The Dragon & the Alpine Star is available to buy today!
As a holiday bonus, Poppies & Roses is discounted to $0.99 and The Devil & the Lily is discounted to $2.99. Give them as gifts, or buy them for yourself with those Amazon gift cards!
Monday, December 23, 2019
Monday, December 2, 2019
Hedgewitches' Tales Book 3: Preorder!
I am pleased to announce that Hedgewitches' Tales book 3, titled The Dragon and the Alpine Star, will be released December 23, 2019 on Amazon.com. It is available for preorder here: https://www.amazon.com/Dragon-Alpine-Star-Retelling-Hedgewitches-ebook/dp/B082666MZQ/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=the+dragon+and+the+alpine+star&qid=1575334708&sr=8-1
It will definitely be available in ebook and Kindle Unlimited, and I am working on getting the physical copy ready in the near future. Not sure if they will be released at the same time but I will do my best.
Those of you who have read my other two books will be in for a treat: this one stars Frau Beck, the quirky 'fairy godmother' figure in David, Clara, Max and Martine's stories. Yes, she gets a book all to herself!
It will definitely be available in ebook and Kindle Unlimited, and I am working on getting the physical copy ready in the near future. Not sure if they will be released at the same time but I will do my best.
Those of you who have read my other two books will be in for a treat: this one stars Frau Beck, the quirky 'fairy godmother' figure in David, Clara, Max and Martine's stories. Yes, she gets a book all to herself!
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
Best Picture #31: Gigi (1958)
Gigi is kind of an odd choice for Best Picture--one of those outliers that doesn't seem to fit with the typical fare that the Academy tends to go for. It has some of the hallmarks: it is pretty to look at, especially the set design, cinematography and locations in Paris. Its cast is made up of some famous Continental actors like Maurice Chevalier, Jacques Bergerac, and Eva Gabor.
But while it is a musical, it's no Sound of Music or West Side Story. The songs are not memorable, and barely feel like songs. The actors will randomly start speaking in rhyme, and then segue into singing that sort of half feels like it's still speech. The story isn't the highlight, either--it's about a playboy bored with the game of love and a girl raised to be a high-end courtesan but not yet entered "the life" coming to discover they've found something more genuine in each other. There is kind of a big age difference between them (she's probably 16 and he's mid-30s), which might squick some people today, though the actors did a good job of making the connection and its evolution seem as not-creepy as they could manage.
Not bad by any means, and hardly a painful watch as some previous have been, but certainly not one of the more memorable Best Pictures.
Watched: March 3, 2019
But while it is a musical, it's no Sound of Music or West Side Story. The songs are not memorable, and barely feel like songs. The actors will randomly start speaking in rhyme, and then segue into singing that sort of half feels like it's still speech. The story isn't the highlight, either--it's about a playboy bored with the game of love and a girl raised to be a high-end courtesan but not yet entered "the life" coming to discover they've found something more genuine in each other. There is kind of a big age difference between them (she's probably 16 and he's mid-30s), which might squick some people today, though the actors did a good job of making the connection and its evolution seem as not-creepy as they could manage.
Not bad by any means, and hardly a painful watch as some previous have been, but certainly not one of the more memorable Best Pictures.
Watched: March 3, 2019
Sunday, November 10, 2019
Best Picture #30: The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957)
The Bridge on the River Kwai on the one hand does a spectacular job of showing the messiness of wartime; there is a lot of moral gray and nobody really comes out on top. On the other hand it's yet another movie based on a novel that was "drawn from" real life but changed or fudged fact for the sake of narrative, so while it tells a compelling story it should not be counted as history and probably does a disservice to all involved.
This is the first time either of us has seen Alec Guinness in anything other than Star Wars, though we knew he was a renowned actor before that and Obi Wan Kenobi was just kind of a throwaway role for him. He won Best Actor for this role, and we very quickly concluded he does a great job playing a guy who has subtly gone mad. He plays a British officer who has been taken prisoner with his unit and they are being forced to build the titular bridge. He desperately tries to keep up his principles in the face of the hardships, which leads to him to willingly collaborate in helping the Japanese build the bridge in order to prove some point in his own mind about English superiority even though in reality they are helping the enemy. He also starts to see the bridge as his own personal legacy--again, blinding himself to the bigger picture to the point that when his allies show up to blow up the bridge he betrays them.
I don't think this movie would have gone down as well had it been made during or post-Vietnam; a war movie full of moral ambiguity about traipsing around the Southeast Asian jungle might have struck a few unhappily sensitive chords.
Watched: February 10, 2019
This is the first time either of us has seen Alec Guinness in anything other than Star Wars, though we knew he was a renowned actor before that and Obi Wan Kenobi was just kind of a throwaway role for him. He won Best Actor for this role, and we very quickly concluded he does a great job playing a guy who has subtly gone mad. He plays a British officer who has been taken prisoner with his unit and they are being forced to build the titular bridge. He desperately tries to keep up his principles in the face of the hardships, which leads to him to willingly collaborate in helping the Japanese build the bridge in order to prove some point in his own mind about English superiority even though in reality they are helping the enemy. He also starts to see the bridge as his own personal legacy--again, blinding himself to the bigger picture to the point that when his allies show up to blow up the bridge he betrays them.
I don't think this movie would have gone down as well had it been made during or post-Vietnam; a war movie full of moral ambiguity about traipsing around the Southeast Asian jungle might have struck a few unhappily sensitive chords.
Watched: February 10, 2019
Saturday, November 2, 2019
Best Picture #29: Around the World in 80 Days (1956)
We are really in the era of upbeat stories now. This is my favorite Jules Verne book so I was actually looking forward to seeing the movie version. For the most part I was not disappointed. Starring David Niven as Phileas Fogg, Mexican comedian Cantinflas as Passepartout, Robert Newton as Detective Fix, and Shirley MacLaine as Aouda, (and most of the rest of Hollywood cameoing in one way or another) it's the story of a very proper English gentleman who in 1872 makes a wager to circumnavigate the globe in 80 days or forfeit his fortune. Hijinks ensue.
Niven makes a really good Fogg; his only flaw was his total lack of chemistry with MacLaine, even at the end when they've decided to marry. Interestingly, in some countries Cantinflas was given top billing over Niven, and he really does steal every scene that he's in. There's an entire very lengthy sequence in Spain that is not in the book added just to showcase him, which includes a hot air balloon flight, flamenco dance, and a bullfight. Even though the movie is already really long (this is the same year The Ten Commandments came out, so it was the era for ginormous epics), I can't complain too much because the whole thing was very entertaining.
There are of course the inevitable uncomfortable stereotypes about non-Western people, though to be fair I think the filmmakers were embracing negative stereotypes-played-for-laughs about literally all the places Fogg visits (Including England with the exaggerated stiff-upper-lip-ness of the Reform Club members and white America with the idiotic guy in California blithely trying to get two foreign nationals to vote in the local election for mayor and the gun duel over nothing Fogg fights with a cowboy in the back of a moving train). Probably the grossest insults are having a blue-eyed white woman play Aouda, who in the book is half-English and half-Indian but in the movie is supposed to be an Indian woman only educated in England, and the feather headdress-wearing, burning-people-at-the stake Native Americans straight out of a 50s Cowboys and Indians serial. But overall it was a fun romp in the vein of other classic road trip movies I've enjoyed like The Great Race.
Watched: January 13, 2019
Niven makes a really good Fogg; his only flaw was his total lack of chemistry with MacLaine, even at the end when they've decided to marry. Interestingly, in some countries Cantinflas was given top billing over Niven, and he really does steal every scene that he's in. There's an entire very lengthy sequence in Spain that is not in the book added just to showcase him, which includes a hot air balloon flight, flamenco dance, and a bullfight. Even though the movie is already really long (this is the same year The Ten Commandments came out, so it was the era for ginormous epics), I can't complain too much because the whole thing was very entertaining.
There are of course the inevitable uncomfortable stereotypes about non-Western people, though to be fair I think the filmmakers were embracing negative stereotypes-played-for-laughs about literally all the places Fogg visits (Including England with the exaggerated stiff-upper-lip-ness of the Reform Club members and white America with the idiotic guy in California blithely trying to get two foreign nationals to vote in the local election for mayor and the gun duel over nothing Fogg fights with a cowboy in the back of a moving train). Probably the grossest insults are having a blue-eyed white woman play Aouda, who in the book is half-English and half-Indian but in the movie is supposed to be an Indian woman only educated in England, and the feather headdress-wearing, burning-people-at-the stake Native Americans straight out of a 50s Cowboys and Indians serial. But overall it was a fun romp in the vein of other classic road trip movies I've enjoyed like The Great Race.
Watched: January 13, 2019
Saturday, August 24, 2019
The Devil & the Lily Available in Paperback!
Have you been waiting to hold Hedgewitches' Tales book 2 in your hands? Wait no further! Follow this link to order it from Amazon.com today!
Sunday, August 18, 2019
Best Picture #28: Marty (1955)
Marty is a bit unusual for a Best Picture. It's not depressing, for one, nor is it just about bad people making stupid decisions. It's what I would call a romantic dramedy, about an average guy living in Brooklyn. He tries, but he can't quite seem to attract a girl even though everyone harangues him about getting married, and he is starting to lose hope of ever finding someone. Finally a girl he is compatible with drops into his orbit but once there is actually a tangible prospect and not some abstract his relatives and friends seem to change their minds (for reasons that have to do with them, and not with Marty or his prospective girlfriend) and start trying to talk him out of it, weakening Marty's already shaky confidence. It doesn't have any of the rom com tropes, though it is about a budding romance. It's sweet, but not particularly impactful. (Though a breath of fresh air from a lot of the typical Oscar fare)
Watched: December 16, 2018
Watched: December 16, 2018
Sunday, August 11, 2019
Best Picture #27: On the Waterfront (1954)
This is one of Marlon Brando's two defining roles (the other being Don Vito Corleone in the Godfather). It's an interesting set of bookends, since in this movie he's a guy on the peripheral of the mob and he ends up taking a stand against them. If I'd just heard his "I coulda been a contender" line as a soundbyte, I would have guessed it was from the Godfather and not this movie. As many years separate the roles, he sounds exactly the same even though here he is young, charming and handsome.
In some ways this movie reminded me of Call the Midwife, which takes place on the London docks instead of the New Jersey docks. The work is the same, as it how it's doled out, the presence of unions, the poverty of the workers and how easily they're exploited.
I am not a massive fan of mobster movies, but as such things go this one wasn't too bad. We were supposed to sympathize with the mob, just the guy awakening to the real danger and then trying to claw his way out.
Watched: October 14, 2018
In some ways this movie reminded me of Call the Midwife, which takes place on the London docks instead of the New Jersey docks. The work is the same, as it how it's doled out, the presence of unions, the poverty of the workers and how easily they're exploited.
I am not a massive fan of mobster movies, but as such things go this one wasn't too bad. We were supposed to sympathize with the mob, just the guy awakening to the real danger and then trying to claw his way out.
Watched: October 14, 2018
Wednesday, June 26, 2019
Poppies & Roses Discounted June 25-July 1!
Head on over to Amazon and pick up your copy!
The ebook has been out for a year, and what a year it's been! I've gotten so much positive feedback; it's good to know I made the right call in making it available.
Enjoy!
The ebook has been out for a year, and what a year it's been! I've gotten so much positive feedback; it's good to know I made the right call in making it available.
Enjoy!
Thursday, June 20, 2019
Best Picture #26: From Here to Eternity (1953)
OK, this one was not my taste at all. I can't stand stories that are just about unlikeable people making bad/stupid decisions. And that's pretty much what this is. It follows a company of men stationed in Hawaii in the year leading up to Pearl Harbor, and 90% of the drama centers around...whether or not one of them enters some inter-Army boxing tournament. Yes, really. There's also relationship drama because he falls in love with a prostitute but neither of them really wants anything permanent but they have that niggling early 20th century "we should get married if we want to keep having sex" urge, and the company's sergeant is secretly sleeping with the captain's neglected wife, blah blah blah. Also we kill off Frank Sinatra without him singing once. Several other characters get to sing, but not him. That in itself should be listed among the movie's biggest sins. How do you have Frank Sinatra in a rather lengthy supporting role and not have him sing?
