremely capable. Yet when the chips are down, it seems others are relied upon more directly. To be fair about Shiv, I don’t think that she did herself any favours by the events at the Shareholders Meeting. But ultimately we will see how it plays out. There are plenty of good things to be watching these days.

November 22, 2021

JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass: In 1991, director Oliver Stone was on a roll. He was already a three time Oscar winner with Directing and Best Picture in 1986 with Platoon, and then again as Director in the Tom Cruise Born on the Fourth of July, while previously being awarded for Best Screenplay with Midnight Express. Then in 1991 he produced and directed the film JFK with Kevin Costner, Donald Sutherland, Gary Oldman and many others. The all-star cast depicted the story of the JFK assassination and the efforts of a New Orleans District Attorney to prosecute someone, anyone for the murder of the President back in November 1963. This newly released documentary addresses legislative updates by Congress in the US since 1991 and the movie to release more of the redacted evidence/documents. Stone is the interviewer and brings forth more evidence of the conspiracy and cover ups in the Warren Commission Report that had found that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone gunman. Among the various pieces of new evidence, we have more fully explained forensics and ballistics to talk about the “magic bullet” that according to the Warren Report, struck both the President and Texas Governor Connally. It also disputes the gun recovered at the scene, whether Oswald was even on the sixth floor, the autopsy and the brain pictures, and the desire for the US military complex to take a hard stance on communism as opposed to the stance from Kennedy and his administration. The CIA, the FBI both look really bad with the additional information. At the very least it seems there were more than four shots fired that fateful day. In itself, that means more than one shooter. In total, it appears as though there was a concerted effort by powerful people to ensure that the evidence from that day matches the story that was formulated on the shooter, rather than letting the evidence tell the story of what transpired. It is compelling TV. For Stone he states in summary that “this evidence makes conspiracy theories, conspiracy fact”. I don’t think that most people believe the Warren Commission nor their findings. This helps to cement that belief a little bit more. It doesn’t bring back a beloved President, nor his brother, nor MLK or Malcolm X. It seems in the turbulent 1960s that assassination was a method of doing business. Sadly, no one is ever charged and most of those involved are dead and buried.

Nothing Left Unsaid: Gloria Vanderbilt and Anderson Cooper: Anderson Cooper is one of many offspring of socialite Gloria Vanderbilt. Unknown to me, Gloria is part of a family that made their fortune in the early 1900s in the steamship and rail business. She led a long and interesting life. My limited knowledge of her was of her selling expensive designer jeans but there was more than that. She had little experience with her Dad, who married her Mom who was 20 yo at her marriage to a much older father. They divorced. She was was married multiple times, as she seemed to think that being in love is a state all should aspire to. She had a well known custody child legal battle when she was just a child. Anderson Cooper the CNN host is using this film as a documentary on her life and talk through it, memorializing it for him and her. She died back in June 2019. I learned something about someone that I didn’t know very well, and about the fortune that the Vanderbilt family once had. It is mostly gone sadly.

The Fugitive: this 1993 movie was another in a series of successful films that cemented the already stellar box office reputation of Harrison Ford. He had already been in two of the most successful franchises in the history of movies with Han Solo in Star Wars and then Indiana Jones in Raiders of the Lost Ark. This is a movie that was based off the TV series from 1963 starring David Janssen. Ford plays Dr. Richard Kimble who is convicted of killing his wife, while he maintained that a stranger entered his home and killed his wife. A one armed man. Through a series of fantastic events, he manages to evade law enforcement and look to track down his wife’s killer. The most compelling member of the police forces searching for him is US Ranger Samuel Gerard played by Tommy Lee Jones. Jones won the Oscar for his performance and it is completely justified. He steals the show and every scene that he is in. This is fun, exciting entertainment that holds the audiences attention from the beginning. It is as exciting today as it was back in its original release. There are some good plots twists both expected and unexpected. For me it was personally more intriguing because the Chicago Hilton Towers Hotel featured in the end is a hotel I stayed at back in 1989 as my first trip to that fine city. I have been a number of times since. This movie introduced US Marshall Gerard and he starred in a follow up movie called US Marshals in 1998 (nowhere near as good as this one). But this is on Crave and worth a watch if you haven’t seen it, or worth a repeat viewing if you haven’t seen in a long while.

November 15th, 2021

There wasn’t an edition published last week since I was away and had little access to the computer (on purpose).

