The X-Files Premiere Recap in Vulture Mag: Fiction Masquerading as Fact, by Keith Uhlich

x_files-fox

Regular readers know that over last year, I binge-watched the entire X-Files series, because I had completely missed the phenomenon the first go-round. I watched a lot of it myself, but then, for fun, I reached out to my friend Keith Uhlich, film critic, TV critic, and the biggest X-Files fan I know, to see if he wanted to binge-watch with me. And so began the great Binge-Watch project of 2015. I would go over to his place every other week, practically, and we’d sit in the dark living room and watch sometimes up to 10 episodes a day. He was a great guide – but better than that – he is a great fan. Not uncritical (Keith is a critic, with a GREAT eye), but also interested in what any given episode was trying to DO, outside of what HE wanted from it.

I seemed to click into the series on the same frequency that Keith did: for me, the series was about emotion and human connection and the Scully/Mulder relationship, how fragile it is, how important it is. That “feeling” didn’t click in for me until the first episode of Season 2, when Scully and Mulder were separated, and had to sneak around to meet up in parking garages or whatever. That first episode of Season 2 was filled with the sense of LONGING that I think is the true theme/mood of X-Files. It’s not about what HAPPENS, or what the TRUTH actually IS: the truth still remains “out there”. It cannot be grasped and pinned down. It can’t, actually, be known. Or, even if you do know it, it ends up not mattering. All we know is what we long for. I mean, the whole TV series didn’t end with a bang, but a “whimper,” Mulder and Scully curled up in one anothers’ arms in a motel room. As paranoid as Chris Carter is, that fragile intimacy of two people (skeptics and believers) seemed to be what he was after all along.

If you’re an X-Files fan, you might have seen the Paley Center 2012 interview with David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson (the entirety is on Youtube). My friend Keith was the one who did that great interview. I wrote about it here. The “what the fuck is magnetite” moment has become notorious enough to become a “gif”, and so my friend Keith is the only one among my friends (that I am aware of) who is now a GIF. (I actually have been wanting to link to this for a while: Here’s Keith’s review of Michael Mann’s Blackhat – a film I also loved. Keith digs into it deep.)

So anyway, Keith and I had a blast with the binge-watch. You can’t binge-watch with just anyone. It takes a certain KIND of person to do a joint binge-watch. We’ve continued on into a binge-watch of Millennium now, and eventually we may get to Supernatural, which he hasn’t seen, but there’s a lot of cross-over, at least in terms of cast/crew/location, etc. Supernatural often looks like an X-Files reunion. (And if you want to know just how good an actor Mitch Pileggi really is – watch any given episode of X-Files, and then watch any episode from Season 6 of Supernatural, in which he appears. Except for the sense of harassed authenticity … it is two totally different characters. 100% believable in both.)

I started to binge-watch because I wanted to participate in … what is happening now. The resurrection of The X-Files as a 6-episode 2016 mini-series.

Advance word from critics on the 1st episode was that it was “bad.” Keith and I watched it about a month ago (he had already seen it), and I have no idea what these critics were talking about. I suppose, like any good show, The X-Files is many different things to different people. (Supernatural is like that too. There’s an epic archetypal quality to the events and the style, so it can TAKE lots of different emotional projections and interpretations.)

Keith will be re-capping the whole thing for Vulture, and his first re-cap is up.

He’s one of the best writers I know, his style elegant, thoughtful, rich, but even more than that: watch how he observes things, and then contextualizes what he has observed. In other words, it’s not a book report. This is analysis.

The X-Files Premiere Recap: Fiction Masquerading as Fact, by Keith Uhlich

Posted in Television | Tagged , | 8 Comments

Review: Rams (2015)

hrutar3-mcv5qv9xycgiu5f38vhe4e6u3kwq0kwak9kpx9940w

Gummi (Sigurður Sigurjónsson) and Hiddi (Theodór Júlíusson) are brothers. They live in adjacent houses in the middle of a wind-swept plain surrounded by bleak highlands in Iceland. They are sheep-farmers, living on the family land. Their two herds of beloved sheep are descendants of the family herds going back generations. It is a bleak and isolated – and yet loved – way of life. There’s a small bustling community nearby, separated from them by a long low bridge over an iced-over river, and that community also lives and dies by its sheep. Gummi and Hiddi, two grizzled wind-swept old dudes, see each other every day, working their separate barns and fields, driving out their herds of separate sheep. When they see each other from afar, they stop, stare, throwing daggers of still hostility across the space.