All of this hot mess gets interrupted, and you (the audience) knew it was coming given the year and location, by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. It's like waiting for the Titanic to hit the iceberg (but that's a different and much more interesting Best Picture). Then it's all "oh shit we're being invaded" and everyone gets trigger happy. The End.
Thank goodness.
While this one wasn't a bad movie, per se, it left a bad taste in my mouth. I honest to goodness started laughing when the boxer asks his prostitute girlfriend to marry him and her line literally is, "Now why would you go and say a thing like that and spoil everything?" It wasn't supposed to be funny, but that's how hilariously fucked up these people are.
Watched: August 9, 2018
All of this hot mess gets interrupted, and you (the audience) knew it was coming given the year and location, by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. It's like waiting for the Titanic to hit the iceberg (but that's a different and much more interesting Best Picture). Then it's all "oh shit we're being invaded" and everyone gets trigger happy. The End.
Thank goodness.
While this one wasn't a bad movie, per se, it left a bad taste in my mouth. I honest to goodness started laughing when the boxer asks his prostitute girlfriend to marry him and her line literally is, "Now why would you go and say a thing like that and spoil everything?" It wasn't supposed to be funny, but that's how hilariously fucked up these people are.
Watched: August 9, 2018
Sunday, June 9, 2019
Best Picture #25: The Greatest Show on Earth (1952)
I am really glad The Greatest Show on Earth turned out to not be the direct predecessor of The Greatest Showman. Other than being about the circus, they are completely different. The circus in The Greatest Show on Earth is well-established and huge. A large portion of the movie is just footage of the acts. I can see the appeal, since it brought the excitement and atmosphere of the circus to the moviehouses. We were entertained almost in spite of ourselves (and in spite of its ridiculous length, this being a film directed by the guy who also did the epic Ten Commandments and also starred bombastic Charlton Heston).
The plot, if it can be called that, is pretty basic. Behind-the-scenes interpersonal drama in a very large circus; love and rivalries blossom and fade between the acts and the individual performers. The draw for the most part is watching the acts perform (done for the most part by actual Ringling Bros/Barnum & Bailey acts). That in itself might have been enough to put it in Oscar contention since it brought the magic of the circus much closer to everyday life and in bright, flashy colors. There is also a very dramatic train wreck towards the end that even though it's obviously done in miniatures is still very impressive and looks less fake than some CGI.
This is supposed to be one of the least deserving Best Picture winners. There is some merit to this, since it beat out High Noon and Singin' in the Rain, both of which have endured longer in the public consciousness, and director Cecil B. DeMille's best-known work now is of course The Ten Commandments, which itself did not win Best Picture. But Best Picture awards don't measure what stands the test of time, they are in many ways a litmus test for the atmosphere of the day, and this movie was the highest grossing film of 1952. For us at least, this is definitely not one of the worst Best Pictures we've seen yet; some, like Broadway Melody, The Great Ziegfeld, Cimarron, and All the King's Men, have been downright painful to sit through. This was big, bold, and entertaining.
Watched: June 12, 2018
The plot, if it can be called that, is pretty basic. Behind-the-scenes interpersonal drama in a very large circus; love and rivalries blossom and fade between the acts and the individual performers. The draw for the most part is watching the acts perform (done for the most part by actual Ringling Bros/Barnum & Bailey acts). That in itself might have been enough to put it in Oscar contention since it brought the magic of the circus much closer to everyday life and in bright, flashy colors. There is also a very dramatic train wreck towards the end that even though it's obviously done in miniatures is still very impressive and looks less fake than some CGI.
This is supposed to be one of the least deserving Best Picture winners. There is some merit to this, since it beat out High Noon and Singin' in the Rain, both of which have endured longer in the public consciousness, and director Cecil B. DeMille's best-known work now is of course The Ten Commandments, which itself did not win Best Picture. But Best Picture awards don't measure what stands the test of time, they are in many ways a litmus test for the atmosphere of the day, and this movie was the highest grossing film of 1952. For us at least, this is definitely not one of the worst Best Pictures we've seen yet; some, like Broadway Melody, The Great Ziegfeld, Cimarron, and All the King's Men, have been downright painful to sit through. This was big, bold, and entertaining.
Watched: June 12, 2018
Wednesday, May 22, 2019
Best Picture #24: An American in Paris (1951)
...holy heck Batman it's in color! Our first color Best Picture since Gone with the Wind (#12), and our first musical since Going My Way (#17). Starring Gene Kelly as the titular character, this movie is a veritable feast for the senses. It's in the same category as the more contemporary Mamma Mia and We Will Rock You, taking the canon of a popular musical group and building a story loosely around it, in this case the Gershwins. So all the music was very familiar, using such classics as "I Got Rhythm" and "S'Wonderful." A lot about this film's look and sound became iconic for the movie musical genre. La La Land in particular pays very heavy homage to it.
The plot runs like a typical rom com that dates back to Shakespeare and beyond. Two men find themselves in love with the same woman. She was already dating one, but finds she really wants to be with the second. Meanwhile the second guy, a starving painter, finds himself the object of the attentions of yet another woman, this one rich, who wants to fund his art. Obviously complications ensue. Therefore everybody's miserable and are obliged to sing and dance to express their love for the person they can't have, and for their careers in the arts.
I really didn't find myself rooting for either guy. There are things about both of them that make me uncomfortable in their relationship with Lise, the lead female. Jerry, the American, takes the "won't take a clear no for an answer and does stalkery things like call and show up at her work until he wears her down" route of courting. This is why guys think if a woman says 'no' she means 'keep trying until I say yes.' With Lise's actual boyfriend Henri, a popular singer, there are some creepy child-grooming connotations to their history where her parents gave her to him to raise because they were in the French Resistance during the war (and presumably died), she crushed on him and then he eventually fell for her. So when she fell out of love with him, she felt she couldn't leave the relationship because she owed everything to him. Ick ick ick for both of them, even though both of their feelings for her are sincere and it's not supposed to be creepy.
While we enjoyed this way more than the last two Best Pictures, we still weren't completely grabbed. It is a classic for good reason, however, and if you liked La La Land (or were disappointed by the ending) you should give this one a spin.
Watched: May 27, 2018
The plot runs like a typical rom com that dates back to Shakespeare and beyond. Two men find themselves in love with the same woman. She was already dating one, but finds she really wants to be with the second. Meanwhile the second guy, a starving painter, finds himself the object of the attentions of yet another woman, this one rich, who wants to fund his art. Obviously complications ensue. Therefore everybody's miserable and are obliged to sing and dance to express their love for the person they can't have, and for their careers in the arts.
I really didn't find myself rooting for either guy. There are things about both of them that make me uncomfortable in their relationship with Lise, the lead female. Jerry, the American, takes the "won't take a clear no for an answer and does stalkery things like call and show up at her work until he wears her down" route of courting. This is why guys think if a woman says 'no' she means 'keep trying until I say yes.' With Lise's actual boyfriend Henri, a popular singer, there are some creepy child-grooming connotations to their history where her parents gave her to him to raise because they were in the French Resistance during the war (and presumably died), she crushed on him and then he eventually fell for her. So when she fell out of love with him, she felt she couldn't leave the relationship because she owed everything to him. Ick ick ick for both of them, even though both of their feelings for her are sincere and it's not supposed to be creepy.
While we enjoyed this way more than the last two Best Pictures, we still weren't completely grabbed. It is a classic for good reason, however, and if you liked La La Land (or were disappointed by the ending) you should give this one a spin.
Watched: May 27, 2018
Thursday, May 9, 2019
Best Picture #23: All About Eve (1950)
All About Eve started out so promising. The opening narration (given by the velvety pipes of Shere Khan, George Sanders) is a hilarious piece of witty exaggeration. Unfortunately, nothing else in the movie is anywhere near as funny. It's another film-about-show-business, which we haven't seen since The Great Ziegfeld (#9). The basic plot is that a young woman, Eve (Anne Baxter), insinuates herself into the inner circle of a temperamental stage actress (Bette Davis) she admires. At first everyone likes and trusts her, but slowly like dominoes falling they all suddenly have separate revelations that she's actually a conniving snake out to supplant the actress and take everything from her because...reasons. It doesn't seem to be personal. It's basically ambition. Some of the early characters realizing this was confusing because they were acting on practically no evidence, they would just take a sudden hard turn into disliking the newcomer. Eventually we the audience are clued in for real as to Eve's true colors, but it takes awhile and in the meantime it makes everyone who dislikes Eve look delusional. Bette Davis is renowned for this performance as a persnickety actress terrified of aging, and while the performance is excellent the character is a whiny, insecure, unlikable bitch in 4/5ths of her scenes.
Then at the end things take a hard turn for the sinister and I actually exclaimed aloud "what the shit am I watching?" We're supposed to think it's Eve getting her comeuppance for all of her lies and manipulation by finding the tables turned and I imagine that's exactly what audiences in 1950 thought. To my 21st-century post-several waves of feminism eye, it raises my hackles because it looks very likely she's about to be turned into a virtual slave to George Sanders' character, sexual and otherwise, when he blatantly says she 'belongs to him' and if she doesn't obey his every whim he'll air all her lies. Since he's a respected theater critic he has the forum and audience in which to do so. There's blackmail, and then there's Blackmail. Yes, Eve had been shamelessly and callously manipulating people for her own ends but no one deserves to be blackmailed this hard. It would have been enough for her to be called on her lies, maybe have her and George Sanders prepare to manipulate and blackmail each other endlessly, and then have the final scene where another young woman appears to be preparing to do to her what she did to Bette Davis' character. That would have satisfied my need for poetic justice without bringing the creepy coercion factor quite so high.
(As a sidenote, this movie also marks an early supporting role for Marilyn Monroe, easily recognizable by that mole.)
Watched: May 20, 2018
Then at the end things take a hard turn for the sinister and I actually exclaimed aloud "what the shit am I watching?" We're supposed to think it's Eve getting her comeuppance for all of her lies and manipulation by finding the tables turned and I imagine that's exactly what audiences in 1950 thought. To my 21st-century post-several waves of feminism eye, it raises my hackles because it looks very likely she's about to be turned into a virtual slave to George Sanders' character, sexual and otherwise, when he blatantly says she 'belongs to him' and if she doesn't obey his every whim he'll air all her lies. Since he's a respected theater critic he has the forum and audience in which to do so. There's blackmail, and then there's Blackmail. Yes, Eve had been shamelessly and callously manipulating people for her own ends but no one deserves to be blackmailed this hard. It would have been enough for her to be called on her lies, maybe have her and George Sanders prepare to manipulate and blackmail each other endlessly, and then have the final scene where another young woman appears to be preparing to do to her what she did to Bette Davis' character. That would have satisfied my need for poetic justice without bringing the creepy coercion factor quite so high.
(As a sidenote, this movie also marks an early supporting role for Marilyn Monroe, easily recognizable by that mole.)
Watched: May 20, 2018
Friday, May 3, 2019
Best Picture #22: All the King's Men (1949)
God, what a depressing movie. That's really all there is to say about it.
OK, in all seriousness. It's a movie version of a book by the same name that only lightly fictionalized the rise in the 1930s of Huey "Kingfish" Long. Never heard of him? He doesn't get talked about much today, but he was a highly controversial figure in the mid 20th century. As corrupt a politician as they come, he used his ill-gotten influence to get a lot of badly needed infrastructure built in Louisiana during the Great Depression (as well as to amass great personal power and wealth, as one does when one is a corrupt politician). Obviously he was a populist, though ostensibly a Democrat, and was notable for appealing to black and white demographics in the highly segregated South (though as an interesting sidenote there is not a single black character in the movie, not even as an extra). Long made it all the way to the US Senate and was eyeing a presidential run when he was assassinated by the relative of a political enemy. He was an interesting enough man that Ken Burns make an entire documentary about him. (This is a dude whose other documentaries usually have big, sweeping titles like "The National Park Service" and "The Civil War.")