Scenes From A Marriage (1973): Jessica Chastain had worked previously with Liv Ullman, the Norwegian actress and director on films like Miss Julie. Ullman is widely regarded as one of the best European actresses, although I have to admit that I am not all that familiar with her work. She frequently worked with Ingmar Bergman. This movie, which was originally a TV series as well, was the original inspiration for the recently released series starring Chastain and the everywhere-man Oscar Isaac. It follows the same chapter pattern with moments in time with the primary couple, Marianne and Johan. In the first chapter, Marianne and Johan have their friends over for a dinner and drinks and it eventually becomes a more tense scene with the friends shouting their gripes about their relationship and a desire to end it. Marianne is a family law lawyer and Johan is an assistant professor. Marianne is able to be a source of legal counsel eventually through the end of the conversation. Chastain was an IT manager in the more recent storyline. In that first chapter Marianne and Johan have been together for ten years. Spoiler alert for those who haven’t seen the latest version nor this one. There are many similarities between the two series but there are also some material differences. I don’t spoil that much to reveal that in this version, Johan comes early to their cottage property and announces that he has fallen in love with someone else. He will be setting off to Paris with this new person the next day for a number of months. I think audiences from the seventies where divorce was not so prevalent than it is today would be more accepting of the reaction of Marianne upon hearing this news. I am not sure that today’s viewers would be as accepting. Then again, this is true of much of the relationship between these two people. The underlying theme is that some people, whether together or not, seem to gravitate to one another. Maybe they are more mature in accepting the wishes of a spouse who questions the relationship they have? Perhaps they are less spiteful and looking for revenge, all very human emotions that don’t seem to show themselves. I am not sure. As things progress the sides have flipped from the latest version where it was Chastain who looked for more, and requested the divorce. Johan seems a little less manipulative in this series. The children are not seen and rarely spoken about except for Marianne to request that Johan try and make an effort to remember their birthdays. Rather matter-of-factly it is mentioned that the children don’t really want to see their father. The other theme that extends into both is this idea that there is no clean break. When children are involved that is absolutely the case. However when some of the scenes are played out, one wonders whether that ability to see it as just a momentary lapse can override a real betrayal. There are certain things that I feel are non-negotiable in a relationship, and in one of the later episodes it can be seen to occur. It was surprising and unexpected that it went there, but even more surprising that later there is a further meeting up. It was interesting to review, to compare and contrast the two versions. I can see where Chastain felt that there was updating necessary, and for her the stronger more independent woman of a household. Isaac in the later version is more sympathetic. Johan far less so, even while mumbling about how sorry he is in his life, at virtually every stage. There is no doubt that even with this 70s version that I still see Little Children comparisons. Still Marianne is more a victim in this circumstance throughout. After all is said and done, it doesn’t really speak too highly of the institution of marriage.

Webb-TV - Se Scener ur ett äktenskap i SVT Play - Gratis streaming

Johan and Marianne discuss their relationship.

Silk Road: I have to admit that I haven’t heard much about Silk Road as a website until recently, and most of it is through books about the principal true character named Ross Ulbricht. Ross is a brilliant young man born in 1984, who struggled like many young people to find his niche. He had broad visions for himself as someone who could “change the world”. He was also very much a libertarian in the truest sense of the word. He believed generally that people, and notably Americans, have the right to do whatever they want with no government interference. He was attending University of Texas, and was about to finish as an engineer. His father notably looked upon him as a person who couldn’t apply himself and never seemed to finish what he started. In 2010, he came up with the idea that he could set up an anonymous marketplace where people could buy and sell anything, including drugs, which he regarded as a personal choice. He would not allow firearms or child pornography or the like. He had a view that using TOR, which encrypted the users identity and making payments in untraceable Bitcoin that there would be no taxes and no government interference. The postal service and couriers would be used to cut out to criminal undercurrent of the current on-the-street and illegal business. He set up his site. It became a news story through the website Gawker, and then took off.

Circuit Affirms Life Sentence for 'Silk Road' Creator | New York Law Journal

At the same time, there is a disgraced police officer who was an effective street cop, but had also become an addict. He had a well publicized incident that had him at an Addiction Centre and later psychiatric help for his demons. He is played by Jason Clarke in this movie. He isn’t fired, but placed with the cyber-security unit at the DEA with all the other computer geeks (no disrespect intended). He hears through a street source that drugs can be purchased through the web and he wants to track it down. His path crosses with Ulbrecht as he tries to gain his confidence. For me, the more intriguing aspect of this story is the Bitcoin. It was the currency of choice for the underworld. At the time, people were transacting in Bitcoin when its value was around $121. Ulbricht took a 10% commission fee for every transaction that took place. When he was arrested in 2013, the federal government seized 144,000 bitcoin. It is believed that the Silk Road commissions from 2011 to 2013 were closer to 600,000 Bitcoin. In mid 2014, the Government auctioned off 30,000 of his coins. All nine auctions went to a venture capitalist for $19M. Bitcoin today is trading at $64,307 USD and those 30,000 Bitcoin are worth $1.9B. And Ulbrecht’s fortune for the 144,000 Bitcoin would be $9.26B!!! Quite remarkable. He was convicted on only a few charges and when you see what happens, if you don’t know the story, I think that you will be shocked. This is a guy who believed in the free economy, not in any way impacted by the Government, yet he lived in modest means, and for all his talk of freedom he moved from place to place and couldn’t enjoy the fruits of his labours. He was always in fear of being arrested. He was a workaholic and that work consumed him. Yes he impacted the world, but at what price? Time and again stories show the drive for brilliance and impact is lost because of other flaws and insecurities. He is serving life sentences. His Mom actively propositioned Donald Trump as President to pardon him. He didn’t. So he remains there. This is an intriguing story moreso than the movie was. The movie was okay, but the subject matter is worthwhile checking into. Bitcoin has become mainstream, with Elon Musk being a major player, but it still smacks of a currency for the underground to me. I had a hockey buddy talk about what he thought the value of a Bitcoin and he was right. He was mining Bitcoin at the time. These people who have made all these riches from Bitcoin might want to investigate how the electrical grid can be boosted to allow all these transactions, and electric cars to take over. For further insight into that, see John Oliver’s piece from Last Week Tonight from last week.