The two brothers have not said a word to one another in 40 years.

The film opens with a Ram competition among the farmers in the town. Hiddi’s ram wins first place because of its rounded fat back haunches. Gummi’s comes in second. When the two have to share a platform at the awards ceremony held at a community center, Gummi can’t stand it and walks away.

Why this situation has come to pass is just an incidental peripheral element of Rams, an astonishing and upsetting film from director Grímur Hákonarson (who also wrote the script). After directing a couple of shorts, and a couple of television spots, Hákonarson has moved into directing features, and Rams is the first film of his to gain traction outside of small festival circles. Within the first 5 minutes, it creates a horrible rip-tide of irresistible emotion. Backstory is not provided. So you discover what is happening in real-time. You are asked to catch up, or at least, follow along, all on your own.

729eb-rams3

After Hiddi’s ram wins the competition, Gummi wanders outside the community center, distraught, and walks among the rams waiting in a pen outside. He goes directly to Hiddi’s ram, and starts inspecting it, pulling back its gums, feeling its body, opening its eyes wide. The next day, he tells someone that his brother’s ram might have “scrapie.”

Now, I didn’t know what “scrapie” is, but you can believe I know now due to Google. It’s a plague among sheep, highly infectious, it attacks the nervous system. It’s transmissible. It’s fatal. And it means financial devastation to any sheep-herding community: every member of every herd must be slaughtered, just to be sure. But of course when I saw the film, “scrapie” had no meaning for me. It didn’t matter: The looks on people’s faces when the word “scrapie” was even mentioned told the whole story. The expressions showed the gong striking Doom at the heart of a community. Sheep are how they make their living, but more than that, sheep ARE their lives. The people care for them, and it’s an intimate kind of care-giving, almost like taking care of a dog. There is affection between owner and herd. To contemplate killing an entire herd because MAYBE they have “scrapie” is devastating.

Hiddi sees the “scrapie” accusation from his brother as an act of pure envy because he got first place in the ram competition. But it turns out Gummi was right. Scrapie has come to the community. Then follows town meetings, and veterinarians lecturing the town about what to do, and elected officials who organize the slaughters, and then organize the clean-ups afterwards. Everything must be burned. Scrapie can get into the wood of the pens. Scrapie can hide in the piles of hay the sheep eat.

Hiddi puts up resistance to the town’s scrapie-elimination campaign, and Gummi watches from his window as Hiddi is dragged, screaming, into a police car. Gummi’s face speaks volumes although you’re not quite sure what it is that you see there. There is a tormented scene where Gummi walks into his barn and looks at his herd. He touches them tenderly. He whispers to them reassuringly. He calls one of them “dear.” None of this is played sentimentally. It’s brutal, honest, open. It’s his last act of love before he shoots them all.

Rams-W

The story unfolds in bleak and ravishing beauty (the landscape similar to the endlessness of the steppe in Once Upon a Time in Anatolia, with its metaphorical hugeness and stunning emptiness), with long stretches of silence where we feel the buildup of rage in the brothers, rage that has been nurtured like a fragile flickering candle. They’re comfortable in the status quo. There’s one extremely touching silent scene where Gummi cooks a rabbit for his Christmas dinner. By himself. And he’s changed into a woolly sweater-vest and slacks, dressing up for his dinner with himself.

Hiddi goes off the rails and it’s revealed that Gummi is not necessarily the squeaky-clean hero. The tension builds slow … slow …

Rams tells a story of a specific community with specific rhythms, it shows a glimpse of a world not often seen in film, a world we get to know. It introduces us to two brothers, their sturdily-maintained silence isolating them but also connecting them … but along with all this specificity the story is Shakespearean (how many enraged brother teams are there in Shakespeare? Fighting for dominance, for the crown, for the glory) and also Biblical, the Bible’s obsession with brothers from Cain and Abel to the Prodigal Son and beyond …

It’s specific and it’s also epic.

