American Murder: The Family Next Door (2020; d. Jenny Popplewell)
Very amateurish. Perhaps interesting to those who weren’t following the case as closely as I was. I’m STILL following the case. Chris Watts seems to think he’s going to be able to appeal his conviction, and thinks he will get out. Sir, you are never ever ever getting out of prison. This Netflix doc has no talking heads or interviews with the detectives or friends or whatever – it’s all just “found” footage – the body cam footage, the interrogation, the lie detector test, and all the social media posts. Which, yes, was one of the distinguishing characteristics of the story as it unfolded: we had more information, instantaneously, than we normally do. But … I don’t know. It left me cold. Your best bet if you are interested in learning about this truly horrifying and also compelling case (so compelling that the FBI and CBI detectives who had initially interrogated Chris Watts traveled up to his prison, post-conviction, to interview him AGAIN – because THEY couldn’t let it go.) is to head over to YouTube, and check out the documentaries uploaded there. Chris Watts. We’ll never get to the bottom of why he did what he did. Enjoy prison, psycho.
The Leftovers, Season 3
The ending flattened me. As I said before, when writing about the other seasons, this show was so out there in its conception and also its willingness to go far far beyond what is expected … that I literally did not know where it was going. It seems like some people had a problem with that, like they were just trying any old thing … but I disagree with that. I think they were far out on the edge of imagination, using all their powers to plumb the depths of the subject of grief and loss – that yes, in that environment anything DOES go. It’s not about the story-line, it’s about the subject itself. Phenomenal. Blown away.
On the Rocks (2020; d. Sofia Coppola)
Sofia Coppola gets criticized for the silliest things, things other directors are not criticized for. She’s criticized for nepotism, for privilege. Well, she can’t help the family she was born into. Would you rather she not get into the business, not follow HER dreams? Would you rather her say to herself, “It’s not fair to other people that my father is famous, therefore I will NOT do what I want to do with my life to give other people a chance.” What world do you live in? If you think that her last name wasn’t also a DETRIMENT to her being taken seriously … I mean, your bitchy comments prove the point. There are legitimate problems in the world. Children of famous people also becoming famous is so trivial I’m bored even writing about it. She is criticized for doing movies only about people who live in a rarified world of wealth and privilege. Well, but, that’s how she grew up, that’s what she knows. Just Imagine how much she would be criticized if she tried to do a movie about a working-class family living in Arkansas, or an immigrant family trying to make it. You know? What the hell is this woman supposed to do? She is also criticized for the low-key-ness of her work, like where is the drama, where is the climax? Well, but, that’s not what she’s about. That’s not her sensibility. At all. Other directors follow their sensibilities. She follows hers. I don’t know whether Somewhere will ever find its proper audience – it may be a very niche kind of film – but I consider it a masterpiece, and maybe her best film. It’s very European. Antoninini-esque. She is way out beyond her contemporaries in what she attempted in that film. And the overall reaction was a big yawn. This DISMISSIVE attitude towards her work is really aggravating. I wonder if some of my frustration comes from … well, here’s how I have thought of it. When you go to sessions at the Actors Studio, held on Tuesdays and Fridays, rain or shine, actors get up to work. There are usually two scenes per session. The actors work on their scenes, or monologues, or whatever. When they finish, the moderator – people like Ellen Burstyn or Harvey Keitel or Estelle Parsons – usually say, “What were you working on?” They don’t immediately weigh in with their “take” on what the actor did. They want to know: What were you working on? Because then they can craft their response to address what the actors was working on. Was the actor working on the drunkenness of the character? Was the actor working on the “moment before”? Was the actor trying to connect to the dialogue for the first time? Whatever it is, the comments should ONLY address those things. This keeps the session from derailing into “I liked it” or “I didn’t like it” – which is irrelevant and serves no one. Who the hell cares what you think? What was the actor working on, and did they succeed or not? This kind of thinking is so engrained in me from acting classes that it is in operation in my criticism. I am trying to understand what the artist is going for – and once I determine that (if I can – sometimes I can’t) – then I try to address whether or not they succeeded. This saves me from having ONLY my personal preference to rely on. It also saves me when I’m reviewing something that doesn’t seem to have been made “for me.” Okay, so it wasn’t made “for me”, it was made for 13-year-old boys. Let me see if I can figure out if it works on the level it is MEANT to work, not complain about why it wasn’t more made “for me.” Different movies work in different ways. Try to figure out the way it works. Or doesn’t. Or … it’s TRYING to work in this particular way, but it is FAILING to do so. That’s valid too. Anyway, I feel like Sofia Coppola has done enough good work, or at least interesting work, to deserve serious focus. Just accept her sensibility and stop demanding she do something else. Her thing may not be your cup of tea. That’s cool. Christopher Nolan isn’t my cup of tea. But I recognize that my way isn’t the highway. And if Christopher Nolan suddenly tried to do a bittersweet rom-com … that may not be in his wheelhouse, and he knows it, and he’s doing what HE wants to do, following how HIS mind operates.
All of that being said as (lengthy) preamble: This marks the third time Coppola has worked with Bill Murray. I had always hoped they would come together again. She really really “gets” him. She lets him be. She lets him do his thing. It’s a gentle little father-daughter drama, and kind of kooky in its conception. The father encourages the daughter to basically stalk her husband, who is maybe possibly cheating. This is really about the father-daughter bond, and its complications. I wonder at the autobiographical potentialities of this. I really enjoyed this. It’s gentle. It’s soft. Coppola’s stuff often is. She’s not going for the big moments, the climaxes. She can go through whole films without huge confrontations. Lost in Translation‘s most important line – most emotion-filled line – is whispered. We don’t hear it.
Goodfellas (1990; d. Martin Scorsese)
I re-watched this (for the umpteenth time) as I read Glenn Kenny’s new book Made Men, about the making of Goodfellas. I highly recommend the book!
Out of Thin Air (2017; d. Dylan Howitt)
This is on Netflix right now. A documentary about a notorious disappearance-case in Iceland in 1976, where all these suspects confess. But who really did it and what really happened? The doc is also a good primer on Iceland itself, and why this case was such a huge deal.
American Graffiti (1973; d. George Lucas)
A magical movie. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen it. I first saw it when I was around Mackenzie Phillip’s age – or at least the age of the character she plays. She was my “way in.” Paul Le Mat was my JAM. I just wrote about him and went OFF on angles and archetypes, because that’s how I roll.