The movie follows all of this quite closely, leaving out only that "Willie Stark" was elected to national office, choosing to have him assassinated at the Louisiana state courthouse in Baton Rouge rather than on the steps of the US Capitol Building as happened to his real-life counterpart (in those days security wasn't so tight and you actually had a prayer of assassinating a Senator with a handgun). The story here is told from the perspective of an idealistic journalist who becomes part of "Stark's" closest staff and watches him go from well-meaning backwater lawyer to towering dictator who even resorts to having people killed to get them out of the way, corrupting everyone around him (including the narrator) along the way like a cancer.
There was apparently a poorly received attempt at a remake about ten years ago, which does and doesn't surprise me. The star-studded cast should have been able to make it work, but the subject matter is difficult to handle at the best of times and I don't think the climate in 2007 was really right for asking the "corrupt politician who gets stuff done: OK/Not OK?" question. Its predecessor is certainly way down on my list of favorites in the Oscar movies we've watched thus far.
Watched: April 8, 2018
OK, in all seriousness. It's a movie version of a book by the same name that only lightly fictionalized the rise in the 1930s of Huey "Kingfish" Long. Never heard of him? He doesn't get talked about much today, but he was a highly controversial figure in the mid 20th century. As corrupt a politician as they come, he used his ill-gotten influence to get a lot of badly needed infrastructure built in Louisiana during the Great Depression (as well as to amass great personal power and wealth, as one does when one is a corrupt politician). Obviously he was a populist, though ostensibly a Democrat, and was notable for appealing to black and white demographics in the highly segregated South (though as an interesting sidenote there is not a single black character in the movie, not even as an extra). Long made it all the way to the US Senate and was eyeing a presidential run when he was assassinated by the relative of a political enemy. He was an interesting enough man that Ken Burns make an entire documentary about him. (This is a dude whose other documentaries usually have big, sweeping titles like "The National Park Service" and "The Civil War.")
The movie follows all of this quite closely, leaving out only that "Willie Stark" was elected to national office, choosing to have him assassinated at the Louisiana state courthouse in Baton Rouge rather than on the steps of the US Capitol Building as happened to his real-life counterpart (in those days security wasn't so tight and you actually had a prayer of assassinating a Senator with a handgun). The story here is told from the perspective of an idealistic journalist who becomes part of "Stark's" closest staff and watches him go from well-meaning backwater lawyer to towering dictator who even resorts to having people killed to get them out of the way, corrupting everyone around him (including the narrator) along the way like a cancer.
There was apparently a poorly received attempt at a remake about ten years ago, which does and doesn't surprise me. The star-studded cast should have been able to make it work, but the subject matter is difficult to handle at the best of times and I don't think the climate in 2007 was really right for asking the "corrupt politician who gets stuff done: OK/Not OK?" question. Its predecessor is certainly way down on my list of favorites in the Oscar movies we've watched thus far.
Watched: April 8, 2018
Tuesday, April 16, 2019
Best Picture #21: Hamlet (1948)
As a disclaimer going in, I should say that Hamlet is by far not my favorite of Shakespeare's plays. I read it in its entirety and saw the Kenneth Branaugh version in high school. I was not particularly impressed then, though I had an out-there theory that Gertrude actually murdered Ophelia.
In any case, this version is a classic because the legendary Laurence Olivier stars in the title role. If you start to google his name, the next word suggestion that comes up is 'Hamlet.' We'd previously seen him as the male lead in Hitchcock's Rebecca, where I have to say his performance was much more sympathetic and compelling.
Hamlet is the gold standard of Shakespearean male roles, the one every classically trained actor aspires to. In this case, however, the entire thing was kind of like a game of golf: likely far more interesting to participate in than it was to watch. Hamlet is supposed to be one of Shakespeare's most complex characters, but everything about the Olivier version of him, and for that matter the play itself, is treated with absolute straightforwardness in this adaptation. Every line is pronounced with solemnity and gravitas, as if all the actors are metaphorically bowing before the genius that created this masterwork and not really thinking about the material beyond that. This is especially evident in the first half, when there is absolutely no emotion at all in any delivery and all the actors sort of gaze out into the middle distance as they speak rather than look at each other. Things get more interesting after Ophelia dies; Olivier finally seems to realize his character is supposed to be tormented occasionally rather than perpetually serene (you can't really tell the difference in the early scenes where he's supposed to be pretending to be mad and him the rest of the time), and the rest of the cast take their cue from him and occasionally give us a facial twitch.
The thing about dramatic tragedies, and Shakespeare understood this given the script he wrote, is that the interest for the audience is watching the train wreck. It's about deeply flawed people bouncing off each other, unable to overcome their flaws, until they're eventually destroyed by them. This movie is so obsessed with the awesomeness of Shakespeare as a writer that it forgot that the lines the actors are speaking are either conversations or inner monologue, not Pronouncements From on High. The characters are archetypes without any kind of subtlety or life given to them by the performance, nor is there any indication that anything the characters say might be anything other than unvarnished truth about how they feel; the important thing is just the words. It's a different way of looking at Shakespeare, the culmination of centuries of blind worship, and as a 21st century viewer used to adaptations of his works that have pulled him off his altar and given him back to the people, as it were, I found this painfully straightforward version dull and off-putting.
As a sidenote, the camerawork in this movie is occasionally bizarre to the point of being distracting. There's a scene where Claudius is plotting with Laertes (why do all these supposedly Danish people have Latin names, Mr. Shakespeare?) and the camera pans in and out on them slowly up a staircase for no apparent reason.
In conclusion, I will leave you with my favorite adaptation of Hamlet. I had to watch this again as a consolation for sitting through this snoozefest, because god. *Someone* should find humor in all of this. The funniest thing that happens in the Olivier version is that Peter Cushing (aka Grand Moff Tarkin) takes a random pratfall at one point.
The Complete Works of Shakespeare (Abridged)--Hamlet
Watched: March 13, 2018
In any case, this version is a classic because the legendary Laurence Olivier stars in the title role. If you start to google his name, the next word suggestion that comes up is 'Hamlet.' We'd previously seen him as the male lead in Hitchcock's Rebecca, where I have to say his performance was much more sympathetic and compelling.
Hamlet is the gold standard of Shakespearean male roles, the one every classically trained actor aspires to. In this case, however, the entire thing was kind of like a game of golf: likely far more interesting to participate in than it was to watch. Hamlet is supposed to be one of Shakespeare's most complex characters, but everything about the Olivier version of him, and for that matter the play itself, is treated with absolute straightforwardness in this adaptation. Every line is pronounced with solemnity and gravitas, as if all the actors are metaphorically bowing before the genius that created this masterwork and not really thinking about the material beyond that. This is especially evident in the first half, when there is absolutely no emotion at all in any delivery and all the actors sort of gaze out into the middle distance as they speak rather than look at each other. Things get more interesting after Ophelia dies; Olivier finally seems to realize his character is supposed to be tormented occasionally rather than perpetually serene (you can't really tell the difference in the early scenes where he's supposed to be pretending to be mad and him the rest of the time), and the rest of the cast take their cue from him and occasionally give us a facial twitch.
The thing about dramatic tragedies, and Shakespeare understood this given the script he wrote, is that the interest for the audience is watching the train wreck. It's about deeply flawed people bouncing off each other, unable to overcome their flaws, until they're eventually destroyed by them. This movie is so obsessed with the awesomeness of Shakespeare as a writer that it forgot that the lines the actors are speaking are either conversations or inner monologue, not Pronouncements From on High. The characters are archetypes without any kind of subtlety or life given to them by the performance, nor is there any indication that anything the characters say might be anything other than unvarnished truth about how they feel; the important thing is just the words. It's a different way of looking at Shakespeare, the culmination of centuries of blind worship, and as a 21st century viewer used to adaptations of his works that have pulled him off his altar and given him back to the people, as it were, I found this painfully straightforward version dull and off-putting.
As a sidenote, the camerawork in this movie is occasionally bizarre to the point of being distracting. There's a scene where Claudius is plotting with Laertes (why do all these supposedly Danish people have Latin names, Mr. Shakespeare?) and the camera pans in and out on them slowly up a staircase for no apparent reason.
In conclusion, I will leave you with my favorite adaptation of Hamlet. I had to watch this again as a consolation for sitting through this snoozefest, because god. *Someone* should find humor in all of this. The funniest thing that happens in the Olivier version is that Peter Cushing (aka Grand Moff Tarkin) takes a random pratfall at one point.
The Complete Works of Shakespeare (Abridged)--Hamlet
Watched: March 13, 2018
Thursday, April 11, 2019
Best Picture #20: Gentleman's Agreement (1947)
Wow, Gentleman's Agreement is just begging to be remade for the 21st century. But which marginalized group to pick? In a way, I think, it wouldn't matter. Discrimination plays out in an almost universal way no matter which group it's against--I recognized a lot of the tactics used here against Jews that are also employed employed against nonwhites and anyone who doesn't identify as straight and cisgender. In that way, this movie is terribly relevant to today, this exact moment in time, as "nice" people who don't think of themselves as racist or sexist or homophobic have to take a good, hard look at their behavior and the behavior they condone in others. If you don't speak up or take a stand, you're part of the problem, no matter how innocent you think yourself.
The plot is pretty straightforward. A celebrated journalist (Gregory Peck, aka the future Atticus Finch. What is it with this guy and civil rights films?) comes to New York City from California and is asked to write a series on antisemitism. He hits on an idea: he'll pretend to be Jewish. Perfect! Then he'll get an inside look. Since he's new in town, nobody will know any different. He quickly discovers all the subtle and not-so-subtle ways Jews are discriminated against. Daily he has to deal with what we today would call "micro-aggressions," in addition to people just outright snubbing him. His girlfriend's nice WASP family, for instance, can't stand that they'll take flack from their nice WASP neighbors and even his girlfriend urges him to "come clean" with them so as to avoid people looking down their noses at her for dating a "Jew." (The fact that he's nonpracticing and not even culturally Jewish is irrelevant. If you're of Jewish extraction, you're treated as inferior. End of story.)
This movie is almost cute in its righteous indignation, from a 21st century perspective. Immediately post-Holocaust, the Jewish cause was the cause celebre and people were feeling deeply sympathetic, enough to examine their own previously breezy anti-Jewish attitudes. Today, we've now seen countless civil rights movements asking for a change in attitudes towards everyone who isn't a white heterosexual Christian male. We're still in the middle of a huge cultural shakeup. I actually think a lot of people today could benefit from watching this film, as preachy as it gets.
Watched: February 17, 2018
The plot is pretty straightforward. A celebrated journalist (Gregory Peck, aka the future Atticus Finch. What is it with this guy and civil rights films?) comes to New York City from California and is asked to write a series on antisemitism. He hits on an idea: he'll pretend to be Jewish. Perfect! Then he'll get an inside look. Since he's new in town, nobody will know any different. He quickly discovers all the subtle and not-so-subtle ways Jews are discriminated against. Daily he has to deal with what we today would call "micro-aggressions," in addition to people just outright snubbing him. His girlfriend's nice WASP family, for instance, can't stand that they'll take flack from their nice WASP neighbors and even his girlfriend urges him to "come clean" with them so as to avoid people looking down their noses at her for dating a "Jew." (The fact that he's nonpracticing and not even culturally Jewish is irrelevant. If you're of Jewish extraction, you're treated as inferior. End of story.)
This movie is almost cute in its righteous indignation, from a 21st century perspective. Immediately post-Holocaust, the Jewish cause was the cause celebre and people were feeling deeply sympathetic, enough to examine their own previously breezy anti-Jewish attitudes. Today, we've now seen countless civil rights movements asking for a change in attitudes towards everyone who isn't a white heterosexual Christian male. We're still in the middle of a huge cultural shakeup. I actually think a lot of people today could benefit from watching this film, as preachy as it gets.