November 1st, 2021

Succession, Season 3: I have begun watching the latest installment of this dysfunctional family series. Dad is a media tycoon, and his children swirl around him like bees on a hive. He in Season1 had a health issue, that sent the kids scrambling. Then Season 2 had the one son end with a press conference that sent shock waves through the company. This season continues on with that story. I think that the writing here is brilliant, with the banter among the characters as first rate. Kieran Culkin (yes MacCauley’s brother) has some of the best lines as the wise cracking, do very little middle sibling. It’s fun. There is plenty of profanity, and it seems that they know very few words that aren’t profane at times. But there are some zingers. Each character is very different and not one of them is honest or willing to deal from the top of the deck with their Dad or each other. I will continue to watch.

Body Heat: When there are more obscure lists that are created about movies, Body Heat from 1981 with William Hurt and Kathleen Turner comes near the top in the category of “sweatiest movies”. Set in small town Florida, in the middle of a heat wave, the look and feel is one of steam rising from the buildings and streets. Characters cool themselves by standing in front of the refrigerator. The plot involves a sole practicing lawyer, who is not remarkable in any way professionally and is known by his friends as a guy who gets around. He sees the Kathleen Turner character at a local event, and chats her up. She quickly notes to him that she is married. But later in the same conversation is not so subtle in her interest in him. Played by Kathleen Turner, she dresses like she has seen Faye Dunaway in Network often.

Kathleen Turner felt 'objectified' by men after first big film role in Body Heat - The Irish News
Kathleen Turner meets and speaks to lawyer William Hurt

As he learns more, she is married, but he husband is away a lot. She lives in a massive place nearby. She begins to drop hints about how lonely she is. Hurt is happy to step right in. The two then plot to have the husband killed and solicit the assistance of a known arsonist, played by a young Mickey Rourke. Things happen and Hurt soon suspects that he is being manipulated, with indications for the slain husband’s murder that some fingers start pointing to him. His buddies, the local District Attorney (played by Ted Danson) and police detective are worried about him. Things progress and unravel for Hurt’s character, and we see just how deep it had become. This is a well acted adult story, with the intrigue in the plot of just how the end result could be reached. There are good supporting cast members and the chemistry between Turner and Hurt, crucial for a film like this, is there. This is on Crave but can likely be found in other streaming services. Well worth checking out.

Wendy: This is a 2020 film take on the classic Peter Pan story. In truth, I am not much of a follower of the Peter Pan story, and yet I can think of a bunch of movies that revolve around it that I have seen. Movies such as Pan, Hook with Robin Williams and Julia Roberts, Neverland with Johnny Depp, the Disney animated version and others. Of that listing I like Neverland the best. This one seems more fantasy based, with a intriguing use of a train that transports the children to another land.

Montserrat's St Patrick's Festival rolls out the Red Carpet for 'Wendy | Loop Cayman Islands
Peter Pan staying young forever

This interpretation wasn’t awful. The young actors playing the roles were very good throughout. Wendy herself played by Devin France is notably good. Beginning in a small diner, Wendy and her siblings are introduced. She has a Mom working hard to keep her customers satisfied, and she speaks about the children taking on this little business in time. The one boy has no interest in it and wants to be a pirate. One day after a quarrel with the adults, he strips off his pants and jumps on a passing train and disappears. After a time, Wendy and her twin brothers decide to take such a train themselves and meet up with a young black boy in a red jacket. Peter. Their adventure begins. There is backstory to explain Hook. There is further backstory to explain the lost boys. The young Wendy keeps your attention, and she is compelling. Still, I cannot recommend for those who aren’t avid Pan fans, if such a thing exists. Given the number of Pan related films there must be, and given the quality of the actors engaged in such projects. The underlying themes of staying young at heart, keeping active and avoiding the ruts of adulthood are well explored. Is it better to stay young forever while others around you are aging? Does aging necessarily mean that there is no more fun or adventure? Do the adults have to let their children go and lead their own lives, seek out their own dreams and place in the world? Time and again we have seen answers to these questions. Truthfully, I wouldn’t want to be a little kid all my life, but maybe it’s because it has those strings of being told what to do, and not independent and able to stand on your own. Even still. I may want the ability to fly, and more than just to believe that I can do it.