Supernatural, Season 15, episode 14 “Last Holiday” (2020; d. Eduardo Sánchez)
The series is back airing episodes, only a couple more to go to complete this 15-year run. It’s been off the air for months. They shut down production only two episodes away from finishing. They have since finished filming those eps – after everyone went under strict Canadian quarantine – and so here we go, wrapping things up. I found a lot to like in this, but what I found to like is indicative of how far we’ve fallen. I hate the bunker, but I was glad this took place entirely in the bunker because it focused the script. I loved that it was just Sam and Dean. I’ve been hungry for that. I was also relieved that the larger arc – Chuck, Amara, worlds exploding – none of which interests me particularly – was not really present. This also, though, shows that … the team is really not in charge of what they’re doing. When I say “team” I mean Dabb et al. They don’t seem to have an idea of what they’re doing. Or they HAVE an idea and I just don’t like the idea. Or … I have a hard time even RETAINING the idea, it’s so Byzantine in its complications. Just one small example of how Dabb et al miss so many subtleties: there were many tie-ins here with A Very Supernatural Christmas, one of the most beloved episodes of the entire series – well, at least to those fans who don’t operate under the mistaken belief that the series started in Season 4. But … this episode missed doing tie-ins deliberately. They don’t seem to know what the series MEANS. Like: Dean and Sam and the holidays – that was the whole point of the earlier Christmas episode. Dean yearns for a holiday, Sam is Grinch-like. None of that was really explored here. Has their experience changed? Has their perspective changed? What does holiday mean to them? I liked the goofball energy – I liked the light-heartedness of it. Everything is normally so grim and earnest and suuuuper serious. Again, this show isn’t supposed to BE like that. And again, with the focus on Jack. At this point I’m like: stop talking about killing him. Just KILL him. Continuing to stand around TALKING about Jack is NOT DRAMATIC.
Rebecca (1940; d. Alfred Hitchcock)
I re-watched this classic because I was reviewing the new one on Netflix. It’s such a melodramatic Gothic romance, and the emotions are all just so HUGE.
I’m Thinking of Ending Things (2020; d. Charlie Kaufman)
I’m going to post what I wrote on Instagram. This kind of covers it:
Charlie Kaufman’s I’M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS flattened me. I was worn OUT. Tears streamed down my face during one sequence, and I was almost embarrassed even though I was alone. (I miss Hope!) Then 5 minutes later I was cracking up at the audacity of the very same sequence. But I was really unnerved by the film, really shook up. It made me think of Walter Benjamin’s concept of the “angel of history.” The angel moves forward … but it faces backward – looking back behind it. And what it sees is a millennia of ruin. As it moves through time, moving forward, looking backward, it sees more and more ruins being created behind it. All as its body moves into the future. That’s what this movie made me think of. You’ll have to see it to understand why I say this. Benjamin’s view is not a hopeful one. In fact, it is one born of horror. Which makes sense considering the time in which he lived. Not to mention how he “ended.” But Benjamin’s view is not just pinned down in one era. It’s not a hopeful view of the world or of man’s chances in this world. I’M THINKING OF ENDING THINGS is also not hopeful, even though there are moments of crazy whimsy, and just the STRUCTURE of it is so dazzling it will keep you guessing, keep you interested, and not just interested but invested. The film deals with time, and the ravages of time. It deals with memories, and how memories work, and how memory is unreliable. Things change. You remember things differently. You find new perspectives. You maybe even try to re-write your own history, trying to find a better narrative, a narrative that will provide comfort, as opposed to nag you with regrets. In this respect, the film reminded me of my own life. I just wrote that “Tsk Tsk” piece and I wrote it from a great remove from the events it described. Memory is fickle. I’m sure I got a lot of things wrong (or “wrong”) and I’m sure if he told the story it might be totally different. But as I was writing my way back into that … romance, no other way to put it … I was aware of the abyss of time between then and now. I tried to put that feeling into my writing. I have thought about the “Tsk tsk” moment for literally years, trying to understand it, and also trying to grapple with its import and impact. Was it really that huge? Well, right now, in this moment, yes, it does seem huge. That might change. Time erases things, time turns things into ruins (the “angel of history”). The movie evokes the spooky feeling of the first 2 months of my lockdown: The past happening alongside the present. The past rising up from out of the past, entering into my present. It made me feel like a ghost, like I lost substance. That’s what the movie made me feel. Jessie Buckley (been a fan since Beast – my review for Ebert here) and Jessie Plemons (SO happy he’s flourishing – The Irishman, The Post, The Master – I remember him in the great Observe and Report too!) They both give extraordinary performances. I’ve seen a lot of pieces like “here’s an explanation of this movie”, “heres what it all means.” People who don’t know what the movie means should consider themselves lucky. To me it was almost a documentary. It’s surreal, yes, and you’re not sure which end is up … but for me, that’s my experience of reality a lot of the time, particularly when strong emotions come into play. Toni Colette and David Thewlis were superb – those roles must have been so fun. Plus: Jud from Oklahoma and Gena Rowlands’ raspberry gesture in Woman Under the Influence? In the same scene?? A relitigation of Baby It’s Cold Outside? (I’m on poor Jake’s side of that tiresome argument.) William Wordsworth’s “Intimations of Immortality”? Pauline Kael? All in the same movie? I was not prepared for the LEVEL of identification I had with this film. I’m still shook.
See this film.
The Opening Act (2020; d. Steve Byrne)
I loved this movie! I reviewed for Ebert. I felt shy and thrilled when Cedric the Entertainer, on his Instagram page, posted a screengrab of the paragraph I devoted to his work, and thanked me personally. I ADORE his work and have for years, and I am happy to get a chance to pay tribute to it.
The Vow, episode 9, “The Fall” (2020; d. Jehane Noujaim and Karim Amer)
Some people seem irritated by the structure of The Vow. It’s not critical enough. It doesn’t condemn hard enough. I disagree with this. I also think its structure is part of the point it’s making. It wants you to get WHY these people joined this group. It wants you to feel the appeal. It wants you to understand why intelligent people could be so hoodwinked. These questions have crucial implications in our world, where critical thinking is NOT at a premium. I still haven’t seen Seduced yet, the new one, featuring India Oxenberg’s experience (SO glad she got out) … but I will. LOOK at the body language of the woman sitting to his left. He just got a sentence of 120 years in prison. Good.
Rebecca (2020; d. Ben Wheatley)
God, this was awful. I reviewed for Ebert.
Killing Eleanor (2020; d. Rich Newey)
A film currently making the film festival circuit – it just won Best Narrative Feature at the Savannah Film Festival! It was written by Annika Marks (who also stars, who also produced). Annika played “Neve” in July and Half of August, the short film I wrote. She has been working on Killing Eleanor for about 10 years, and I hope to eventually interview her about that process AND about her relationship with Jenny O’Hara, the incredible actress who plays opposite her in the film. (Note to Supernatural fans: she played the ex-nun in Mother’s Little Helper, where the entire episode she spent in conversation with Jared Padalecki, and it was so good! Here, she takes center stage. Eventually Killing Eleanor will be available for all to see – as of now, it’s still in the festival route. Keep your eyes peeled, and I’ll be sure to give a heads up here. I wrote about the film here.