Watched: February 17, 2018
Friday, April 5, 2019
Best Picture #19: The Best Years of Our Lives (1946)
The Best Years of Our Lives was pretty good. Its biggest downside is its length--almost three hours. But I actually think more people should watch it, especially combat veterans.
The story centers around three WWII veterans who are returning home and happen to meet on the plane flying back. They share their fears and dreams about returning to civilian life. One is a decorated bombardier who has no other marketable skills and a young wife he married hastily before being shipped out to Europe. One is an infantry sergeant who has a wife and grown children, and is a successful loan officer at a bank. One is a Navy engineer who left behind a high school sweetheart, and while a former football quarterback had his hands burned off when his ship was attacked and now wears prosthetic hooks. He isn't sure his sweetheart will want to marry him now that there are things he can't do for himself.
The movie then continues to follow these three and their families as they try to readjust. They have varying ups and downs at this, and they cope very differently. But I think modern veterans and their families will relate to their struggles--a lot of it reminded me of things I've heard about coming home after combat from people who have experienced how tough that adjustment period is. Especially for the ones who were wounded and now have to figure out a different normal. The actor who played the sailor who lost his hands actually was a disabled veteran with prosthetic hands. You could tell they weren't faked in part because of how deft he was with them. He won Best Supporting Actor for his performance.
For obvious reasons this movie was very popular in 1946. It was the next big "blockbuster" after Gone With the Wind--the movie everybody saw and talked about. It's all but forgotten today, but we enjoyed it and I think it deserves a revival.
Watched : December 26, 2017
The story centers around three WWII veterans who are returning home and happen to meet on the plane flying back. They share their fears and dreams about returning to civilian life. One is a decorated bombardier who has no other marketable skills and a young wife he married hastily before being shipped out to Europe. One is an infantry sergeant who has a wife and grown children, and is a successful loan officer at a bank. One is a Navy engineer who left behind a high school sweetheart, and while a former football quarterback had his hands burned off when his ship was attacked and now wears prosthetic hooks. He isn't sure his sweetheart will want to marry him now that there are things he can't do for himself.
The movie then continues to follow these three and their families as they try to readjust. They have varying ups and downs at this, and they cope very differently. But I think modern veterans and their families will relate to their struggles--a lot of it reminded me of things I've heard about coming home after combat from people who have experienced how tough that adjustment period is. Especially for the ones who were wounded and now have to figure out a different normal. The actor who played the sailor who lost his hands actually was a disabled veteran with prosthetic hands. You could tell they weren't faked in part because of how deft he was with them. He won Best Supporting Actor for his performance.
For obvious reasons this movie was very popular in 1946. It was the next big "blockbuster" after Gone With the Wind--the movie everybody saw and talked about. It's all but forgotten today, but we enjoyed it and I think it deserves a revival.
Watched : December 26, 2017
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Best Picture #18 Review: The Lost Weekend (1945)
The Lost Weekend is largely a cautionary tale about the dangers of alcoholism. We follow our main character, Don, in his desperate quest to find more whiskey, all while dodging his well-meaning brother and girlfriend's attempts to help him. This description makes it sound more gripping than it is. What it really is is hard to watch, the entire spectacle is so pitiful. You feel so desperately sorry for everyone involved (as you're meant to).
What struck me partway through the movie as I listened to Don describe how he turned to the bottle was that, at least in my armchair psychologist's opinion, what was really going on was that he had what we would call today severe anxiety, and was using alcohol to manage it. As a young man he was told he had talent as a writer, and he couldn't take the internal pressure to produce something great so to silence that little voice that told him he was going to fail he began drinking. I think we've all heard that little voice sometimes and have varying degrees of success in telling it to go fuck itself. In that was Don was very relateable even to someone who hasn't been impacted by alcoholism.
I'm going to refer to the particular run of music that played whenever Don felt the urge to drink "The Call of the Bottle." It got more insistent and more annoying the longer he went without a drink, and it reminded me of the screeching anxious violin theme from Psycho. Certainly it made its metaphorical point, if a bit overstated at times. Don't watch this movie with a headache--this score will definitely not improve it.
Propaganda? Yes. Nicely put together propaganda? Absolutely. It's not anti-alcohol per se, it's more about alcoholism, and it is well shot and well acted. It's just not exactly casual viewing. I felt like I was in an episode of Scared Straight that wasn't directed at me. I could appreciate what went into putting it together knowing that I was not the target audience. It says something about how rampant alcoholism must have been in the 1940s if this won 1945's Best Picture over more feel-good pieces like The Bells of St. Mary's.
What struck me partway through the movie as I listened to Don describe how he turned to the bottle was that, at least in my armchair psychologist's opinion, what was really going on was that he had what we would call today severe anxiety, and was using alcohol to manage it. As a young man he was told he had talent as a writer, and he couldn't take the internal pressure to produce something great so to silence that little voice that told him he was going to fail he began drinking. I think we've all heard that little voice sometimes and have varying degrees of success in telling it to go fuck itself. In that was Don was very relateable even to someone who hasn't been impacted by alcoholism.
I'm going to refer to the particular run of music that played whenever Don felt the urge to drink "The Call of the Bottle." It got more insistent and more annoying the longer he went without a drink, and it reminded me of the screeching anxious violin theme from Psycho. Certainly it made its metaphorical point, if a bit overstated at times. Don't watch this movie with a headache--this score will definitely not improve it.
Propaganda? Yes. Nicely put together propaganda? Absolutely. It's not anti-alcohol per se, it's more about alcoholism, and it is well shot and well acted. It's just not exactly casual viewing. I felt like I was in an episode of Scared Straight that wasn't directed at me. I could appreciate what went into putting it together knowing that I was not the target audience. It says something about how rampant alcoholism must have been in the 1940s if this won 1945's Best Picture over more feel-good pieces like The Bells of St. Mary's.
Saturday, March 23, 2019
Best Picture #17 Review: Going My Way (1944)
Going My Way was kind of like the forerunner of both Mary Poppins and Sister Act. It was a pleasant, humorous and uplifting story, about as different from Casablanca as it's possible to be.
Father O'Malley (portrayed by famous crooner Bing Crosby, one of the few people primarily known for their singing I've ever seen who can also act) is a young priest sent to the ailing parish of St. Dominic's in New York City. Its indomitable leader is Father Fitzgibbon, who at first resents this "progressive" new intruder who sweeps in and in his unassuming way seems to make friends with everybody. Crosby's character is of course very musically inclined, which gives myriad excuses for him and various other characters to sing periodically--unlike Broadway-style musicals, however, the musical numbers are incorporated into the plot rather than being interludes where everybody then has to pretend they hadn't randomly burst into song ten seconds earlier. So for example Crosby meets a young aspiring singer and to determine her skill the two sit down to the piano. He also starts a church choir made up of the local gang of hoodlums by explaining everything to them in baseball terms, and them singing songs he composes eventually raises the money to save the parish. (The dude is supernaturally good at everything. And I mean everything, including, for some reason, golf. I guess that's what angels do when they're bored in heaven. The movie only obliquely implies that's what he is, but that was my take on him.) Eventually he is called away to help another parish, leaving everyone happier in his wake.
As I understand it there is a sequel titled The Bells of St. Mary's (nominated for Best Picture in 1945), which is slightly better known today because it's mentioned in the perennial holiday classic It's a Wonderful Life (nominated in 1946). Apparently in the mid-40s there was a cinematic universe of feel-good Christmas movies. It is interestingly coincidental that we are hitting it in December in our journey through the Oscars.
Watched: December 9, 2017
Father O'Malley (portrayed by famous crooner Bing Crosby, one of the few people primarily known for their singing I've ever seen who can also act) is a young priest sent to the ailing parish of St. Dominic's in New York City. Its indomitable leader is Father Fitzgibbon, who at first resents this "progressive" new intruder who sweeps in and in his unassuming way seems to make friends with everybody. Crosby's character is of course very musically inclined, which gives myriad excuses for him and various other characters to sing periodically--unlike Broadway-style musicals, however, the musical numbers are incorporated into the plot rather than being interludes where everybody then has to pretend they hadn't randomly burst into song ten seconds earlier. So for example Crosby meets a young aspiring singer and to determine her skill the two sit down to the piano. He also starts a church choir made up of the local gang of hoodlums by explaining everything to them in baseball terms, and them singing songs he composes eventually raises the money to save the parish. (The dude is supernaturally good at everything. And I mean everything, including, for some reason, golf. I guess that's what angels do when they're bored in heaven. The movie only obliquely implies that's what he is, but that was my take on him.) Eventually he is called away to help another parish, leaving everyone happier in his wake.
As I understand it there is a sequel titled The Bells of St. Mary's (nominated for Best Picture in 1945), which is slightly better known today because it's mentioned in the perennial holiday classic It's a Wonderful Life (nominated in 1946). Apparently in the mid-40s there was a cinematic universe of feel-good Christmas movies. It is interestingly coincidental that we are hitting it in December in our journey through the Oscars.
Watched: December 9, 2017
Tuesday, March 19, 2019
The Devil & the Lily Available
My second novel, The Devil & the Lily: A Retelling of the Fairy Tale 'Bearskin' is available for purchase via Amazon starting today! Just the ebook is available right now, but stay tuned for the physical book. Click below to buy it!
The Devil & the Lily
Never heard of Bearskin? It's an obscure Grimm Brothers fairy tale. I went for a deep cut this time around, but I've loved the story ever since I came across it and I am very pleased with the results of my retelling. You can read an annotated version of the original story on the Sur La Lune Fairytales website.
This is also a sequel to Poppies & Roses in that it's set in the same universe, though it is a standalone story and you don't have to have read the first book to enjoy this one. Some characters from Poppies make cameos, but unless you've read the first book they blend into the background.
The Devil & the Lily
Never heard of Bearskin? It's an obscure Grimm Brothers fairy tale. I went for a deep cut this time around, but I've loved the story ever since I came across it and I am very pleased with the results of my retelling. You can read an annotated version of the original story on the Sur La Lune Fairytales website.
This is also a sequel to Poppies & Roses in that it's set in the same universe, though it is a standalone story and you don't have to have read the first book to enjoy this one. Some characters from Poppies make cameos, but unless you've read the first book they blend into the background.
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Best Picture #16 Review: Casablanca (1943)
The best word I can think of to describe Casablanca is "complicated." Not in a bad way, like, it wasn't too complicated to follow, but everything about the situation and the characters is very nuanced and complex. Nobody fits perfectly into a box and their personalities are all shaded with gray.
I don't really need to describe the plot to you, do I? Jaded nightclub owner bumps into old flame and discovers they never really knew each other all that well but that made no difference to their feelings, which are quickly rekindled. Ultimately, he has to make a choice: let her go with another man or escape Casablanca with her himself. Of course there's a lot more to it than that but it's the best I can do without going into every detail and we'll be here until next Tuesday.
One of the things I think this movie does well is capture what it was like for a lot of people to be in WWII. Survival and principles were constantly warring, and making a choice with your heart instead of becoming cynical and suspicious about everything could easily cost you your life. Each of the major characters here are shown having to walk the fine line between self-preservation and making a moral choice, and where they fall on the spectrum depends on what they decide they can ultimately live with versus what might be worth dying for.
A surprise for us given this movie's reputation as one of the Top Movies to See Before You Die was the quality of the acting. At times it was stilted and stiff, and the actors, especially Bogart as Rick and Bergman as Ilsa, wavered between feeling like real people and obviously Acting For the Camera.
Ultimately one of the superior Best Pictures we've seen thus far movie-wise, no question, but not one we're likely to return to now that we've seen it once.
Watched: December 2, 2017
I don't really need to describe the plot to you, do I? Jaded nightclub owner bumps into old flame and discovers they never really knew each other all that well but that made no difference to their feelings, which are quickly rekindled. Ultimately, he has to make a choice: let her go with another man or escape Casablanca with her himself. Of course there's a lot more to it than that but it's the best I can do without going into every detail and we'll be here until next Tuesday.