The silence helps elevate the story into its universal vastness. The style and look of the film (brilliant cinematography by Sturla Brandth Grøvlen) grounds it in its landscape but also blasts it up into the stratosphere. You could look at those volcanic hills and ice rivers and gigantic wind-swept spaces and read the History of the World. It’s open for that kind of projection. The acting is visceral, no other word for it, and it relies on silence, and reactions, and internal shifts not verbalized.

The second the film it ended, it started telescoping out in my mind, getting bigger … and bigger … and bigger … until it was almost unbearable.

Barely released in the States, it was one of the best films of last year. I would have included it on my Best of 2015 list if I had seen it in time.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , | 16 Comments

Review: Naz & Maalik (2016)

large_51OkFFuFkzjShQKv0uhlkp7Yq6R

A story filled with so much potential! Naz and Maalik are two devout Muslim kids, living in Bed-Stuy, who have just taken their relationship into romance. It’s strictly forbidden. There are more pressures on them. But for the most part, we get to follow them around, listening to what they talk about when they’re alone. The best parts of the movie. Good New York street cinematography too. Doesn’t quite add up, though: not as powerful as it could have been.

My review of Naz & Maalik is now up at Rogerebert.com.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Review: The 5th Wave (2016)

large_vXfNCc42KGbD1aOvyA42Lf82fbs

I loved the books by Rick Yancey (two out so far, the third coming out in May, apparently). I had hoped that … the movie would be good. I really did. Those books are RICH with excellent material.

Sadly, it’s not to be. This is Dystopia-Lite.

My review of The 5th Wave is now up at Rogerebert.com.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

“The Long Shadow of Gilda“: My Essay Up on Criterion

tumblr_n1h54iKOCo1r6amklo1_500

The Criterion Collection’s release of Charles Vidor’s Gilda came out this week. You can order it here.

Special features include: commentary track by critic Richard Schickel, interview with Film Noir guru Eddie Mueller, plus a couple of wonderful heart-warming clips from Martin Scorsese and Baz Luhrmann about how much the 1946 film continues to inspire them. And there’s more!

I wrote an essay on Gilda for the release, focusing on its impact at the time (and still), as well as the nature of Rita Hayworth’s breakthrough role (explosive, a kind of stardom that cannot be predicted or even planned for) and how much Gilda changed everything for her. I talk about her famous entrance, captured in the gif above.

Criterion just put my essay up on its site, so go check it out!

“The Long Shadow of Gilda, Criterion Collection.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , , , | 11 Comments

Crimson Peak to Open Ebertfest

Exciting news on the Ebertfest front (the film festival started by Roger Ebert in his hometown Champagne-Urbana): Guillermo del Toro’s Crimson Peak will open the festival, and Del Toro himself is the honorary guest. The Fest is held in the Virginia Theatre, a gorgeous old-school (for real) movie palace that seats 1500 people. To see that film on such a huge screen with such a rapt crowd is going to be a great pleasure!

Ebertfest started out as Roger Ebert’s “Overlooked Film Festival,” a 5-day festival hand-curated by Roger himself to highlight films (current and past) that he felt had been overlooked for whatever reason. I was aware of the Overlooked Film Festival long before Ebert reached out to me in 2013 to review for him, because my favorite ex-boyfriend (we’re still good friends) Michael Gilio, wrote/directed/starred in a beautiful film called Kwik Stop, that Roger chose to present at the 2002 Overlooked Film Festival. Complete with QA with Michael onstage. It was a huge moment for him. Here is Roger’s review of Kwik Stop, here are some things I wrote about it, and it was a great pleasure to have the chance to celebrate Roger’s championing of my friend’s film on Rogerebert.com in the “My Favorite Roger” series. So to now be a regular at this Fest, as a contributor and participant, is great because once upon a time it honored my friend, a friend who really deserved that kind of championing. (See Kwik Stop if you haven’t. Michael is so talented.)

I gave Crimson Peak 4 stars in my Ebert review, and so much look forward to meeting Guillermo del Toro! Jim Beaver (well known to Deadwood and Supernatural fans, of course – but absolutely wonderful in Crimson Peak as the concerned father) may – slight chance – attend too – if he can swing it. Either way: The onstage QA after the film will be amazing!

The rest of the docket for Ebertfest has not been announced yet, but the Crimson Peak news, as well as the news of Del Toro flying in for it, is a thrilling start.

Posted in Movies | Tagged | 8 Comments

It’s Gilda-out-on-Criterion Day.