Supernatural, Season 15, episode 15 “Gimme Shelter” (2020; d. Matt Cohen)
“I would never hurt you.” For me, that’s the only line that matters.
The Boys, Season 1 (2019)
I finally started watching. Both Jim and Mitchell are big fans. I am not into superheroes, like, at all, but they both said that this show basically interrogates and deconstructs the whole superheroes thing. The superheroes are the villains. Also, of course, I knew I had to watch it because it’s Erik Kripke’s baby AND Jensen Ackles will be joining the cast as Soldier Boy in Season 3. So whatever, I was quarantining in an undisclosed location, and I am filled with anxiety and stress and anticipatory mourning … and I also missed having The Leftovers to binge. I need BINGING in my life, it’s helped get me through the dumpster fire that is 2020. So I started the show and was hooked almost immediately. I also felt the whole Kripke THING in it. It’s similar to Supernatural, in that I can feel Kripke’s influence and sensibility, his love of cars and grease-monkeys and men – in all their mess and insecurities and failings, and how men fail each other, how manliness itself is something to at least LOOK at: what does it MEAN? Why does it get so TOXIC? (Phone call for John Winchester.) All of that is here – I mean, just look at the title – a very non-2020 title. But I really liked it. It’s difficult, thorny, entertaining. So okay, I’m in. Anthony Starr, as Homelander, is freakin’ unbelievable. Great seeing Elizabeth Shue with a nice big meaty role as well.
The Craft (1996; d. Andrew Fleming)
It holds up. Its aesthetic may be goth-emo-1990s but it’s amazing how far that aesthetic travels. Fairuza Balk … she should be a huge star. But at least we have what we have from her. A sui generis actress. Willing to go into the pits of darkness in her work. A quality I so appreciate in our current era of girlish smiley leading ladies.
The Craft: Legacy (2020; d. Zoe Lister-Jones)
Here is an example where I can see what they were going for, but they did not succeed. Everything they wanted to do is extremely well-meaning … and yet it assumes that the earlier film somehow DIDN’T address these things, or portray these things. I found it very shallow. The whole “female friendship is empowering” thing – spoken about by all the actresses and director in every interview – is pretty weakly done, and also eradicates potential conflicts. Nobody is a three-dimensional character. And there’s this unwillingness to explore darkness, to allow women/girls to be dark, to have dark impulses, hostility, anger, rage … it’s very common right now and it is REALLY hurting screenplays. Of course I am all for girls feeling empowered in their lives, but NOT if it means a script-writer can’t create complex characters. I reviewed for Ebert.
Supernatural, Season 15, episode 16 “Drag Me Away (From You)” (2020; d. Amyn Kaderali)
Is anyone else irritated that the childhood friend is named “Travis”? It’s along the lines of naming Danneel’s character “Jo.” There are a million names in the world. Why are you RECYCLING names? My favorite line is this was from the waitress: “We’ve got iceberg lettuce. With ranch.”
Murder by Numbers (2002; d. Barbet Schroeder)
I wrote a huge thing about my love of this movie years and years ago. It’s on here somewhere. But it was long ago enough that I put it on my pitch-list to cover in my Film Comment column, particularly Sandra Bullock’s work. I think it’s her best performance. And “underrated” doesn’t even begin to cover this movie’s status. It’s also the introduction of Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt to the screen (at least in substantial roles), and they are absolute PHENOMS. My GOD. I love this movie. Allison had never seen it and she and I have spent the last weeks holed up in a cabin surrounded by falling autumn leaves. So I made her watch it and it was so much fun.
Nice Guys (2016; d. Shane Black)
In a perfect world, this would have been the start of a hugely successful franchise. Member when franchises DIDN’T mean superheroes? (I feel the same way about The Heat. Nice Guys wasn’t a success – which baffles and enrages me – but The Heat was a hit. They should have milked that shit. Do more!) Allison had never seen this one either – so we stayed on the Ryan Gosling train, to revel in this movie. I wrote a little bit about it here.
In the Land of Women (2007; d. Jonathan Kasdan)
Now it was Allison’s turn to show ME a movie. I had scrolled through this before, to watch Kristen Stewart’s scene, for one of the pieces I wrote about her, but had never seen the whole thing. Allison loves it, so we settled in. It is a lovely movie, with wonderful performances from Stewart, Meg Ryan, Olympia Dukakis and a total crush-worthy Adam Brody. I loved it.
The Skeleton Twins (2014; d. Craig Johnson)
Allison and I share a deep love for this dark beautiful movie. It wasn’t marketed correctly. And therefore audiences didn’t groove to it. They went in expecting a wacky comedy. Instead, they were “forced” to watch this complicated painful story about a truly fucked-up pair of twins (Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader). While it has hilarious moments, it’s really about how these two survived their childhood – or … really, neither of them did. They both struggle along with lifelong damage, but the damage manifests in different ways. Both of them are SO GOOD as is Luke Wilson. I wrote about this movie here.
The Undoing (2020; d. Susanne Bier)
Dammit, this was so GOOD. Allison had already seen it, but then re-watched it with me. We love watching things together. We stop and start so many times it would drive other people crazy. We only watched the first episode, and were horrified that we had to WAIT for episode 2. So spoiled have we become with binging. I NEED to know what happened. And I will reiterate what I said last year: Hugh Grant “went away” for a while. About a Boy was a signal of things to come. But in the past couple of years, he has suddenly blossomed into an older man who is doing all KINDS of radical things in these GREAT character parts. No more leading-man stuff. I mean, maybe he’ll do that again, but he’s just been showing up so HARD in all these great projects and kicking everyone’s ass around him. Paddington 2. If you haven’t seen it yet, I don’t even know what to say. You don’t need to see the first Paddington. You don’t even have to care about Paddington. It’s just a wonderful wonderful movie and he is UPROARIOUS in it. Best of all, he reminds me of the character actors in classic Hollywood, people like Walter Catlett or Thomas Mitchell – these versatile dudes who could do subtle but could also do BROAD. Then he did Florence Foster Jenkins – he was practically the best thing in it – plus A Very English Scandal – again: phenomenal work from him. It’s thrilling. And here he is again. I am already so INTRIGUED by this series. Directed by Suzanne Bier, no less!