October 25th, 2021

Dune Part One: There will be inevitable comparisons between this latest version of the Frank Herbert classic sci-fi novel published in 1965 to the David Lynch film from 1984. From this reviewer’s perspective, this Denis Villeneuve version is far superior, although that really isn’t saying much nor is it a high bar to hurdle. I read the book many years ago, but I have to admit that it isn’t all that fresh with me. For the uninitiated and unfamiliar with the story, I think that Villeneuve has taken his time to explain the plot well. Note that in the opening credits it is noted that this is Part One. At 2:35 running time, this movie takes it time and keeps the audience aware of what is happening. It is a complex story about a planet in the universe that is the only source for “spice”. Spice is mined and important since it is crucial for interstellar travel, so it is very valuable. There are native people, the Fremin on the planet, but the Emperor has chosen to ignore them and placed families in charge of the spice production. The Emperor has replaced the incumbent family of Harkonnen’s with the Atreides family. There is much political jousting taking place with intrigue and suspicion among the players. The Fremen are unknown in numbers and fight against the occupying force, whatever that may be. In many ways there are themes from movies like Avatar. Within the Atreides family, there is father, played by Oscar Isaac who we discussed is everywhere these days, along with his son Paul, played by Timothee Chalamet. Paul’s mother Jessica, played by Rebecca Ferguson, isn’t married to the Duke and she was part of a female order, the Bene Gesserit, but she decided to have a child with him and left to be on his planet. The head of the Order shows up for a meeting with Jessica and her teenage son. We learn that the Bene Gesserit have been looking to genetically create a Matrix-like One, who can become a galactic leader. Paul is put to a test, as he has learned through his Mother some unique talents like speaking in a Voice, or communicating through alternate means (like sign language).

I won’t delve further into the plot because it is complex and not really necessary for a discussion. Many of Denis Villeneuve’s films are about the visual experience than the plot anyway. Arrival and Blade Runner 2049 show him to be the next Ridley Scott when it comes to ships, and visualizing new unseen worlds. The costume design is first rate and he has well selected actors who are able to show much while saying very little. He borrows images from other directors too, like Francis Ford Coppola in Apocalypse Now when we are seeing the overweight Marlon Brando as Colonel Kurtz. There are other camera angles and images that are borrowed too. I think these are an homage to the other great films, and they do not distract from the story. The time passes by quickly and despite having a bladder that was ready to explode, I wasn’t shifting in my seat. He had my full attention.

In comparing with the 1984 version, the Harkonnen’s are still a very unsightly bunch, but they aren’t over the top covered with boils and disgustingness. They find other ways to make you feel uneasy about them. Stellen Skarsgard looks almost unrecognizable in his role as their leader, flying around after eating and being intimidating. There is still a test for Paul which is similar with both films, and a similar introduction to the native planet’s worm population that can make mining the spice a very challenging job. They can get to be over 450 metres long and they move like whales through the sand. There are plenty of dream sequences, and I feel like there are more in this newer version. Because this is part one, there isn’t as much ground covered. This is a good thing, as we are allowed to keep up. Science fiction and fantasy films often like using similar and complicated names for the participants. Tolkien was infamous for them, and I welcome having a Paul and Jessica as primary protagonist names in this story. I have seen this once, and I fully expect to see it again. I feel as though that there is more to capture in a second viewing, much like Arrival for me, and Blade Runner 2049. That is a skill, and I greatly appreciate it. Villeneuve has said that he hasn’t committed to a Part Two until he sees that this version is a success. Releasing it during Covid-19 makes that measurement a more difficult task. I know that there has been no principal photography scheduled, and given the stars involved, it could be a challenge finding time for them. But I am hopeful that they carry on with this version to show more from the spice planet.

Foundation: Apple has released a mini series for the Isaac Asimov story from the early 1940s. This is more classic science fiction being put on display. I have watched 6 episodes. I will provide a more fullsome discussion about the series when I have completed it, but I have enjoyed it so far. It deals yet again with another Empire, and it’s royal three kings who are clones of one another at three different ages. They rule the galaxy for centuries, but their confidence has been shaken by a mathematician, played well by Jared Harris as Hari Seldon. Seldon is not a prophet, yet gets treated as one as he proves that the existing Empire has a finite lifecycle. He predicts the downfall. Then the intrigues continues. In many ways it is battling to keep knowledge, a library of sorts, alive to allow a species to grow and evolve. We as humans are around for a short while, but knowledge can carry on. I am hopeful that this doesn’t turn into Star Wars, because it isn’t. For those who pay attention, George Lucas borrowed many themes from both Dune and Foundation. I will continue to watch and see where this all leads.