One of the things I think this movie does well is capture what it was like for a lot of people to be in WWII. Survival and principles were constantly warring, and making a choice with your heart instead of becoming cynical and suspicious about everything could easily cost you your life. Each of the major characters here are shown having to walk the fine line between self-preservation and making a moral choice, and where they fall on the spectrum depends on what they decide they can ultimately live with versus what might be worth dying for.
A surprise for us given this movie's reputation as one of the Top Movies to See Before You Die was the quality of the acting. At times it was stilted and stiff, and the actors, especially Bogart as Rick and Bergman as Ilsa, wavered between feeling like real people and obviously Acting For the Camera.
Ultimately one of the superior Best Pictures we've seen thus far movie-wise, no question, but not one we're likely to return to now that we've seen it once.
Watched: December 2, 2017
Friday, March 15, 2019
Poppies & Roses On Sale!
From today until 3/22/2019, the ebook of Poppies & Roses is only $0.99! Pick up your copy before the release of The Devil & the Lily on Tuesday!
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Best Picture #15 Review: Mrs. Miniver (1942)
If anyone ever asks you what the phrase "Keep calm and carry on" really means as it was originally intended, show them Mrs. Miniver. It might as well be the slogan of this movie.
Made in 1942 and set in 1939 and 1940, the plot centers around an upper middle class English family living in the English countryside just outside London. It first shows a glimpse of their lives just before WWII breaks out. The husband is a successful architect, the titular Mrs. Miniver a cheerful housewife. They have three children and a few servants, and live in a beautiful house. Their oldest son comes home from college for a visit, spouting philosophy as only the young and idealistic can. He meets and is smitten with the sweet, lively granddaughter of the local lady of the manor. The lady herself reminded me of the Dowager Countess on Downton Abbey: old-fashioned but always ready with a cutting quip and not so unbendable as she first appears.
The war begins and very quickly everything changes. The Minivers' son joins the Air Force and begins hasty training to combat German bombers, which very soon begin to drone overhead and wreck havoc. Blackout curtains hang everywhere and the family digs a bomb shelter out back, to which they are forced to frequently retreat. Mr. Miniver is called out with other civilian boat owners to assist with the retreat at Dunkirk and does not return for days. During this time, a downed German fighter pilot who had thus far evaded capture invades the Miniver home and threatens Mrs. Miniver at gunpoint. She bravely waits until he faints from his injuries, takes his gun and calls the police. When he wakes, he rants about how the Germans will soon own the world while she listens in mute horror. Once he is taken away, Mr. Miniver returns home, as does their son. He marries his sweetheart, but she is quickly killed in a bombing raid, along with many others in the village, and the family's home is partially destroyed while they cower in their bomb shelter. Through it all, Mrs. Miniver keeps the proverbial stiff upper lip. She remains as cheerful as she can and stoically makes the best of everything with a smile plastered on her face. Sometimes it's even genuine.
The tragic irony of the war coming home for the Brits is of course made manifest in the death of the son's wife: she is killed by machine gun fire while her husband, the Air Force pilot, lives to come home. In our Oscar movies about the previous war, it was all of the young men who went off to inevitably die in the trenches or in aerial dogfights. No one is safe in this war, and all the British people can do is Keep Calm and Carry On, as the pastor giving his eulogy for the wife and the others in the village killed in the bombing raid makes abundantly clear as he stands in the ruins of the church. They are all at war, not just the soldiers, and if they all do not fight, they are lost. A convenient plea to the watching American audience to buy war bonds immediately follows the list of the movie's cast, which, I admit, left me with the impression that the entire movie was nothing but an extra-long, very well-made ad for the war effort.
It is interesting to think about the impact of this movie, since when it was made the outcome of the war was far from certain. Indeed, Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union stood poised to own a good chunk of the globe and the Allies were only beginning to make any headway in fighting back.The Battle of Midway, the first big American victory in the Pacific, took place the very day this movie was released to theaters. The Blitz and Pearl Harbor were recent, very raw, memories. The invasion of Normandy was exactly two years away. This movie was very timely and very needed to keep up everyone's morale, knowing this was going to be a long, bloody global war in which civilians in Europe and Asia would be in as much danger as active troops. It was a reminder to try to cling to normalcy as much as possible and to remember the good in life in the face of that danger. For that alone, I can see why it won the Oscar.
Watched: November 25, 2017
Made in 1942 and set in 1939 and 1940, the plot centers around an upper middle class English family living in the English countryside just outside London. It first shows a glimpse of their lives just before WWII breaks out. The husband is a successful architect, the titular Mrs. Miniver a cheerful housewife. They have three children and a few servants, and live in a beautiful house. Their oldest son comes home from college for a visit, spouting philosophy as only the young and idealistic can. He meets and is smitten with the sweet, lively granddaughter of the local lady of the manor. The lady herself reminded me of the Dowager Countess on Downton Abbey: old-fashioned but always ready with a cutting quip and not so unbendable as she first appears.
The war begins and very quickly everything changes. The Minivers' son joins the Air Force and begins hasty training to combat German bombers, which very soon begin to drone overhead and wreck havoc. Blackout curtains hang everywhere and the family digs a bomb shelter out back, to which they are forced to frequently retreat. Mr. Miniver is called out with other civilian boat owners to assist with the retreat at Dunkirk and does not return for days. During this time, a downed German fighter pilot who had thus far evaded capture invades the Miniver home and threatens Mrs. Miniver at gunpoint. She bravely waits until he faints from his injuries, takes his gun and calls the police. When he wakes, he rants about how the Germans will soon own the world while she listens in mute horror. Once he is taken away, Mr. Miniver returns home, as does their son. He marries his sweetheart, but she is quickly killed in a bombing raid, along with many others in the village, and the family's home is partially destroyed while they cower in their bomb shelter. Through it all, Mrs. Miniver keeps the proverbial stiff upper lip. She remains as cheerful as she can and stoically makes the best of everything with a smile plastered on her face. Sometimes it's even genuine.
The tragic irony of the war coming home for the Brits is of course made manifest in the death of the son's wife: she is killed by machine gun fire while her husband, the Air Force pilot, lives to come home. In our Oscar movies about the previous war, it was all of the young men who went off to inevitably die in the trenches or in aerial dogfights. No one is safe in this war, and all the British people can do is Keep Calm and Carry On, as the pastor giving his eulogy for the wife and the others in the village killed in the bombing raid makes abundantly clear as he stands in the ruins of the church. They are all at war, not just the soldiers, and if they all do not fight, they are lost. A convenient plea to the watching American audience to buy war bonds immediately follows the list of the movie's cast, which, I admit, left me with the impression that the entire movie was nothing but an extra-long, very well-made ad for the war effort.
It is interesting to think about the impact of this movie, since when it was made the outcome of the war was far from certain. Indeed, Germany, Italy, Japan and the Soviet Union stood poised to own a good chunk of the globe and the Allies were only beginning to make any headway in fighting back.The Battle of Midway, the first big American victory in the Pacific, took place the very day this movie was released to theaters. The Blitz and Pearl Harbor were recent, very raw, memories. The invasion of Normandy was exactly two years away. This movie was very timely and very needed to keep up everyone's morale, knowing this was going to be a long, bloody global war in which civilians in Europe and Asia would be in as much danger as active troops. It was a reminder to try to cling to normalcy as much as possible and to remember the good in life in the face of that danger. For that alone, I can see why it won the Oscar.
Watched: November 25, 2017
Friday, March 8, 2019
Preorder for The Devil & the Lily
Follow this link to preorder Hedgewitches' Tales book 2, The Devil & the Lily!
Best Picture #14 Review: How Green Was My Valley (1941)
This was definitely one of the duller Best Pictures we've watched so far, though it was not insufferable. It's basically a nostalgia piece about a Welsh coal mining valley with a man looking back on his idyllic childhood there and the gradual end of his innocence. We get to watch as life in the valley for the boy (Roddy McDowall) and his family slowly slide from happy to intolerable, and it was really hard to care. The most engaging scene was when the local boxing talent goes to the boy's school and beats the shit out of the teacher because he was excessively punishing the students. But it also shows what passes for excitement compared to the rest of the movie. It simply isn't very attention-holding.
It is an interesting note that this movie beat Citizen Kane for Best Picture. Certainly Citizen Kane has had a more lasting cultural impact, though its quality to anyone but film students is, I believe, open for debate.
This is an early role for child actor Roddy McDowall, who went on to star in films like Lassie Come Home and Planet of the Apes, and had supporting roles in a long and illustrious TV and feature length career that included Cleopatra, The Poseidon Adventure, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Pinky and the Brain, and A Bug's Life.
Watched: October 29, 2017
It is an interesting note that this movie beat Citizen Kane for Best Picture. Certainly Citizen Kane has had a more lasting cultural impact, though its quality to anyone but film students is, I believe, open for debate.
This is an early role for child actor Roddy McDowall, who went on to star in films like Lassie Come Home and Planet of the Apes, and had supporting roles in a long and illustrious TV and feature length career that included Cleopatra, The Poseidon Adventure, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Pinky and the Brain, and A Bug's Life.
Watched: October 29, 2017
Monday, March 4, 2019
Best Picture #13 Review: Rebecca (1940)
Rebecca is a Gothic mystery directed by Alfred Hitchcock and was the only film of his to ever win Best Picture despite it being one of his lesser-known works today (I'd venture to say most people know him by his later efforts like Rear Window, Psycho, and The Birds). Interestingly, this film beat out Charlie Chaplin's The Great Dictator to win its award.
A young woman (played by Joan Fontaine, though we never learn the character's first name) is swept off her feet by an English aristocrat (Laurence Olivier) who owns an extensive estate in Cornwall, and they marry after a whirlwind romance at a hotel in Monte Carlo. Once back at his home, the young bride quickly realizes there was something strange about both the life and death of her husband's first wife, the titular Rebecca. She seems to loom over everything, jeopardizing the fragile happiness of a young couple who married quickly and don't know each other well.
In what I've been told is typical of Hitchcock films, a lot of things are implied or left for the viewer to draw their own conclusions. It was nice not to be hand-fed everything by the director. The plot itself seems to have been taking some inspiration from Jane Eyre and other Gothic-style tales with the huge mystery mansion, the brooding Byronic male lead, and the secrets surrounding the first wife. I even detected some inspiration from the fairy tale Bluebeard. I've seen some descriptions of it as "a Cinderella story gone wrong" but I'd put it more firmly in the Bluebeard family.
Olivier in looks and mannerisms kept reminding me of Cary Elwes. Or maybe the other way around. As an additional fun tidbit, Rebecca's oily former lover, who shows up to play tertiary antagonist behind the dead wife and the creepy housekeeper, was portrayed by George Sanders, the future velvety voice of Shere Khan the Tiger from Disney's The Jungle Book (I had one of those "I know that voice!" moments).
I was curious from the moment we were first shown the exterior of the creepy house which real-life house it was, because the Haunted Mansion at Disney World is a dead ringer (ha ha) for it. In fact the house in this movie was entirely a model and no actual house was used. But I bet you anything at least one of the Disney Imagineers was inspired by it.
Watched: October 21, 2017
A young woman (played by Joan Fontaine, though we never learn the character's first name) is swept off her feet by an English aristocrat (Laurence Olivier) who owns an extensive estate in Cornwall, and they marry after a whirlwind romance at a hotel in Monte Carlo. Once back at his home, the young bride quickly realizes there was something strange about both the life and death of her husband's first wife, the titular Rebecca. She seems to loom over everything, jeopardizing the fragile happiness of a young couple who married quickly and don't know each other well.
In what I've been told is typical of Hitchcock films, a lot of things are implied or left for the viewer to draw their own conclusions. It was nice not to be hand-fed everything by the director. The plot itself seems to have been taking some inspiration from Jane Eyre and other Gothic-style tales with the huge mystery mansion, the brooding Byronic male lead, and the secrets surrounding the first wife. I even detected some inspiration from the fairy tale Bluebeard. I've seen some descriptions of it as "a Cinderella story gone wrong" but I'd put it more firmly in the Bluebeard family.