Miss Stevens (2016; d. Julia Hart)
I so loved this movie when I saw it in 2016. Because Lily Rabe was in The Undoing, I mentioned this movie to Allison. She had never heard of it. Nobody has. It should have been bigger. This kind of movie just doesn’t have a chance to “be big” anymore and our cinematic culture is the poorer for it. This is early Timothy Chalamet too – well, we’re still in the early stages, in general – plus Lili Reinhart – who is also excellent. But LILY RABE. This feels like a 1970s-era movie, and Lily Rabe would have been a huge leading-lady star in the 1970s. Seek this movie out. It’s excellent!
The Queen’s Gambit (2020; d. Scott Frank)
It was a snowy bitter-cold day. Allison and I settled down to watch it, a fire crackling in the fireplace. 9 hours later, we emerged. I think we might have stopped for lunch … but not really. We could not stop. “Sheila, we have been watching television for nine hours.” “I know.” That’s the power of this thing. It hit me on such a deeply satisfying level I’m still vibrating with it. It’s basically one of my favorite genres: underdog-sports-movie, only here the “sport” is chess. Ana Taylor-Joy is one of the best new actresses on the scene, and she has something her contemporaries don’t have … maybe it’s a bravery? A not giving a shit whether or not she’s likable, relatable, or even understandable? (Jessie Buckley, mentioned above, is the same way.) She was so good in The Witch, she was a DREAM in Emma and here … my GOD it’s incredible. Now the best thing about watching this with Allison is she is a chess fiend. She said there were periods in her life when she was so into chess that she would walk down a New York sidewalk and perceive everyone around her as chess pieces, the pavement stones as squares on the chess board – she felt everyone moving around her like a chess match. There was one memorable day when we sat in the lobby of the posh W hotel, had huge glasses of red wine, and she tried to teach me how to play. So you haven’t LIVED until you’ve watched a chess movie with someone who knows the game. She kept pausing it so she could analyze the board. She would explain to me what was happening. Sometimes she had to envision 4, 5 plays ahead in order to understand the import of the moment. It was SO MUCH FUN. As of now, I have no more to say – I’m still absorbing it – I will for sure watch again. In my opinion, it doesn’t make one false move.
I Want My MTV (2019; d. Patrick Waldrop, Tyler Measom)
Allison worked at MTV during its heyday in the mid-late 90s. She had been telling me about this documentary – many of the people interviewed she knew. I met Kurt Loder through Allison. This documentary was on A&E and was a fascinating look at the birth of this ENTITY which then took over the world (for better or worse, mostly worse in my opinion). It’s hard to fathom just how much it changed the world, it changed music, it changed movies, it changed everything. Reality TV. Thanks, MTV! But how it BEGAN is so interesting, it was the OPPOSITE of corporate. And then there’s the whole “we don’t play black artists” thing – which is indefensible and was also addressed in the documentary. That David Bowie interview … WOW.
I spent much of every hour of The Vow yelling at the screen. “Why??” As in why, when someone is introduced to you as a “world-class scientist” and the man with the “highest-ever recorded I.Q.,” would you not, once you’ve stopped laughing, go out and search for justification of these claims? The people The Vow focuses on were not stupid, not uneducated, and yet they didn’t do this. I slogged through all episodes and emerged unenlightened. If you watch Seduced, you learn why–how it was done, how it was targeted, what the strategies were. You also get great respect for the Oxenbergs, especially Granny Oxenburg, who, upon attending an early cult meeting, responded with “This is rubbish!” Seriously, Seduced is worth a look, and it’s much shorter.
// would you not, once you’ve stopped laughing, go out and search for justification of these claims? //
I KNOW. and just one look at him should give you pause.
I was so interested at the one woman – maybe in episode 6? – who was his legal counsel – she said she felt red flags immediately. He struck her as kind of gross and he always kissed everyone on the lips. But she ignored said red flags.
// You also get great respect for the Oxenbergs, especially Granny Oxenburg, who, upon attending an early cult meeting, responded with “This is rubbish!” //
I had great respect for Catherine in The Vow!! I will for sure be watching Seduced. I’m really glad they put it out there – and I am so relieved India is out and seems to be doing as well as can be expected. Amazing that there are still “loyalists”, dancing around like idiots outside of the jail in Brooklyn where he is incarcerated.
I appreciated The Vow because of all that FOOTAGE of this sociopath in action.
Okay Jincy I watched the first three episodes of Seduced – I think the final one is airing tonight? – and I am blown away. It is the missing piece – you’re right – it’s all about the why of it. SO glad they did this and kudos to India for 1. getting out and 2. sharing her deprogramming journey.
I love The Boys. Anthony Starr is really a force of nature. Amoral and needy and entitled. Capricious as a god. As you might expect, there’s a bit more backstory on him in season 2. I don’t know the comic series, but as you said Kripke really delves into all of the vicious loyalty that men can get into with each other. Morality and rough compassion and just-because-I-want-to. Karl Urban and Jack Quaid are also very good. Yesterday I had a close friend tell me that he couldn’t speak to me for the next few months because of who I voted for. I sent him a picture of myself flipping the bird, with an “I Voted 2020” sticker on my hand and a “here’s something to remember me by if we don’t speak for a while” message. Guy stuff like that Kripke gets.
Isn’t The Nice Guys just one of those movies that you can put on whenever you want and just have a great 2 hours?
I don’t know anything about chess, so I couldn’t clock the playing on The Queen’s Gambit, but I’ve read the same thing that Allison said: the chess is real. I follow Garry Kasparov on Twitter, so I’ve had my eye out to see if he makes any comments.
I’m thinking I want to rewatch it soon. I did ask myself the Cary Grant/Ingrid Bergman Notorious question – what happens afterwards? Does Beth kick the pills and booze? I am not hopeful.
I also love seeing Harry Melling in things, after seeing him as Dudley Dursley in the Harry Potter movies. He was also the evil pharmaceutical enterpreneur in Charlize’s The Old Ones earlier this year. The guy is doing good work. I also thought that Marielle Heller as Beth’s adoptive mom was a great character. I thought Beth’s description of her as stuck, not pathetic, was insightful. And how MH played the character. I liked that exchange because it let us see that Beth could really understand someone else if that person caught her attention and sympathy. It wasn’t a natural sort of thing for her to get people, but if she found herself caring for someone, she brought her full focus onto that person.
And I was asking myself where I had seen Thomas Brodie-Sangster before. I hadn’t seen any of his movies since Nanny McPhee in ’05 – the guy has a memorable face. I liked his character a lot. The helpful arrogance.
Speaking of guy stuff, I don’t know chess culture but I assume it’s like math competition and robotics competition culture in that people share helpful info between competitions. I think we talked a little about this when we talked about the film Computer Chess. There’s some “I know shit that you don’t” posturing, but an ethos of improving the overall competition – helping everyone get better.