795_DVD_box_348x490_original

The Criterion Collection’s release of Charles Vidor’s Gilda is available starting today. You can order it here.

The release includes a booklet of essays about the film, including one by yours truly. Order now, yo.

Posted in Movies | Tagged , , | 6 Comments

The Books: Baseball: A Literary Anthology; from The Autobiography of Leroi Jones, by Amiri Baraka

31253

On the essays shelf (yes, there are still more books to excerpt in my vast library. I can’t seem to stop this excerpts-from-my-library project. I started it in 2006!)

NEXT BOOK: Baseball: A Literary Anthology

Amiri Baraka (née Leroi Jones) was a towering figure in American letters who died in 2014 after 50 years of prolific commentary. He started as a poet (many collections), but also wrote plays (Dutchman being his most well-known, still produced with regularity today in repertory companies and college programs – probably still 20 or 30 times a year across the country), music criticism, essays (political and personal), plus fiction, as well as his classic 1984 memoir The Autobiography of Leroi Jones. Leroi Jones went to Howard University and as well as Rutgers, served time in the U.S. Army and then attended the New School for Social Research. He has been accused of anti-Semitism, misogyny (probably rightly, although … well, if we discounted every writer who showed “incorrect” attitudes, then we’d all be left ONLY allowed to read Tumblr posts for the rest of our days), of abandoning his unique voice to political causes. The debate on all of that continues. He took his role as Spokesman seriously, but many were like, “Hey. Don’t you speak for me.” He was one of those artists who was open to change (many aren’t: they burst onto the scene, and then just keep repeating themselves until their work becomes “schtick.”) In the 1950s, Leroi Jones was pure Beat Generation. He lived in Greenwich Village. He hung out with Frank O’Hara. He wrote with intensity, he was personal. A contemporary of Kerouac and Ginsberg and their explosive psychological stream-of-consciousness style. Poems were meant to be expressions of personality, of states of mind. The subjective turned universal. Apolitical, practically, although there was a political side to the Beats, or their focusing on individualism helped create an atmosphere that launched into 60s politics. The 60s radicalized him into a Black Nationalist, and the 70s brought on the Marxism in his philosophy – although all of that was, of course, part of him from the beginning. When he changed, he often left the audience he had cultivated behind. Come with, or don’t, it didn’t matter to him. He was accused of focusing on his own personal experience, seen as completely inappropriate in a world going to hell, when people lived in poverty, when Third World countries were erupting into revolution. He listened to those accusations, they got under his skin. His work changed.

In 1964, he wrote The Dutchman, a thrilling and confrontational play about a white woman and a black man on a subway train. It won the Obie in 1964 and then was turned into a film.

dutchman2

Jones’ style was different, very much his own, although he had the avant-garde in his soul (the 1960s were such a thrilling time in American theatre, with voices both surrealist and realist rising, Leroi Jones, Lanford Wilson, John Guare – giants, in other words – and off-Broadway – and small theatres like The Cherry Lane – where The Dutchman premiered started to dominate in a way that just hadn’t existed before.) Many people who weren’t poetry readers were introduced to his work through The Dutchman. The play still works for a modern-day audience.

He wrote a classic book about jazz and the blues: Blues People: Negro Music in White America, two styles completely indigenous to America: it’s a history book, tracing the genesis, through its developments, creating the continuum necessary for further analysis. (It’s a hell of a book. I read it in college.)

Malcolm X’s assassination was part of his break with his own past. He moved to Harlem and opened up an acting school for the community. He wanted to foster black pride, and create an alternative to white training programs. Many who were a fan of his poetry considered what was happening to him one of the greatest losses to literature they had ever known. He changed his name to Amiri Baraka in 1966.

Eventually, Baraka saw Black Nationalism as destructive, and moved on to his third world Marxist stage, again alienating many who had seen him as their mouthpiece. (On the flip-side, there were always champions in the literary world who cautioned against “dismissing” this giant, just because he changed his mind, or his style changed.) Many thought that he “lost” his unique-ness when he aligned himself with specific causes. Disappointment in him – and his abandonment of his earliest concerns – followed him wherever he went. He withstood that criticism, something I found admirable, even when he drove me crazy. He made inroads into the white establishment with his writing, busting down doors. Mohawk poet Maurice Kenney said of Baraka, “We’d all still be waiting for the invitation from The New Yorker without him. He taught us how to claim it and take it.”