Olivier in looks and mannerisms kept reminding me of Cary Elwes. Or maybe the other way around. As an additional fun tidbit, Rebecca's oily former lover, who shows up to play tertiary antagonist behind the dead wife and the creepy housekeeper, was portrayed by George Sanders, the future velvety voice of Shere Khan the Tiger from Disney's The Jungle Book (I had one of those "I know that voice!" moments).
I was curious from the moment we were first shown the exterior of the creepy house which real-life house it was, because the Haunted Mansion at Disney World is a dead ringer (ha ha) for it. In fact the house in this movie was entirely a model and no actual house was used. But I bet you anything at least one of the Disney Imagineers was inspired by it.
Watched: October 21, 2017
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
Best Picture #12 Review: Gone With the Wind (1939)
Well, on one level I was right to dread Gone With the Wind (Oscar Best Picture #12). It is a heinous piece of Confederate propaganda. The entire thing is nothing but an argument for how great things were in the South if the war hadn't ruined it all. The poor stupid black people were happier as slaves anyway, says this movie, and the few smart ones kept right on loyally serving their white betters whether they were "free" or not. A privileged white woman like Scarlett could have lived out her life as the spoiled, vapid rich girl she was always meant to be with her pretty little head never troubled by deprivation or worse, business. The war is blamed for ruining everything innocent and robbing everyone of the happiness they should have had if them mean ole Yankees hadn't wrecked Paradise itself where everything was beautiful and everyone knew their place.
Scarlett O'Hara is of course the high-spirited, conniving bitch for which the character name has become synonymous. I actually sympathized with her more than I thought I was going to, at least in the middle of the movie when she was the only one who had the inner strength to keep going when everything was falling apart. She actually managed to turn her flaws into virtues. The rest of the time she was very hard to like. She was cruel, shallow, proud, spiteful, and breathtakingly selfish. She didn't deserve anyone's loyalty, and yet had everyone else dancing to the tune of her fiddle. Like the spoiled child she was she only wanted something when told she couldn't have it.
Rhett Butler is a rapist and this movie is probably responsible for a lot of rape fantasies for both men and women. It typifies the "if the woman says no in no uncertain terms, she secretly wants the man to force her" attitude because that's the crux of every interaction Rhett and Scarlett have. Rhett also seems to serve as a weird spokesperson from the future, predicting everything that the filmmakers knew in hindsight actually happened but someone in that time wouldn't know. For example, he correctly sees Gettysburg as the turning point of the war before the battle even happens, when in reality the armies meeting at Gettysburg was an accident and he in Georgia couldn't have known there was going to be a battle there at all, let alone whether the outcome was important. It bugged me even though I knew it was a storytelling device.
All that aside, the production itself is incredible when compared to all the Oscar winners that preceded it. It is such a huge leap forward in every way. It's in color. It's almost four hours long, and I was never bored. The shots were all gorgeous, especially the ones with the characters in silhouette. I can see why people in 1939 were swept off their feet by the sheer scope and spectacle of the thing. It and The Wizard of Oz, which came out the same year, are true cinematic achievements. Even if I find the subject matter of this particular piece utterly despicable.
Watched: September 16, 2017
Scarlett O'Hara is of course the high-spirited, conniving bitch for which the character name has become synonymous. I actually sympathized with her more than I thought I was going to, at least in the middle of the movie when she was the only one who had the inner strength to keep going when everything was falling apart. She actually managed to turn her flaws into virtues. The rest of the time she was very hard to like. She was cruel, shallow, proud, spiteful, and breathtakingly selfish. She didn't deserve anyone's loyalty, and yet had everyone else dancing to the tune of her fiddle. Like the spoiled child she was she only wanted something when told she couldn't have it.
Rhett Butler is a rapist and this movie is probably responsible for a lot of rape fantasies for both men and women. It typifies the "if the woman says no in no uncertain terms, she secretly wants the man to force her" attitude because that's the crux of every interaction Rhett and Scarlett have. Rhett also seems to serve as a weird spokesperson from the future, predicting everything that the filmmakers knew in hindsight actually happened but someone in that time wouldn't know. For example, he correctly sees Gettysburg as the turning point of the war before the battle even happens, when in reality the armies meeting at Gettysburg was an accident and he in Georgia couldn't have known there was going to be a battle there at all, let alone whether the outcome was important. It bugged me even though I knew it was a storytelling device.
All that aside, the production itself is incredible when compared to all the Oscar winners that preceded it. It is such a huge leap forward in every way. It's in color. It's almost four hours long, and I was never bored. The shots were all gorgeous, especially the ones with the characters in silhouette. I can see why people in 1939 were swept off their feet by the sheer scope and spectacle of the thing. It and The Wizard of Oz, which came out the same year, are true cinematic achievements. Even if I find the subject matter of this particular piece utterly despicable.
Watched: September 16, 2017
Sunday, February 24, 2019
Saturday, February 23, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #19: Best Director
- Peter Jackson, They Shall Not Grow Old
- Joe & Anthony Russo, Avengers: Infinity War
Friday, February 22, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #18: Best Actor
- Josh Brolin, "Thanos" Avengers: Infinity Wars
- Paul Rudd, "Scott Lang/Ant-Man/Janet Van Dyne" Ant-Man and the Wasp
- Rami Malek, "Freddie Mercury" Bohemian Rhapsody
Thursday, February 21, 2019
Physical Copy of Poppies & Roses
A physical copy of Poppies & Roses: A Retelling of Beauty and the Beast will be available starting 2/23/2019!
It's taken some time to get it formatted and get the cover ready, but I have a proof copy and am very pleased with the result. Stay tuned!
It's taken some time to get it formatted and get the cover ready, but I have a proof copy and am very pleased with the result. Stay tuned!
Mini (Personal) Oscars #17: Best Actress
- Danielle MacDonald, "Willowdean Dixon" Dumplin'
- Emily Blunt, "Mary Poppins" Mary Poppins Returns
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
ReSounding the Archives Project
This is a really neat joint project by several of the big Virginia universities. They digitized World War I-era sheet music, performed it, and wrote essays giving context. Several of the songs are even available as recorded download. The song 'The Little Good For Nothing Is Good For Something After All' might have been written for my English character Clara Prescott, though I didn't know about it when I created her and it's an American song.
It's good to be reassured sometimes that the research one did was not in vain.
ReSounding the Archives Project
It's good to be reassured sometimes that the research one did was not in vain.
ReSounding the Archives Project
Best Picture #11 Review: You Can't Take It With You (1938)
You Can't Take it With You was cute. We laughed out loud several times, and the husband remarked of the main character (played by Lionel Barrymore, who we've seen before in Grand Hotel) "I like him. He's chaos personified."
The youngest scion of a family of free-spirited eccentrics has been dating the son of a wealthy banker. Turns out unbeknownst to either party the banker has been wanting to buy the family's house and tear it down to build a munitions factory. Needless to say when the families meet, hijinks ensue.
Jimmy Stewart, seven years before his iconic role as George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life, plays the banker's lovestruck son. It's actually a surprisingly subtle performance given how cheerfully uninhibited the character is, and Stewart does a good job portraying a brash, spoiled young man who has to figure out what's really important.
Watched: September 2, 2017
The youngest scion of a family of free-spirited eccentrics has been dating the son of a wealthy banker. Turns out unbeknownst to either party the banker has been wanting to buy the family's house and tear it down to build a munitions factory. Needless to say when the families meet, hijinks ensue.
Jimmy Stewart, seven years before his iconic role as George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life, plays the banker's lovestruck son. It's actually a surprisingly subtle performance given how cheerfully uninhibited the character is, and Stewart does a good job portraying a brash, spoiled young man who has to figure out what's really important.
Watched: September 2, 2017
Mini (Personal) Oscars #16: Best Supporting Actor
- Michael B. Jordan, "Eric Stevens/Killmonger" Black Panther
- Adam Driver, "Flip Zimmerman" BlacKkKlansman
- Nicholas Hoult, "Lord Harley" The Favourite
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #15: Best Supporting Actress
- Danai Gurira "Okoye" Black Panther
- Letitia Wright "Shuri" Black Panther
- Rachel Weisz "Lady Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough" The Favourite
Monday, February 18, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #14: Best Onscreen Duo
- Mila Kunis and Kate McKinnon, The Spy Who Dumped Me
- Winona Ryder and Keanu Reeves, Destination Wedding
- Hailee Steinfeld and Bumblebee, Bumblebee
Sunday, February 17, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #13: Best Ensemble Cast
- Solo: A Star Wars Story
- Tag
- Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse
Saturday, February 16, 2019
Best Picture #10 Review: The Life of Emile Zola (1937)
The biopic The Life of Emile Zola is on the surface a highlights reel of the life of one of the late 19th century's leading writers. Zola is best known for his connection to the infamous Dreyfus Affair in France, and that's the main focus of this movie, though it does spend a little time on Zola's early adulthood, his friendship with painter Cezanne, and attainment of fame as a muckraker-style writer.
Then comes the Dreyfus Affair, in which (for those who slept through this lesson in history class on the leadups to the first and second World Wars) an army captain is falsely accused of passing intelligence to the Germans and when their mistake is revealed the French High Command desperately tries to cover it up in order to save face. Zola eventually takes up the cause, and the movie's high point is his trial for libel in which he is eventually found guilty thanks to enormous pressure from the military and the French government. Zola flees to England, but eventually new people come to power who force the truth to come out. Zola and Dreyfus are eventually exonerated, but the day before Dreyfus is publicly acquitted Zola accidentally dies of carbon monoxide poison.
This movie is probably most interesting to examine in context rather than for its actual content, though Paul Muni admittedly gives a stirring performance as the titular character and the guy playing Dreyfus (Joseph Schildkraut) has long-suffering pathos for days. But this movie, while set in late 19th century France, was made in America in 1937. The Dreyfus Affair is one of the best-documented examples of European anti-Semitism prior to Hitler and his ilk, yet this movie conveniently forgets to mention that Dreyfus was Jewish, let alone that he was targeted *because* he was Jewish and therefore an easy scapegoat as a traitor and saboteur. Hitler didn't get his ideas about the Jews out of a vacuum. So it makes it an interesting move for those making this movie in 1937 to make Dreyfus such a sympathetic character who is to be pitied, yet fail to mention Dreyfus' Jewish heritage. No opinions from me on what it means, just an observation.
The character of Zola also makes several impassioned speeches directly to the camera about fighting tyranny and upholding the torch of liberty and justice and so on. Clearly a barely disguised reference to current events in 1937, though WWII would not begin for another two years and the US would not enter it for yet two more years after that. My favorite is the moment when the camera is placed in the jury box. We, the audience, are the jurors left to decide whether it is more important to let truth prevail or allow a few people get screwed over in the name of preserving public faith in the system and its leaders (here we are again, as in Mutiny on the Bounty, with the idea that the World's Worst Human Being is the man who decides to double down rather than admit to a mistake).
Mr. Trump, this whole Russia thing may get to you yet. (Which is a big jump from talking about a movie about the Dreyfus Affair. Or perhaps it isn't. Hmmm... I leave it to you, dear readers, to perhaps watch this currently overlooked film for yourselves and draw your own conclusions.)
Watched: August 3, 2017
Then comes the Dreyfus Affair, in which (for those who slept through this lesson in history class on the leadups to the first and second World Wars) an army captain is falsely accused of passing intelligence to the Germans and when their mistake is revealed the French High Command desperately tries to cover it up in order to save face. Zola eventually takes up the cause, and the movie's high point is his trial for libel in which he is eventually found guilty thanks to enormous pressure from the military and the French government. Zola flees to England, but eventually new people come to power who force the truth to come out. Zola and Dreyfus are eventually exonerated, but the day before Dreyfus is publicly acquitted Zola accidentally dies of carbon monoxide poison.