// Guy stuff like that Kripke gets. //
I don’t know, I’ve seen a lot of women doing stuff like this too. lol It’s more about unmanaged feelings, rage, equating pain with weakness – all the “let me check if you have lady parts” thing if any man expresses vulnerability or uncertainty … there are people who watched SPN and didn’t hear the CRITIQUE in all of that stuff – they think the show BELIEVES it as opposed to CRITIQUING it. The Boys is even more hard-hitting in a way. Because Butcher is … I can’t help but keep comparing this to SPN: Butcher is, in a way, even more off the charts than John Winchester was – I love how in Season 2 they’re letting the arc play out of Butcher vs. whatshisname (Dennis Quaid’s kid) – you keep waiting for Butcher to soften a bit – and he just doesn’t.
I continue to be blown away by Anthony Starr. He is truly mad.
There’s one shot of Black Noir (first of all: the name is so STUPID. it’s such a funny joke.) – sitting on the floor of the hallway, reading the news alerts on his phone about Compound V – his shoulders shaking with sobs. lol There’s a lot of wit here too – I love it!
I’m into Season 2 now – and Stormfront has arrived – nice to name her character after the #1 white supremacist hate-site on the internet. I don’t even want to get into the alarming moment circa 2004 or something when I suddenly was on their radar – because I posted an excerpt from the letter Tolkien wrote to the German publishers who asked if he was Aryan. White supremacists are all big Tolkien fans too so they were all suuuuuuper bummed to see their idol push back against the question itself.
// Isn’t The Nice Guys just one of those movies that you can put on whenever you want and just have a great 2 hours? //
Yes! I love it so much.
// Does Beth kick the pills and booze? I am not hopeful. //
I think she’ll be fine although she’ll never be normal. She’s a chess weirdo. I loved her transformation over the course of the thing – and I love how she was a clothes-horse. Her outfits were outrageous. It was just a little thing about her character that wasn’t really explained but makes perfect sense. She grew up wearing one dress every day. Of course she’d go nuts with the clothes the first chance she got.
Marielle Heller – YES. One of my new favorite directors – I had no idea how good she was as an actress. That character broke my heart in a way – but I also loved how she put her whole life into her adopted daughter’s chess gift. Of course she had ulterior motives – she needed the money – but whatever gets you there, right? I really loved her performance.
I loved how once she showed her skill the sexism kind of fell away. I loved the support she had from all those guys – huddled by the phone during her final match – it was really moving.
Couple of things to say here :
First I do agree that “The Leftovers” has not usurped its reputation as one of the “best” show ever (whatever that all means of course). It certainly was one of the most unexpected ones. People seem to prefer season 2 and 3 but as flawless as season 2 is I still think season 1 did pack a stronger punch – also in term of cinematography it’s much “colder” than the 2 others so visually it stands out. I see season 2 more as a “bridge” between 1 and 3 which is perfect since season 3 is basically the show working at its highest level and potential – it single handedly justifies the whole journey.
It’s extraordinary as well how the show simply DOESN’T care at all about its own plot it’s so refreshing at a time where plot seems to overtake a lot of the television and movie production at the expense of depth. Sure they do let slip in the end some explaination for the mystery but we’re not even sure it’s a reliable one and it’s clear that it doesn’t really mean anything. That last episode is SOOOOOOO anticlimactic but in a perfect way ! It’s the macro story that becomes micro again, the true purpose of the story. Overall there is so much depth and emotions !
I love pretty much EVERYTHING about this show : the actors (Christopher Eccleston, among many others, is phenomenal), the dialogues, the photography, the soundtrack (both openings are fantastic and Max Richter score is simply out of this world), the settings… Although I’m not crazy about the teenager characters they seem a bit shallow to me and I could do without. But that’s really a nitpick.
Second I recall you already said some good things about “The Heat” in some of your previous reviews and I have to say I simply adored this movie it was the perfect subversion of the usually very masculine buddy cop comedy trope. I loved Bullock and Mccarthy and among other things I loved that they were able to express their sexuality as much as their male counterparts (in say “Lethal Weapon” for exemple). And it was so funny !
Third as a fan of the original comics I have to say I really enjoyed the first season of “The Boys” and not only because it was another Kripke effort. Both casting choices for Homelander and Billy Butcher were simply perfect and the show went a long way to integrate some of the more… disturbing and otherwise simply unfilmable materials of the comics. Of course a lot of story bits were oversimplified and I regret that they didn’t because of obvious budget limitations fully embrace the vision of a world entirely overrun by super-heroes (we get like a dozen heroes onscreen instead of a few hundreds) but they did a really good job of giving a proper characterization to the Seven members (A-Train or The Deep in particular) than in the comics – in which most of them are pretty shallow. As it is, the first season was a nice companion to the comics because it seemed more interested in the Seven than in the titular “Boys”.
All that said I have to say with regret that I really didn’t enjoy the second season : it was a bumbling mess more preoccupied by an inexistent and frankly boring plot than it was by its characters. Dialogues were cliche, pacing was very slow and even the actors looked like they were wondering what they were doing on screen. It took a couple of cheap shots at Marvel movies of course but knowing it’s produced by Amazon the show really shouldn’t trow too much rocks as it lives itself in a glass house. And many important narrative elements from the comics were thrown away and instead used as easy winks to the fans audience. Overall it seemed that they used all their creative energy during season one and simply weren’t expecting of being picked up for a second season… I hope the third season will be closer to their original intent but I’m not sure how they’ll write themselves out of the narrative mess they created.
Paul – thanks so much for weighing in. I love your comments!
// I see season 2 more as a “bridge” between 1 and 3 which is perfect since season 3 is basically the show working at its highest level and potential – it single handedly justifies the whole journey. //
Interesting, yeah. Each season is very contained – different moods and atmospheres – Season 3 was REALLY unleashed, although they all were, in different ways. That final episode … I need to watch the whole thing again, going slower this time, so I can absorb it at a normal pace.
// That last episode is SOOOOOOO anticlimactic but in a perfect way ! It’s the macro story that becomes micro again, the true purpose of the story. //
I loved the anticlimactic nature of it too. And how you had to adjust – once again – to where they wanted us to go – this alternate time, or not, or whatever – where things are no longer familiar – you just have to go with it. I loved the show’s confidence – that it just expected me to go along with it. So much stuff now is risk-averse, for various reasons – and it brings a lot of cookie-cutter plots into the fray – we’ve seen this in Supernatural, which forgets its horror beginnings and has now moved into YA fantasy – because YA fantasy is “the thing” now – but … it just was the wrong damn choice and it doesn’t fit the show. Horror is its own thing. Go with that.
But I digress.