October 18, 2021

Just in case you aren’t seeing enough Oscar Isaac these days, here are a couple more times to view him and his considerable talents before you see him playing Duke Leto Atreides in Dune next week. I have already mentioned in previous reviews the ongoing series Scenes From A Marriage where he is paired with Jessica Chastain. Last Sunday night the final installment of this series took place on Crave/HBO. As mentioned earlier this is a series, with episodes released in consecutive weeks and this was the last one. Episode five of five. Time has passed and our couple, with a young daughter between them, have been living apart. As we begin, Jonathan is getting ready to meet up with Mira. The structure of this series ensures that we don’t really know how much time has passed between the episodes. For the most part we have seen Mira acting in the most manipulative way, with Jonathan reacting to her. He has been hurt. He was surprised earlier in the series and has still be trying to put the pieces back together for himself. In some ways, this series reminds me of the movie Little Children with Kate Winslet and Patrick Wilson. There the adults were running around with no consideration for anything but their own needs. They left behind a trail of shattered lives. In some ways watching someone on screen do things that you are not emotionally engaged with can allow for better clarity. Jonathan’s actions often I felt were not seeing the bigger picture. His love for his wife, even when she was acting solely in her best interest, blinds him. I think that he comes off as an innocent party who has things happen to him, and he is left to try and put together the pieces for himself afterwards. This final episode turns this around somewhat. Jonathan as things unfold is doing things that I can’t imagine him ever doing before the previous episodes take place. He seems to be moving on, and then he does things that run contrary to that thinking. We can see where this journey has taken him. It’s not a positive place, and he will explain at length his justification. Mira meanwhile has been moving forward with her career, and has slowed down her relationships. Ultimately these scenes from a marriage don’t paint a very positive story. That likely is the point, and stories of good communication with people working together towards common goals wouldn’t give us much to talk about. Still. It can be a tough watch, where an actress that I like takes on a persona that is frustratingly annoying. Isaac plays and acts his part well, and they interact well together. This is believable, but not necessarily enjoyable. I wouldn’t want to spend a evening with drinks and conversation with Jonathan and Mira, although I suspect that, like in the first episode, that they can put together a good show, and say much by what they don’t say to one another.

The Card Counter: Oscar Isaac returns in this latest release where he plays a guy with a checkered past, and a rather uneventful present. As we meet him, he is making a living by moving from place to place and playing cards. We learn that he has taught himself to play cards and work the Blackjack tables. He explains how card counting works early on but he is also plays a mean game of Texas Hold ‘Em Poker, where “you play the person and not the house”. He is successful but not to the point of drawing attention to himself. He meets a young man who has a chip on his shoulder and wants to avenge some prior wrong. He knows our card player previously. How he knows him unfolds slowly in pieces and flashbacks. The young man has a beef with a man giving a presentation played by Willem Dafoe. Isaac’s character takes the young man under his wing. He sees a young man with passion but not a lot of sense about planning and executing on a complex plan. I had expected to see this plot travel the path of The Colour of Money, with the veteran showing the ropes to a young man as they work together to make scores. Not the case here. Yes, there is a “money person” who finds promising card talent and bankrolls their efforts (think Molly’s Game) and the veteran (Isaac) only looking to play for a very short period of time. But it takes a left turn. Rather than working together, Isaac wants something different. He reveals more about himself and we see more of his past, and his interest in the Dafoe character. It builds and then changes. I was surprised. It was a human story, and reflected a life that many people cannot relate to. In the end, seeing Isaac plays these very different roles in both look and experience is fun to watch. He is one of the most versatile actors out there today and he is getting plenty of quality roles. I look forward to seeing him next weekend in Dune. This is not action packed. It has its own pace and takes it time to develop the story of the protagonist. If you like Isaac, and want to see more of him. This is worth watching. If you want a greater pace with car chases and action scenes then it isn’t for you.

October 11, 2021 Canadian Thanksgiving. Bond

No Time to Die:  Daniel Craig puts on the tuxedo as James Bond for one final turn.  Finally released after many Covid-19 delays, it has arrived in North American theatres a week after Europe.   I saw this in IMAX in a mostly full theatre, as in Ontario they just as of midnight Saturday allowed full capacity.   It was invigorating to be back in a full theatre.  At the same time it seems many people have lost all their sense of etiquette for attending with others.   I like assigned seats generally but it means people arrived 15 mins late in the dark disturbing others.  Others can’t seem to hold their bladders and were up and down multiple times.  Also disturbing.   

Now to the movie.  It was first and foremost long at almost three hours.  I had not anticipated that length.   It felt it too.  I found myself wondering the end scenes were actually the end.   

Craig of course is an excellent Bond and he delivers.  He finished Spectre with his foster brother nemesis lying lame on Westminster Bridge in London as he throws his handgun into the Thames and leaves with Lea Seydoux character (Mr White’s daughter).   I have to admit that I don’t see any chemistry with those characters at all.  In Spectre she goes from loathing him and the life he leads.  Minutes later she is professing his love for him.   You can’t unring that bell, and it means she her character’s emotions likely more than they should go at that time.   It doesn’t really work.  

The Spectre storyline is explored further and resolved in a way that is quite surprising.  It is disappointing at the same time.  With Blofeld behind maximum security bars the audience is left to wonder how such a man can have influence in the criminal underworld.  What kind of criminal organization is it that would allow him to even try?  Presumably there is a Number 2, to borrow from Austin Powers?   

We are introduced to a new character played by Remi Malik.  He can be difficult to understand.  He mumbles in crucial parts.  I am fuzzy with his role and how it interacts with Spectre.  Yes he had a family loss as result of Spectre but the details of it were not clear.  Add to that how this man gets the money and power to formidable person that he is, raises a few eyebrows.   But asking too many questions doesn’t help reconcile the story.   So I will wrap up plot discussion at that point and just go with it.  