This movie is probably most interesting to examine in context rather than for its actual content, though Paul Muni admittedly gives a stirring performance as the titular character and the guy playing Dreyfus (Joseph Schildkraut) has long-suffering pathos for days. But this movie, while set in late 19th century France, was made in America in 1937. The Dreyfus Affair is one of the best-documented examples of European anti-Semitism prior to Hitler and his ilk, yet this movie conveniently forgets to mention that Dreyfus was Jewish, let alone that he was targeted *because* he was Jewish and therefore an easy scapegoat as a traitor and saboteur. Hitler didn't get his ideas about the Jews out of a vacuum. So it makes it an interesting move for those making this movie in 1937 to make Dreyfus such a sympathetic character who is to be pitied, yet fail to mention Dreyfus' Jewish heritage. No opinions from me on what it means, just an observation.
The character of Zola also makes several impassioned speeches directly to the camera about fighting tyranny and upholding the torch of liberty and justice and so on. Clearly a barely disguised reference to current events in 1937, though WWII would not begin for another two years and the US would not enter it for yet two more years after that. My favorite is the moment when the camera is placed in the jury box. We, the audience, are the jurors left to decide whether it is more important to let truth prevail or allow a few people get screwed over in the name of preserving public faith in the system and its leaders (here we are again, as in Mutiny on the Bounty, with the idea that the World's Worst Human Being is the man who decides to double down rather than admit to a mistake).
Mr. Trump, this whole Russia thing may get to you yet. (Which is a big jump from talking about a movie about the Dreyfus Affair. Or perhaps it isn't. Hmmm... I leave it to you, dear readers, to perhaps watch this currently overlooked film for yourselves and draw your own conclusions.)
Watched: August 3, 2017
Friday, February 15, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #11: Best Production Design
- A Wrinkle in Time
- The Nutcracker and the Four Realms
- Mary Poppins Returns
- Special Awards: Ocean's 8 for the Crown Jewels setpiece
Thursday, February 14, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #10: Best Visual Effects
- A Wrinkle in Time
- Ready Player One
- Avengers: Infinity War
- Bumblebee
- Aquaman
Mini (Personal) Oscars # 9: Best Original Song
- "Ashes" Deadpool 2 (Petey Martin, Jordan Smith, and Tedd T, performed by Celine Dion)
- "Busy Doing Nothing" Christopher Robin (Richard Sherman)
- "Can You Imagine That?" Mary Poppins Returns (Mark Shaiman, performed by Emily Blunt)
- "A Cover is Not the Book" Mary Poppins Returns (Mark Shaiman, performed by Emily Blunt and Lin-Manuel Miranda)
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Best Picture #9: The Great Ziegfeld (1936)
While not quite as insufferable as Broadway Melody 1929, the biopic The Great Ziegfeld (Oscar winner #9) is yet another movie about show business where we wander around following unlikable people. Namely, one person, Florenz Ziegfeld. This guy isn't even smarmy, he's just an asshole. He goes around lying and cheating everyone he knows, but always gets away with it because he's charming.
The movie is way too long to be enjoyable--over three hours. The overture alone (in which there's nothing on the screen but the word 'Overture') is probably more than five minutes long. The thing that probably clinches the Oscar for this one is all of the elaborately staged musical numbers, including the crown jewel of Ziegfeld's signature "A Pretty Girl is Like a Melody" with the huge spinning wedding-cake set piece. We keep taking time outs from the plot for these things; for someone used to modern Broadway shows where the songs move the plot forward or tell us about the characters, it feels like everything comes to grinding halt every time this happens.
The most interesting scenes in the movie are those with Frank Morgan as Jack Billings. He gets the best witty repartee. Morgan would go on a few years later to play the Wizard (plus various other small roles) in the Wizard of Oz. In an interesting coincidence, his future Oz costar Billie Burke, who plays Glinda the Good, was the real-life widow of Ziegfeld--and is portrayed in younger form by someone else (Myrna Loy) in this movie.
The women in this movie are either naive fools, sweet, biddable doormats, or both. There is the requisite early 20th century showbiz blackface act, though it's done in such a thoughtless kind of way that it seems like force of habit rather than actually trying to racially stereotype in a demeaning way. This doesn't excuse it, of course, but it's much less in-your-face Racism with a capitol R as the watermelon jokes in Cimarron.
Watched: July 15, 2017
The movie is way too long to be enjoyable--over three hours. The overture alone (in which there's nothing on the screen but the word 'Overture') is probably more than five minutes long. The thing that probably clinches the Oscar for this one is all of the elaborately staged musical numbers, including the crown jewel of Ziegfeld's signature "A Pretty Girl is Like a Melody" with the huge spinning wedding-cake set piece. We keep taking time outs from the plot for these things; for someone used to modern Broadway shows where the songs move the plot forward or tell us about the characters, it feels like everything comes to grinding halt every time this happens.
The most interesting scenes in the movie are those with Frank Morgan as Jack Billings. He gets the best witty repartee. Morgan would go on a few years later to play the Wizard (plus various other small roles) in the Wizard of Oz. In an interesting coincidence, his future Oz costar Billie Burke, who plays Glinda the Good, was the real-life widow of Ziegfeld--and is portrayed in younger form by someone else (Myrna Loy) in this movie.
The women in this movie are either naive fools, sweet, biddable doormats, or both. There is the requisite early 20th century showbiz blackface act, though it's done in such a thoughtless kind of way that it seems like force of habit rather than actually trying to racially stereotype in a demeaning way. This doesn't excuse it, of course, but it's much less in-your-face Racism with a capitol R as the watermelon jokes in Cimarron.
Watched: July 15, 2017
Monday, February 11, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #7: Best Soundtrack/Use of Music
- Ready Player One
- Deadpool 2
- Bohemian Rhapsody
- Dumplin'
- Bumblebee
Sunday, February 10, 2019
Saturday, February 9, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #5: Best Animated Feature
- Incredibles 2
- Ralph Breaks the Internet
- Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse
Friday, February 8, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #4: Best Costume Design
- Black Panther
- A Wrinkle in Time
- Ocean's 8
- Mary Poppins Returns
- Aquaman
Thursday, February 7, 2019
Best Picture #8: Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)
Mutiny on the Bounty is kind of hard to form a strong opinion about. It's another Clark Gable movie--he seems to be typecast as men who are mild assholes with good hearts. Here he plays Fletcher Christian, the eventual lead mutineer against the tyrannical Captain Bligh. Not that we don't take forever to get to the actual mutiny. We spend a massive amount of time establishing Bligh as the World's Worst Human Being (recall Hitler was in power when this movie was made in 1934, though no parallels are ever drawn between the two; this movie's idea of World's Worst Human Being is "Dude Who Refuses to Admit to a Mistake and Instead Doubles Down"--Bligh reminds me more of Trump than Hitler). Then we get an extended period with the crew just fooling around on Tahiti before we finally get to the titular mutiny. I assume this was to give Gable someone to ravish for the benefit of the women in the audience--he spends about ten seconds with a Tahitian woman (played of course by a white woman in an attempt at native dress) before they're having sex. Oddly, the publicity images for the movie seem to have mostly focused on this relationship rather than what the movie's actually about, which is the conflict between Bligh and Christian where neither of them really comes out ahead at the end even though Christian is clearly the one whose ideals are in the right place. Bligh doesn't get his revenge--Christian escapes capture--but Christian and the rest can never return to England and instead have to live out the rest of their lives on a tiny dot in the Pacific.
The movie takes an odd turn after the mutiny of having us almost sympathize with Bligh, adrift in his little boat with some of the men loyal to him, showing him inspiring them not to give up and actually displaying something resembling compassion. Then it's right back to World's Worst Human Being. I assume this was done to show us Bligh is more complex than he first appears, but it mostly feels out of place since we spent so much time before and after this sequence establishing his Worst Ever-ness. There are of course issues with historical accuracy, and though the mutiny did indeed happen, there has been much debate about how awful Bligh really was--certainly not as tyrannical and coldhearted as this movie depicts. In real life the mutineers who survived in the Pacific mostly finished each other off Lord of the Flies-style, so they certainly weren't saints. Indeed, they seem to have taken their freedom from the rule of law a bit far. But this movie is in fact based on a novel, which was based on the real life story, so most of the gross inaccuracies are overlook-able if not forgivable for the sake of telling a story.
Watched: July 6, 2017
The movie takes an odd turn after the mutiny of having us almost sympathize with Bligh, adrift in his little boat with some of the men loyal to him, showing him inspiring them not to give up and actually displaying something resembling compassion. Then it's right back to World's Worst Human Being. I assume this was done to show us Bligh is more complex than he first appears, but it mostly feels out of place since we spent so much time before and after this sequence establishing his Worst Ever-ness. There are of course issues with historical accuracy, and though the mutiny did indeed happen, there has been much debate about how awful Bligh really was--certainly not as tyrannical and coldhearted as this movie depicts. In real life the mutineers who survived in the Pacific mostly finished each other off Lord of the Flies-style, so they certainly weren't saints. Indeed, they seem to have taken their freedom from the rule of law a bit far. But this movie is in fact based on a novel, which was based on the real life story, so most of the gross inaccuracies are overlook-able if not forgivable for the sake of telling a story.
Watched: July 6, 2017
Mini (Personal) Oscars #3: Best Hair and Makeup
- Black Panther
- A Wrinkle in Time
- Dumplin'
- The Favourite
Wednesday, February 6, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #2: Best Fight Choreography
- Black Panther
- Avengers: Infinity War
- Deadpool 2
- Ant-Man and the Wasp
- Mission Impossible: Fallout
Tuesday, February 5, 2019
Mini (Personal) Oscars #1: Best Stuntwork
It's Mini Oscar time!
Counting down to the Oscar ceremony, I will be revealing my personal picks for movies I saw this year. I use some actual Oscar categories, and some I make up. Some Oscar categories, like Sound Mixing, I know so little about that to try to come up with nominees is pointless so I don't do those.I only give my nominees, not winners, in part because in some cases it's like comparing apples to oranges. Picking "best" at that point becomes so subjective as to be almost meaningless, especially since there's rarely such a thing as perfect.
For context, I saw 32 movies total that were released in 2018.
The first one I will do is one of my made-up categories:
Best Stuntwork
- Mission Impossible: Fallout
- The Spy Who Dumped Me
- Black Panther
Monday, February 4, 2019
Best Picture #7: It Happened One Night (1934)
For the first time since Wings, we've seen a Best Picture winner that was actually engaging throughout. It Happened One Night starring Clark Gable is a rom com, the last before the MPAA cracked down on things like sexual innuendos and bare chested men. This one actually felt like a movie to us: there was actual acting instead of people just speak-shouting lines as has been the tendency in Best Picture movies that were talkies. There was a plot that was tight and didn't meander. The writing was good and got in some witty lines.
Clark Gable plays a smarmy (I seem to use that word a lot in these reviews) reporter who is a bit of an asshole in a clever sort of way. He meets on a bus traveling from Florida to New York a spoiled heiress played by Claudette Colbert who has run away from her father to impulsively marry a man that she loves but is unaware he is only marrying her for her money. In exchange for his help reaching New York undetected by her father, she agrees to give the reporter an exclusive on her story. Of course they go from fighting to falling in love. There is the classic rom com misunderstanding that threatens to keep them apart forever (including the "what do you mean he didn't take the reward for my safe return? that means he loves me!" that Spaceballs later directly parodies. In fact, Spaceballs could be considered a loose sci fi remake that of course parodies a lot of other things in the process) but eventually they sort that out.
There are of course some misogynistic things that might be a little uncomfortable for the modern audience (including ass-slapping as punishment when the woman is a little too sassy and Clark Gable's character starts off as kind of a creeper who won't hear "leave me alone"), but this was made in 1934 and women, especially wealthy women, were still largely viewed as delicate objects who needed a man to look after them. Claudette Colbert's character has spunk, and she sets off on her own to traverse the entire East Coast by herself despite her sheltered upbringing, so she does have an independent streak and proves decently resourceful once she's done making naive mistakes.