// I simply adored this movie it was the perfect subversion of the usually very masculine buddy cop comedy trope. I loved Bullock and Mccarthy and among other things I loved that they were able to express their sexuality as much as their male counterparts (in say “Lethal Weapon” for exemple). And it was so funny ! //
Yes!! Loved it so much! The dynamic together was so fantastic – I wanted more of it – why doesn’t the industry work that way anymore? It’s so frustrating. It was great to see Sandra Bullock go toe to toe with McCarthy – GREAT pairing. A friend of mine from grad school was in it – she was the woman with the baby who scolded Melissa to keep it down in the bar. lol They both were like, “you have a baby in a bar. You have no leg to stand on.”
// Third as a fan of the original comics I have to say I really enjoyed the first season of “The Boys” and not only because it was another Kripke effort. //
Interesting – can you speak to the source material? What have they adapted or changed? Do you feel it’s representing the comics as you imagined them?
// Overall it seemed that they used all their creative energy during season one and simply weren’t expecting of being picked up for a second season //
Interesting! I’m halfway through the second season and I can definitely feel what you are saying. It’s feeling much more scattered.
I really love what’s been done to The Deep’s character – it’s gotten … deep. And he’s a really wonderful actor. Considering his first appearance in Season 1, you’d think he’d be set up to be irredeemable, just a “baddie.” But they’re really subverting that, interrogating it, making HIM interrogate it – I’m really here for that kind of complexity.
There’s a bitchy quality to it that I like. It’s pretty niche bitchiness though. Like, the director pitching his movie to the 7 – standing in front of the storyboards – walking them through this rote “origin story” movie. That’s all fine, but whoever did the costumes – however that conversation took place – they chose to put him in a T-shirt with the word FASSBINDER on it. Which just brings the bitchiness to a whole other level. The commodification of a sui generis figure like Fassbinder – but also this corporate lackey wearing that shirt as a badge of honor – even though he himself has clearly abandoned any path of artistic freedom … Like I said, it’s really niche – but I know people like that – it’s so common. AND that it was “Fassbinder” – not obscure to cinephiles but obscure to everyone else – is even funnier.
// hope the third season will be closer to their original intent but I’m not sure how they’ll write themselves out of the narrative mess they created. //
I’m curious about the original intent. Could you elaborate on that?
// Paul – thanks so much for weighing in. I love your comments! //
Thank you very much Sheila it’s been over a year that I discovered your blog looking for Supernatural reviews and I simply adore not only how much justice you did this overlooked show but pretty much every comments you make about cinema and art in general – you are so erudite ! Your blog really is a breath of fresh air among the more “fan oriented” and superficial (although I considered myself a fan of many things) contents I seem to constantly stumble upon on the internet. The discussions below your Supernatural reviews posts are so fascinating I love how you seem to open all these topics for us readers to explore !
It’s a bit disheartening that it took these lame late developments of our beloved show for me to finally share my onwn commentaries but I really appreciate to be able to exchange with you.
// Interesting – can you speak to the source material? What have they adapted or changed? Do you feel it’s representing the comics as you imagined them? //
Well those are all delicate questions to answer. First of all Garth Ennis the original author along with illustrator Darick Robertson of “The Boys” is one of the most singular and frankly provocative voice in the world of comics (of which I’m not a huge expert I’m more on point with european cartoons so I might have a few things wrong here) : he didn’t write much for any of the big characters from Marvel or DC, the closer he got was writing a mini-series for “The Punisher” but as such it doesn’t affect the character continuity. His biggest hits on “Hellblazer” and “Preacher” (which he created) were published under the Vertigo label that DC created for its more “adult” contents. “The Boys” itself was initially published by another DC label, Wildstorm, but after a few issues the series moved to Dynamite Entertainment and I’m pretty sure its tone is among the reasons that motivated this departure.
Indeed the comic features not only extremely graphic violence but also heavy, explicit and often non-consensual sexual contents, along with featuring very unsubtle carricatures of all the DC and Marvel heavy hitters (most notoriously the Justice League, the Avengers and the X-Men). But beyond its apparently childish and sometimes almost unbearablly violent gratuity, “The Boys” deploys some truely subversive materials regarding subjects as wide and heavy as sexual violences and trauma survivors, the american military industrial complex and imperialism, capitalism and the threatening power of corporate multinationals… It’s a radical attack against the american way of life under the guise of a parody of super-heroes comics. It constantly walks the line with a perfect balance between profound, elegant, mature and childish, provocative, untasteful.
For all these reasons, most of the comic is simply unadaptable on screen : not only most of what’s shown in the comics cannot be shown even on cable television but I’m not even sure most of it can even be caught on camera… Beyond that it’s a very rich, very intricate series with hundred of characters and all this complexity simply cannot fit all in a television show. A cartoon series would probably be more successful although it’s often disregarded as a “childish” form of cinema.
All that said, I think the first season did a great job, by focusing on the key characters (the Boys and the Seven) and retaining enough of the comic’s grisly vibe (like with the “accidental” or not death scenes) to develop its own singular voice among a more formated television landscape. I think the first season worked as a good introduction to the universe of “The Boys” without tapping to much into its actual narrative arcs : the V-compound isn’t really a secret in the comic and the team is already assembled when Butcher comes in England to recruit Hughie into the Boys. I liked that they weren’t able to use the V-compound themselves like in the comic it gave a more realistic, paramilitary vibe to the show and made for some great moments like when they were trying to find a way to kill Translucent.
But the real innovation behind this adaptation was the focus they put on the Seven themselves which are in the comic very shallow and/or completely despisable human beings (with the exception of Homelander, Queen Maeve and Starlight). It was briliant to cast an afro-american actor to play A-Train and to lean into the more “sportive” aspect of its powers as he now serves as a great denunciation of the racist hypocrisy that makes a black athlete taking off his sportive gears just another potential black criminal in the eyes of a store’s security vigile. Likewise I adore the character of the Deep – which in the comic is black, practically inexistent and not one of the Starlight rapists, that they made into this deeply insecure, profoundly immature incarnation of masculinity – I mean the guy’s name is even Kevin ! He could have simply been portrayed as a monstruous, abnormal, irredeemable rapist, but as he was written and performed, he was profoundly and desperatly human and banal. I love the guy they picked to play him, such a great balance of egoism and violence, but also extreme vulnerability. He’s at the same time despicable, hilarious and touching ; the scene in which he is himself more or less “symbolically” raped by a woman is terrifying.
Also it was unavoidable but ultimately greatly handled the way they incorporated social networks into the world of “The Boys” (which was written between 2006 and 2012). The mock promotional video in which A-Train visits a dying kid at the hospital who asks instead for Transluscent is a highpoint of black comedy.