This isn’t the best Craig Bond film.  I think that Casino Royale is.   A close second is Skyfall.  Quantum of Solace the worst.   A documentary on Crave on Being Bond explains that filming for Quantum started at the beginning of a writers strike in Hollywood.  They had no finalized script.  It deeply impacted that film.  

I like Bond.   I was unimpressed by the “new” 007.  She seemed to just have a chip on her shoulder and that is not a personality.   Rather this tension with Bond feels forced as he is not really bothered by being retired and her presence.   The more interesting person was the American agent that Bond meets in Cuba.  Played by Ana de Armas named Paloma.  She was interesting, showed tremendous skills (especially wearing high heels and a skimpy dress) and arrived and disappeared far too quickly.   

In the end, things that haven’t been done before with a Bond character were done here.  They are appropriate.  This series of Bond movies were not just stand alone movies against bad guys.   They were driven by more back story and character development with Bond himself.  We have learned a lot more about him as a man.   He was more an action hero than at any time.   Sean Connery would not being jumping off cranes or riding a motorcycle like he does.   Pierce Brosnan didn’t have the hand on hand combat that Craig has.  Craig has left his mark and in a very good way.   Where the franchise decides to go after this will be interesting.

October 4th, 2021

The Eyes of Tammy Fay: For the first time since late August 2020, I was able to see a movie in a regular theatre since I saw Tenet. I went on a “Cheap Tuesday” when the tickets are about half price. A deal! Usually a newly released, first run movie on a Cheap Tuesday would have packed theatre packing lot and theatre. My how things have changed. I arrived for a 6:55PM showing and there were parking spots available right near the entrance. I had pre-purchased my ticket and was able to show my vaccination status to head in. There ended up being four other people at showtime! Four! Now I wouldn’t say that this new Jessica Chastain movie would be for a mass audience, but it had just premiered at TIFF two weeks before. There was some decent press about the performances by Andrew Garfield and Jessica Chastain both as Jim and Tammy Fay Bakker, the 80s tele-evangelists. Had Jessica Chastain not been starring I have to admit that I likely wouldn’t be attending. Quite frankly, the subject matter didn’t interest me. I had seen Jim and Tammy Fay live on TV with their PTL Club. I found that they are phony and plastic people who preyed on the weak and the desperate with a gospel in which paying them money led to the path of righteousness, and being granted your wishes. I am not overly religious at all, and so in concept I find the whole business model to be flawed. So I ventured forth to see the performances. Both Garfield and Chastain are very good actors with quality performances in their bodies of work. In this story we follow the life of Tammy Fay from a young impoverished girl in Minnesota with a family life which is challenged. Mom plays at the local church as the organist. Acting Dad stays pretty low key, while Tammy Fay is excluded. Excluded because she is a living example of a child out of wedlock. Mom is ashamed. She finds a clever way to get herself into the church from which Mom kept her away. She grows and heads off to school and early on meets a young Jim. He is ambitious in his bible readings. He looks to “teach” his instructors. Tammy Fay is entranced. They quickly marry and head out on the road, selling their brand of the church. They begin, quite accidentally, for Pat Robertson and his network show (the 700 Club) using puppets to entertain the children who, in turn, would bring their parents. This is a time of Robertson, with others too like Jimmy Swaggart, Jerry Falwell and others. They are popular, but in time are cut out by Robertson. So they set up their own show and network. The underlying theme is that Tammy Fay was not the business person, she was a performer and strong believer in people and belief. She wholeheartedly believed in Jim. His scruples were questionable and there are strange business dealings that took place. This later becomes his downfall for which he was jailed (not giving anything away). Tammy Fay was never jailed. I am not sure that I believe that she was willfully blind about the finances of this Ministry, as she saw her residences expand and grow becoming more and more opulent. She never wanted for anything and they lived the high powered life, using funds from their parishioners as their own personal funds. Yes, she cared about people and she was an early believer in treating all people the same, including those with AIDS. She supported the LGBTQ community without hesitation. Still, I get the sense that she was a performer. From first to last. Her trademark heavy mascara and endless tears were a source of humour at the time and for years to come. Incidentally Jim has done his time and is back on TV preaching, scarily enough. Tammy Fay passed away in 2007. I cannot recommend this film, but I am hard pressed at this point to think of a female performance that will garner the Oscar attention. I was distracted by the make up (enlarged cheeks) on both Garfield and Chastain. Chastain’s accent reminded me of Marge Gunderson, played by Frances McDormand, in Fargo. In the end it wasn’t overly compelling but that really shouldn’t surprise me.

I do look forward to more visits to the theatre in October, with at least James Bond’s No Time to Die and also Dune.

I managed to watch two very average movies this past weekend on Netflix, both recent releases.