Watched: July 1, 2017
Clark Gable plays a smarmy (I seem to use that word a lot in these reviews) reporter who is a bit of an asshole in a clever sort of way. He meets on a bus traveling from Florida to New York a spoiled heiress played by Claudette Colbert who has run away from her father to impulsively marry a man that she loves but is unaware he is only marrying her for her money. In exchange for his help reaching New York undetected by her father, she agrees to give the reporter an exclusive on her story. Of course they go from fighting to falling in love. There is the classic rom com misunderstanding that threatens to keep them apart forever (including the "what do you mean he didn't take the reward for my safe return? that means he loves me!" that Spaceballs later directly parodies. In fact, Spaceballs could be considered a loose sci fi remake that of course parodies a lot of other things in the process) but eventually they sort that out.
There are of course some misogynistic things that might be a little uncomfortable for the modern audience (including ass-slapping as punishment when the woman is a little too sassy and Clark Gable's character starts off as kind of a creeper who won't hear "leave me alone"), but this was made in 1934 and women, especially wealthy women, were still largely viewed as delicate objects who needed a man to look after them. Claudette Colbert's character has spunk, and she sets off on her own to traverse the entire East Coast by herself despite her sheltered upbringing, so she does have an independent streak and proves decently resourceful once she's done making naive mistakes.
Watched: July 1, 2017
Friday, February 1, 2019
Best Picture #6: Cavalcade (1933)
Ever wondered what Downton Abbey would look like if it had been made in the 1930s? That's Cavalcade in a nutshell, aka Oscar Best Picture winner #6. Two English families, one wealthy, one working class, live through the defining moments of the early 20th century. The wealthy family has two sons, the working class a daughter. As the story opens, the working class family are servants to the wealthy, but they eventually move out on their own. Both fathers fight in the Boer War, and both mourn the death of Queen Victoria with equal sadness at the passing of an era. The working class father becomes a drunkard and is eventually killed by being run over by a carriage. The kids grow up; one of the wealthy sons dies on the Titanic on his honeymoon (of course), the younger falls in love with the working class daughter (who has become an actress and a singer) and they have an affair all through WWI, but before they can decide whether to surmount the social barriers between them and marry he is killed on the day the Armistice is signed. We then fast forward to the "present," 1933, as the movie looks back on all the social changes the century has seen and wonders whether the future holds peace.
The irony. You people have no idea what's waiting down the road.
So yeah, it's basically Downton Abbey, including all the tragic deaths, if it were made in the 1930s with the benefit of living-memory hindsight instead of looking back a century. It's also probably the second-most entertaining of the Oscar winners thus far barring Wings. The silent film, the very first Oscar winner, still remains at the top of our list.
Watched: June 22, 2017
The irony. You people have no idea what's waiting down the road.
So yeah, it's basically Downton Abbey, including all the tragic deaths, if it were made in the 1930s with the benefit of living-memory hindsight instead of looking back a century. It's also probably the second-most entertaining of the Oscar winners thus far barring Wings. The silent film, the very first Oscar winner, still remains at the top of our list.
Watched: June 22, 2017
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
Best Picture #5: Grand Hotel (1932)
Grand Hotel, while not particularly to my taste and displayed a certain distinctive ennui typical of the between-World-Wars period, was certainly superior to Cimarron. It's easy to see how it won the Oscar, because it showcases a star-studded cast that includes Greta Garbo, Joan Crawford, and brothers Lionel and John Barrymore (Drew Barrymore's great-uncle and grandfather, respectively). As a result, the acting is top-notch. The characters' nuances and foibles and their interactions are luckily the showpiece rather than the plot or setting.
Watched: April 12, 2017
Watched: April 12, 2017
Saturday, January 26, 2019
Best Picture #4:Cimarron (1931)
Um, wow. So Cimarron was...interesting. In the "so...there's that" kind of way. Basically we're following around this smarmy asshole cowboy-type who thinks he's better than everyone else because he likes classic literature and the Bible, yet continually leaves his wife and kids for up to a decade at a time for...reasons. Basically he can't stand to put down roots and how dare anybody expect him to stick around, dammit, and because he's a handsome white man he can do exactly as he pleases. He's also a really great shot because how can you be a real man of the West without that skill? (There are several scenes of him doing things like shooting off people's ears, but the bullet never hits anything behind them. One would almost think the bullets were magic.) The focus of the movie is equally on his belabored wife who has to run the newspaper he starts and raise his kids while he's gallivanting all over Oklahoma. She of course as a faithful, loving wife falls immediately back into his arms with delight whenever he deigns to reappear and all of her accomplishments (she eventually gets herself elected to Congress--yes really) and her reservations about him are pushed aside in favor of his smarmy self-righteousness. The movie's narrative structure seems to indicate we're supposed to sympathize with these people, but by the end we really couldn't bring ourselves to care about either of them.
Modern-day audiences will obviously be offended by the racist stereotypes and jokes this movie proudly trots out--for example, our intrepid main character goes out of his way to point out a wagon of watermelons to the token black character, who is of course also mentally deficient so we don't feel too bad about laughing at him.::sigh:: Oh, 1930s humor. Making fun of two marginalized groups simultaneously. Ha ha.
I would imagine the movie gained its Best Picture largely on the first five minutes, which is a grand series of shots showing the rush to claim territory in Oklahoma, during which several cameramen and a bunch of extras were probably nearly run down Ben-Hur style. It is really impressive, but the movie after that just sort of wanders around following these people we don't really like. While nowhere near as bad as Broadway Melody, All Quiet and especially Wings are definitely still far superior.
Next up is Grand Hotel, which as I understand it is one of those movies where a whole bunch of unrelated people are shown to have interconnecting stories. (The genre to which Crash and Love Actually belong) Here's hoping it's better than this one, which overall was decidedly 'meh.
Watched: April 8, 2017
Modern-day audiences will obviously be offended by the racist stereotypes and jokes this movie proudly trots out--for example, our intrepid main character goes out of his way to point out a wagon of watermelons to the token black character, who is of course also mentally deficient so we don't feel too bad about laughing at him.::sigh:: Oh, 1930s humor. Making fun of two marginalized groups simultaneously. Ha ha.
I would imagine the movie gained its Best Picture largely on the first five minutes, which is a grand series of shots showing the rush to claim territory in Oklahoma, during which several cameramen and a bunch of extras were probably nearly run down Ben-Hur style. It is really impressive, but the movie after that just sort of wanders around following these people we don't really like. While nowhere near as bad as Broadway Melody, All Quiet and especially Wings are definitely still far superior.
Next up is Grand Hotel, which as I understand it is one of those movies where a whole bunch of unrelated people are shown to have interconnecting stories. (The genre to which Crash and Love Actually belong) Here's hoping it's better than this one, which overall was decidedly 'meh.
Watched: April 8, 2017
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
Oscar Nominees Best Picture 2019 Reaction
Of the Best Picture nominees, other than The Favourite and Roma I have actually at least heard of all of them. Good job to the Academy for not just picking tiny indie films no one outside of NYC and LA saw. Roma is actually a Netflix release, though it got a tiny theater release in order to be eligible for the Academy Awards.
I have seen Black Panther, BlacKkKlansman, and Bohemian Rhapsody, and all are deserving. I've heard good things about A Star is Born, Green Book and Vice, and The Favourite at least looks entertaining. Roma is a semi-biographical pic by director Alfonso Cuarón, who has had an...interesting career between directing one of the Harry Potter movies, Gravity and Children of Men.
I will be staging my own mini-Oscars in the weeks leading up to the awards night of the movies I've watched this year. I did this on facebook last year and folks seemed to like it, so I'll be expanding the audience this year.
I have seen Black Panther, BlacKkKlansman, and Bohemian Rhapsody, and all are deserving. I've heard good things about A Star is Born, Green Book and Vice, and The Favourite at least looks entertaining. Roma is a semi-biographical pic by director Alfonso Cuarón, who has had an...interesting career between directing one of the Harry Potter movies, Gravity and Children of Men.
I will be staging my own mini-Oscars in the weeks leading up to the awards night of the movies I've watched this year. I did this on facebook last year and folks seemed to like it, so I'll be expanding the audience this year.
Best Picture #3: All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)
All Quiet on the Western Front, while it had its interesting moments, was overall a little hard to follow, especially at the beginning. Everything that it portrays (war=hell, the bitter irony of war, an entire generation permanently emotionally scarred, the mass deaths, people at home having no way of understanding unless they were there, the romantic nationalistic jingoism that sent so many young dreamers to cruel, pointless deaths), Wings does better. So if you're looking for a WWI movie, Wings is still the more compelling choice in my opinion. Even if the extras sometimes don't quite know how to fake-die.
I don't need to say that All Quiet was far superior to Broadway Melody, however, in nearly every way it is possible to be. We weren't longing for it to be over in the first five minutes.
Next up is Cimarron, the first Western to win Best Picture. Westerns are not my thing and this one is kinda lengthy, so we'll see how well I manage.
Watched: March 5, 2017
Addendum, looking back from 2019: If you're interested in some of the early inspiration for what eventually became Poppies and Roses, be sure to check out both Wings and All Quiet. You'll recognize a lot of small details that (I hope) gave Poppies the right World War I "feel." The germs of the idea came from watching these two movies practically back-to-back.
I don't need to say that All Quiet was far superior to Broadway Melody, however, in nearly every way it is possible to be. We weren't longing for it to be over in the first five minutes.
Next up is Cimarron, the first Western to win Best Picture. Westerns are not my thing and this one is kinda lengthy, so we'll see how well I manage.
Watched: March 5, 2017
Addendum, looking back from 2019: If you're interested in some of the early inspiration for what eventually became Poppies and Roses, be sure to check out both Wings and All Quiet. You'll recognize a lot of small details that (I hope) gave Poppies the right World War I "feel." The germs of the idea came from watching these two movies practically back-to-back.
Sunday, January 13, 2019
Best Picture #2: The Broadway Melody of 1929
So Oscar Best Picture winner #2, Broadway Melody of 1929, was a complete bust. Let's just say it has not aged well. The plot was inane and the characters insufferable. I'm not sure whether this is an issue with voice recording equipment back then or whether that's how "talkie" performances were done in 1929, but all the voices were shrill, nasal whines and just a little too fast to be understood well, and unfortunately there was a lot of shouting. I'm surprised I didn't have a headache by the end. Probably didn't only because we stopped paying close attention about 1/4 of the way through.
This set the precedent of Movies About Show Business winning Best Picture--this was the very first of those. It was also one of the first movies to have a sequence in Technicolor, though that segment only exists in black and white now, and one of the first movie musicals. For technical achievement alone I see why it won the Oscar. It certainly wasn't because it was a compelling movie like Wings.
Watched: March 1, 2017
This set the precedent of Movies About Show Business winning Best Picture--this was the very first of those. It was also one of the first movies to have a sequence in Technicolor, though that segment only exists in black and white now, and one of the first movie musicals. For technical achievement alone I see why it won the Oscar. It certainly wasn't because it was a compelling movie like Wings.
Watched: March 1, 2017
Tuesday, January 1, 2019
Best Picture #1 Review: Wings (1927)
Note that the first thirty Oscar Best Picture reviews or so are back-posts. Date originally watched will be noted at the bottom of the post.
I'm not sure what I was expecting from a silent movie made in 1927 (which is officially now the oldest movie I've ever watched, the previous was Disney's Snow White made in 1937), but it exceeded my expectations. It's worth a watch if you can get your hands on it; it was remastered in 2012 and given a DVD release. We got it out of the local public library. We were surprised at how engaged we were.
Watched: February 26, 2017
I'm not sure what I was expecting from a silent movie made in 1927 (which is officially now the oldest movie I've ever watched, the previous was Disney's Snow White made in 1937), but it exceeded my expectations. It's worth a watch if you can get your hands on it; it was remastered in 2012 and given a DVD release. We got it out of the local public library. We were surprised at how engaged we were.
Watched: February 26, 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)