Finally Homelander and Billy Butcher, the two main characters of the comic (beyond Hughie and Starlight who reflect more of the reader’s POV), were perfectly casted as well : they are (or were in the case of Urban unfortunately) as terrifying as they are in the comic. The ultimate truth though is not only that they pretty much are both faces of the same coin but that eventualy Butcher is even way worse ; he is the true vilain of the story, a violent man that like The Punisher took the excuse of a tragic loss to bury himself in the neverending war to which he always aspired, and that I’m not sure the TV show is willing to aknowledge.
But really truth is that they never really leant into the most political aspects of the story beyond a few punches at the american political landscape during the second season. It was to be expected of course as it is a rather “commercial” tv show, produced and heavily promoted by Amazon, but as it is, the series seems more hypocritical than anything else when it mocks the other, more litteral super-heroes productions.
The first season was narratively very loosely based on the first issues of the comic but as I said it wasn’t really a problem since its main purpose seemed to plant the seeds of a bigger, deeper story. But now that the seeds have been planted, the result doesn’t look like anything that the comic has accomplished in its #72 issues, even with its ups and downs. It’s just a boring scenaristic mess that cynically exploits its surrounding cultural momentum for a few cheap laughs, throwing in a few easter-eggs from time to time to keep fans of the original comic on the edge of their seats. Anthony Starr is still astonishing of course but that’s pretty much everything I can say in favor of this second season.
So… There it is I think I pretty much summed it all up but please don’t hesitate to ask for more questions if I left some things unadressed I really really love “The Boys” and I could talk in lenghts about it. In fact that’s pretty much what I just did !
Paul – THANK YOU. That was fascinating. I really appreciate it!
So much to respond to here – but I’ll just pull out a couple of things.
// Likewise I adore the character of the Deep – which in the comic is black, practically inexistent and not one of the Starlight rapists, that they made into this deeply insecure, profoundly immature incarnation of masculinity – //
Seriously! He’s my favorite. Chace Crawford is incredible. I didn’t see him in Gossip Girl – but he did make a huge impression on me in All About Nina – a movie I absolutely love (I reviewed it) – and nobody else seems to have seen. I keep singing its praises. He has a small role – as an abusive fuck-buddy of the lead character – and he was fantastic. Now, with The Deep, I’m a little bit blown away. This is a hard part! How do you make him so sympathetic?? Also, to CARE to make him sympathetic – to have him start out the way he did – assaulting Starlight – the INGENUE – and then to dig in to interrogating why men like that are the way they are – and how clueless he is about his own … interior life … and why he might be doing the things he does … The series is running along on its various tracks, and he is having this whole unique experience far separated from the main action – and I am so here for it. of COURSE he would join a cult and get brainwashed and gung-ho – it’s so insightful! I am really loving that aspect of the series.
// He’s at the same time despicable, hilarious and touching ; the scene in which he is himself more or less “symbolically” raped by a woman is terrifying. //
Fantastic scene. The fear of “penetration.” Women walk around with that fear. It’s part of their everyday lives. To then examine male fear of penetration – with THAT character too … I was like, “wow, you GO The Boys!!”
The actors are all so good.
// that eventualy Butcher is even way worse ; he is the true vilain of the story, a //
Yes. I am getting that vibe.
One of the things I appreciate is the series’ interrogation of – and vicious lampooning of – the whole “badass girl power” thing, which has so outworn its welcome, in my opinion, and feels so pandering I’m amazed that so many fall for it. When I talk about this I tend to sound like a cold-hearted bitch, and maybe I’m okay with that. Like, don’t tell me that scowling Brie Larson being an asshole during her press run for Captain Marvel is the new avatar of feminism. I’m really disheartened by the idea that being a “badass” is THE best thing you can say about women. I mean, okay … but what about vulnerability? The “badass” thing is its own trap – women are then judged for being “weak” – just like in the Victorian era – for having emotions. For loving! For “falling” for a man. Whatever. Human stuff. Women are NOT ‘superheroes.” We’re just human beings. I really love how the series goes after this.
It’s hard – because when I say stuff like this, the people who agree vehemently with me are usually assholes. like MRA guys. lol. But I still have to call it out!
My hope – my deepest hope – is that Jensen gets some really cool fucked-up grown-up shit to do when he arrives. I kind of can’t wait to see him in this environment. Kripke knows what he has in Ackles. So I hope he gets a kick-ass arc and all kinds of complex dark shit to play.
Any intel on Soldier Boy?
anyway: thank you for the nice words and the conversation!
// Fantastic scene. The fear of “penetration.” Women walk around with that fear. It’s part of their everyday lives. To then examine male fear of penetration – with THAT character too … I was like, “wow, you GO The Boys!!” //
Yes exactly ! The Deep’s arc in season 1 was when I felt the most the subversive vibe of the original material and with such confidence that it wasn’t even in the comic !
// One of the things I appreciate is the series’ interrogation of – and vicious lampooning of – the whole “badass girl power” thing, which has so outworn its welcome, in my opinion, and feels so pandering I’m amazed that so many fall for it. //
I totally see what you mean and I do agree with most of what you already said about that subject in your Supernatural reviews and comments.
I do understand the political appeal of such a gender dynamic reversal but not only is it narratively frustrating it is also often politically superficial. The matter of “representation” seems to have taken a far bigger place in today’s political landscape than it reasonably should : it’s an important subject to discuss of course but I think people tend to overestimate the impact of cultural contents compared to other much less visible and more material dynamics.
Of course we can and must criticize the often sexist depictions of female characters on screen but the narrative trope of “badass women” seems to lean into the exact same kind of fetishism : they’re “badass” yes but only as “women”, their gender still remains the basic foundation of their identity.
All that said I do have a problem with the character of Stormfront as portrayed in the series : in the comic it’s a man and while I do not necessarily disapprove this change on paper, this female version makes women rights look like a trojan horse for fascism, which is an all too real discourse today among the conservatives and reactionaries. I’m pretty sure it’s the litteral belief of most MRA guys.
// Any intel on Soldier Boy? //
Well it wont be of much help since he hardly does play a role in the main narrative. He’s a very insecure parody of Captain America and the closer he gets to the spotlights is when Homelander tricks him into sleeping with him by pretending it’s a trial in order to join The Seven.
// it’s an important subject to discuss of course but I think people tend to overestimate the impact of cultural contents compared to other much less visible and more material dynamics. //
This, for sure. But also since it is so often corporations promoting this kind of feminism … I just find it gross.
Bringing it back to Supernatural: the whole conception of the “Wayward sisters” is kind of indicative what I mean. Claire – a newbie – a nobody teenager – is suddenly caked in makeup and taking down a whole vampire nest singlehandedly. And there’s a “you go girl” aspect to it that I find extremely alienating. Maybe if I was a teenager I would be into it, but I’m not sure. When I was a teenager, I gravitated towards intense flawed heroines – Emily of New Moon, Jane Eyre, Cathy in Wuthering Heights – Jo in Little Women – Harriet the Spy – these were people who made mistakes, who felt things too much, who were very flawed – and were aspirational but not in the way these “badass” girls are.