The Guilty: This stars Jake Gyllenhaal, what could have been a Broadway play, since most of it happens in a single building. It feels similar in structure to the 2002 Phone Booth which starred Colin Farrell and the voice of Kiefer Sutherland. In this version, Jake plays a police officer who is attending a 9-11 call centre as a worker as part of a leave from his on-the-street job. He takes phone calls. He is stressed, angry, and dealing with the issue of trying to see his daughter, all the while trying to answer calls. Then he receives a phone call from a woman who is sounding very anxious. We find out that she is being abducted and she has two young children at home. Jake takes the call and on very limited information looks to piece together what is taking place. Things happen. More things happen and Jake’s character has to address not only this situation, but also a pending court appearance. The court appearance was a new development and I won’t get into those details. Its introduction was delayed as we got to learn more about this main character. There are many close ups of Jake and his emotional roller coaster. He does an admirable job, in revealing how his character is impacted by the things that are happening around him. It feels a little bit hollow as we better understand the title of the movie. But it’s not very satisfying. So I cannot recommend this.

The Starling: Stars Melissa McCarthy, Kevin Kline and her co-star from Bridesmaids Chris O’Dowd who plays her husband in this movie. McCarthy and O’Dowd play a husband and wife who are expecting a new baby. They begin in their baby’s room painting a wall with trees and flowers. Then something happens which changes their lives and sends them in different directions. Despite three very good comedic actors, this really isn’t a comedy. Kevin Kline plays a vet who has in his past some psychiatric experience. He is suggested as someone that Melissa should speak with. The starling, in this film, is a device which uses plenty of CGI to have an interaction with the human beings. It is used more than it likely should be, and it doesn’t really provide the comic punch that the producers were expecting. I liked this even less than The Guilty. It feels forced. It deals with a difficult subject matter for which the spin taken isn’t really appropriate, in my mind.

September 27, 2021

In and Of Itself: Back on Feb 1st I reviewed this movie directed by Frank Oz. I re-watched it again as it was just released on Crave. I enjoyed it thoroughly once again. It is a one man show from a guy named Derek DelGaudio. It is hard to describe it in a single word really. It is part philosophy, part illusion, part parlour trick and altogether interesting. I won’t describe it further because it bears viewing with fresh eyes. So if you haven’t seen it, check it out.

Scenes From A Marriage (Episode 3): This show is on weekly at present. Once again it stars Jessica Chastain and Oscar Isaac. Both are very good in it. It is slow. It can be painful. The character that Jessica plays, for me, is one that is becoming less and less admirable. That likely isn’t a desired trait, or perhaps reflects exactly what the producers had intended; not all people act admirably. So this can be a mirror to what people experience. Episodes one and two have the changes within this marriage beginning. They have been together for quite some time, and she had some news which resulted in a particular direction. Then, once again, she had in episode two after some passage of time some more news that she wanted to bring to her husband. This episode is really a continuation of that news after some time has passed. It is a tough position for the husband to play in this context. Isaac plays it very well. He has been in reactive mode, trying to adjust his life. He has also sought out to evaluate himself and his contribution to the recent happenings. After all there are always two people in any relationship and rarely it would be solely one person who is making decisions in a vacuum. There were moments here that I was actively cringing and speaking aloud for the husband to choose a different path. If you are watching this, you will know when I mean. I will continue to watch.

Last Week Tonight: This ongoing series from John Oliver is always fun for me. The host makes interesting commentary on the news of the day, then has segments of other items of interest. It is done with humour, but also a critical eye. His news item this week was addressing the refugees seeking to enter the US from Haiti and how they have been turned back. At times forcibly with border agents on horseback. His other segment was on Voting Rights and how certain States (mostly red Republican States) are putting forth legislation to limit the ability to vote or at least curtail its availability. Mail-in voting, specific ID requirements etc. are being put forth which can have a disproportionate impact on the non-white voters. There isn’t much of a surprise there, but it is an effort that President Biden isn’t really taking too seriously. Finally he did a segment on Duck Stamps, which was quite funny. These are stamps that are generally sold to hunters, but also collectors. 97% of the proceeds is used to save wildlife habitation and during its life, has raised over $1B. Each year a team selects the art to be chosen from a list of entries. John’s team entered a number of suggestions.

Here is one of them (note the dog from Nintendo’s Duck Hunt in the back):

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver "Duck Hunt" by Eric Joyner | eBay
Last Week Tonight Failed Entry for 2022 Duck Stamp now up for auction

All his entries failed to get consideration from the judges, but he is now auctioning them off with all contributions going to the charity. It was all very funny. In the same way as his purchase of Russell Crowe’s divorce movie paraphernalia or having Danbury CT name their waste management plant in his name. Enjoy!