So The Boys going after that “girls get it done” thing – while at the same time forcing said girls to wear these ridiculous body-hugging bodysuits – I don’t know, the messaging is very confused. It’s a confused time.
// they’re “badass” yes but only as “women”, their gender still remains the basic foundation of their identity. //
Yeah, and one of the really unfortuante and damaging byproducts of this – is that vulnerability is then seen as weakness. This is BAD. I have heard from my acting teacher friends that their students are very very judgmental towards fictional characters’ flaws – women are supposed to be strong and fabulous and make the right choices all the time – otherwise they are “weak”. This is crazy – this is a throwback to earlier eras where women were deemed “too emotional” to work, to be bosses, to hold political office. This means young actresses judge Blanche Dubois as a pathetic victim – as opposed to a woman who has survived the best she can. Talk about victim-blaming.
So I think The Boys take on all of that is really refreshing – and it also has a lot of wit!
Interesting about Storm Front – I didn’t know she was originally a man. You’re right – making her a woman brings in all kinds of other implications that may be unintended. (Although I think she gave a phenomenal performance.)
// the closer he gets to the spotlights is when Homelander tricks him into sleeping with him by pretending it’s a trial in order to join The Seven. //
Okay, I really hope this happens.
Your viewing diaries are more important to me than ANY world “news.” Guess that’s what I get, being an enthusiastic consumer of entertainment!
The Queen’s Gambit was, for me, utterly perfect. I, too, watched the whole thing in one day! I didn’t expect or plan it…it just happened. It might be my favorite series of the year to date.
Happy you’ve seen The Boys, happy you finished The Leftovers (my #1 for many years), and hey, mutecypher, I had problems with Thomas Brodie-Sangster’s character in The Queen’s Gambit, too—all I could see was his child face, telling dad Liam Neeson about his heartache being in love with a girl in school. The movie was Love, Actually, in which Hugh Grant was also very good. I’ve seen that one too many times to count.
Let’s hope the world looks different (better!) tomorrow.
Hi Sarah –
Speaking of young actors from Hugh Grant movies, I just started watching The Great. Nicholas Hoult, from Hugh’s About A Boy is in that. As is Elle Fanning. He’s a lot of fun, with his earnest face and utter selfishness. It has a different take on masculinity than The Boys.
Ohhhh, I absolutely adored Nick Hoult in The Great! He first flew onto my radar in the British TV series “Skins.” He’s been great in everything I’ve seen him in since.
// The Queen’s Gambit was, for me, utterly perfect. I, too, watched the whole thing in one day! I didn’t expect or plan it…it just happened. It might be my favorite series of the year to date. //
It’s for sure my favorite series of the year. I’m waiting to go back and watch it again – just letting it percolate.
It’s interesting – I kept expecting something truly horrific to happen. Like, getting physically/sexually abused at the orphanage. Like, getting in crazy trouble for playing chess in the basement. Being adopted by monsters. Whatever. But … none of that happened. I realized how conditioned I’ve been to stories being told like this – I hadn’t realized how ROTE all that trauma had become, at least in its presentation of it – until I felt the absence of it in Queen’s Gambit.
Life wasn’t perfect or sunshiny – and the orphanage doling out drugs was horrifying (I imagine that was really done in some places?) – but the “expected” didn’t happen. She’s allowed to go to the chess club. Her gift was encouraged. She got some shit early on for being a girl – but then she quickly breezed past that with her skills.
The story didn’t play out in the expected way – there were no cheap plays for emotion/sympathy. I really appreciated that.
Just checking in while I am desperately trying to avoid watching the election night coverage. I just watched Bringing Up Baby with Hepburn & Grant. I usually like this movie but the comedy was too frantic for me tonight. Currently searching through my streaming for something calming & distracting.
I watched American Murder and I really wish I hadn’t-the last thing I needed in 2020 was to watch this guy confess to killing his little girls.
RE: The Vow, finished it not long ago and I started watching Seduced; Inside the Nxivm Cult, much more of it from the victim’s point of view.
I’m laughing at myself because I’ve been watching documentaries about tragedy & trauma to distract myself from all the political bs and my fear for our democracy. I watched the Challenger documentary on NETFLIX. I was stationed in MA when it happened & I remember so vividly MA mourning for Christa McAuliffe.
When I feel calmer I will go back to finish reading-your October list is very interesting :)
// I just watched Bringing Up Baby with Hepburn & Grant. I usually like this movie but the comedy was too frantic for me tonight. //
I totally understand this!
// I started watching Seduced; Inside the Nxivm Cult, much more of it from the victim’s point of view. //
I am now caught up on Seduced – and I thought it was absolutely fantastic. A necessary missing piece – HOW this cult worked. Or not just this cult – how mind control works. We see this all the time – people saying “how could these smart women get so suckered?” Or with false confessions – “well, but they confessed, they had to have done it…” There’s a real resistance to understanding how fragile the mind is – and I REALLY appreciated Seduced for the care it takes in educating people about it. The Vow really did not do that. I found The Vow fascinating – but I had been following this story very closely from the moment it broke – so I had a lot of knowledge going in. I imagine if you’re brand new to the story, The Vow might come off as totally opaque or manipulative or incomplete. Seduced is great – I am so glad India got out.
// I’m laughing at myself because I’ve been watching documentaries about tragedy & trauma to distract myself from all the political bs and my fear for our democracy. //
I relate to this. It makes sense. I’ve been watching YouTube video interviews with people who got out of cults. I find it strangely soothing – it’s been very difficult to concentrate on fictional stories these days.
Thank you for your take on Sofia C. You really went to town and I’m grateful. She is not everyone’s cup of tea. She is not alone in her “lane,” but she is the best at what she does. I can’t wait to see this one. Your energy and enthusiasm are all over this diary. I loved it.
Thank you Melissa!
Yes – like, I don’t know what people WANT from Sofia C. “Change!” But if she did, you’d go after her for it. “Don’t change!” Okay, but if she does that you accuse her of doing the same thing over and over again. Get your stories straight, people. She’s just a director, like any other director, trying to get projects she believes in off the ground. People are so BORING about her.
Sheila – I know you enjoy when people get into the nuts-and-bolts of their work. I ran across this video from Carlos Rafael Rivera on how he scored the final scene in The Queen’s Gambit. I especially liked how he mentioned referencing a scene from Out of Africa, and a horn part from a Chicago song.The guy brings his own likes and quirks to his work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H901SWAyhio
Thanks! Funny, I was just thinking of re-watching that last night.