September 20th, 2021

This week I watched some older films and the new release on Crave with Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest: This is a classic movie that won the Oscar for Best Picture back in 1975. It also won Best Actor for Jack Nicholson, Best Actress for Louise Fletcher and Best Director, Milos Forman. Forman also directed Amadeus. It is an iconic role for Nicholson. This is role where Jack Nicholson actually plays a role than playing himself. He plays Randall McMurphy who is convicted felon, who thinks that being in a psychiatric hospital is better than being in a prison with assigned work details. He meets up with Nurse Ratched an experienced tough-as-nails, no nonsense woman who runs her floor like a well oiled machine. Over time one questions whether she really is looking to improve the lives of her patience, or rather this is an affirmation daily of her superiority. She isn’t to be challenged. In comes McMurphy who quickly looks to upend her structured existence with her patients. The patients are all men, and are important to dynamic. There are some well known actors here in their early days like Danny Devito and Christopher Lloyd. The story is really a power play between McMurphy who challenges the other patients and pushes them to be more independent, and Nurse Ratched. McMurphy has an impact on each and every one of them becoming the somewhat leader of this motley group. The acting is first rate all around. I was re-visiting this because I haven’t reviewed it, but I had seen it a long time ago. The performance of the Chief is one that has struck me more upon another viewing. Forman tells this story, one that my brother read in high school, but was unread by me, in a moving way where the performances shine and you get a sense about an aspect of life for some that wouldn’t normally be seen. The story remains as effective today as back in the 70s. People are people, even though I expect that shock treatment is no longer used as a means of “treating” people with mental challenges.

Basic Instinct: In 1992, this movie became a sleeper hit and mostly on the performances by Sharon Stone and Michael Douglas. Stone shines in a movie that is a psychological thriller and murder mystery. For 1992, there was more nudity and titillations than for its time. There is plenty of frontal nudity. Stone plays an author named Catherine Trammell, who inherited a great deal of wealth from her deceased parents, and writes murder mystery books. Her books tend mirror people and characters in her life. There are some classic scenes like the interview scene with Stone in the white dress. She uncrosses and crosses her legs in full view of her male police, legal interviewers. Later there is a bedroom scene where a scarf is used and then an ice pick comes into play. The players get more entangled and the story moves on, with the audience not knowing whether Trammell did or didn’t do what occurs. Is this an Academy winner? No. But is it entertaining? Yes. One can view and wonder about how this will all unfold. If the reader doesn’t feel like watching this, likely male teenagers in the house will.

Scarface: This is an iconic role for Al Pacino. For a man who has played many incredible roles, including the unforgettable Michael Corleone in The Godfather, this is one for which many people will think of him first. His Cuban accent is forced, but this 1983 movie directed by Brian De Palma is a tour de force for Pacino in a role of a Cuban exile who becomes a major drug king pin in Miami. He plays Tony Montana. Like the other movies reviewed, this movie has some memorable scenes, like the early scene in the motel with the Columbians. There are also many lines used that have become part of the every vernacular of life like “Say hello to my little friend” and “All I Have In This World Is My Balls And My Word, And I Don’t Break ‘Em For No One!” and “In This Country, You Gotta Make The Money First. Then When You Get The Money, You Get The Power. Then When You Get The Power, Then You Get The Women.” Steven Bauer plays his best friend and side kick. From a new immigrant to the US, to a dish washer, he has street smarts and ambitions for bigger things. The end always justifies the means. He will do anything to get ahead. He has a hair trigger temper when it comes to his sister. He lives boldly and passionately with a strong business sense. Together he and his best friend rise in the Miami drug world. Tony has early visions of owning the world. He meets his boss’ girlfriend, played by Michelle Pfeiffer and is immediately struck by her. Early advice on having longevity in the cocaine business from that old boss is quickly forgotten. The story is one of unbridled ambition and excess. If the entire focus of a life is making money and getting ahead, something can get lost. Usually this can mean relationships, with family or friends or both. This is a remake of a film from 1932 of the same name. This addresses the cocaine drug scene in Miami in ways that weren’t seen before. The performance of Pacino makes it, and the circumstances that reveal just how crazy this business was, along with the participation of bankers, legislators and the Columbians.

Scenes From A Marriage: This new series on Crave was just released last week. It plays each Sunday. Yesterday the second episode was played. Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain play a married couple with a young daughter. Chastain plays a woman who works at an IT company. She is the bread winner in the family. Isaac plays a professor who is the primary caregiver for the daughter. The first episode was slow but got better as the wife has some interesting news. The couple needs to deal with it. The series is a re-make of the 1973 series from Ingmar Bergman. Michelle Williams was apparently supposed to star in it, but she bowed out. Chastain stepped in. These two played a married couple from A Most Violent Year. They are former classmates from Julliard School. Like Revolutionary Road, with Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio from a few years ago I wonder why these dramas about marriage have to seem so miserable. I suppose that there wouldn’t be much drama if things all went swimmingly in a blissful union of two people so deeply intertwined. Life is more complicated than that. Especially when there are children involved, there are painful discussions that take place. Decisions are made, and they are never easy. There is deep hurt and emotion. Things both said and unsaid. The ebbs and flows of connection and disconnect. Rarely is it that two people are in sync at the same time. One is almost always on a different plain at a different time. One doesn’t enjoy this, and the scenes that are painful but you experience them. In many ways, this isn’t for younger viewers. They don’t have the life experience to understand that this can be very real. Love for the young can be very black and white, an absolute. The truth can be that it is more shades. The simple act of packing a bag can be more impactful emotionally, and tell you a lot about the people involved, than you might expect. Two episodes in, I enjoy the performances. I will continue to watch.