I took an African-American literature course in college, and we read the people I had already encountered in my great Humanities class in 10th grade, but the college course went into more depth: the great Countee Cullen, Zora Neale Hurston, Lorraine Hansberry, Alice Walker, Ralph Ellison, James Baldwin, Phyllis Wheatley, Gwendolyn Brooks, Richard Wright, Langston Hughes. It was an amazing class. We devoted about 3 weeks to the work of Amiri Baraka, although I was already familiar with him since I was a theatre major and The Dutchman was one of the regular plays assigned in acting classes for scene work (along with the plays of Tennessee Williams and Clifford Odets). It’s one of THOSE pieces of writing: great for young actors, first of all, and also easily used for scene work purposes and actor development. Good for a young African-American male actor too, a part to sink his teeth into, and utilize all parts of himself. (There are only two people in the play, and it’s great for young actors to work on “conflict” and how to play/tap into the different stages of conflict. If you can’t play conflict, you can’t be an actor.)

The Autobiography of Leroi Jones is required reading if you want to understand the upheaval, social/political/cultural, of the second half of the 20th century.

I love that the editors of this anthology excerpted the part of the memoir that deals with Jones’ memory of attending Negro League baseball games in Newark, where he grew up, and what those games were like, and what they meant to his community. “His” team was the Newark Eagles. The way he described the fan reaction was: “pure love.” In the white world, everyone had to “Yes, sir” “No, sir” and tolerate rubbing-shoulders with racists. Little-boy Jones watched his father blossom at those games, the easy banter with fellow spectators, getting to know some of the players, who were heroes. Everyone dressed to the nines for those games. The sadness he felt when the Negro Leagues disintegrated (not all at once) post-Jackie Robinson. With all the fervor and adulation and controversy about Jackie Robinson moving into the all-white major leagues), the feelings of a lot of people were more complex. One essay in this anthology deals with that explicitly: the wonderful profile of Cool Papa Bell,, believed to be the fastest man who ever played the game. Barak’s feelings about Robinson (as you can see below) were ambivalent, and many African-American writers from the time (and especially Negro League players) expressed the same thing. It was bittersweet.

Here’s the excerpt.

Excerpt from Baseball: A Literary Anthology, edited by Nicholas Davidoff. From The Autobiography of Leroi Jones, by Amiri Baraka

It was black life that was celebrated by being itself at its most unencumbered. Mrs. Effa Manley, who owned the team, would even come through and Baba or somebody would buy her a drink. Or my father would push me forward for an introduction and Monte Irvin would bend down and take my little hand in his and, jim, I’d be all the way out.

In the laughter and noise and colors and easy hot dogs there was something of us celebrating ourselves. In the flying around the bases and sliding and home runs and arguments and triumphs there was more of ourselves in celebration than we were normally ever permitted. It was ours. (Not just the ownership of the teams, the Negro National League, though that had to be in it too.) But our expression unleashed for our and its own sake. It made us know that the Mantans and Stepin Fetchits and Birminghams were clowns – funny, but obviously used against us for some reason. Was it a big creep in a white hood somewhere in charge of trying to make black people feel bad? I thought so. But the clowns we knew were scarecrows, cardboard figures somebody was putting out trying to make us feel bad. Cause we knew, and we knew, that they wasn’t us. Just clowns. Somebody got hooked up. We was out on the field at Ruppert Stadium, jim. And we was even up in the stands diggin it. Laid back in a yellow shirt with the collar open and white pencil-stripe pants. We was in the sun with a hot dog and a root beer having our hands shook by one of our father’s friends. We was cheering for Mule Suttle or seeing Larry Doby make a double play. We was not clowns and the Newark Wagles laid that out clear for anyone to see!

But you know, they can slip in on you another way, Bro. Sell you some hand magic, or not sell you, but sell somebody somewhere some. And you be standin’ there and all of a sudden you hear about – Jeckie Rawbeanson. I could tell right away, really, that the dude in the hood had been at work. No, really, it was like I heard the wheels and metal wires in his voice, the imperfected humanoid, his first words “Moy nayhme is Jeckie Rawbeanson.” Some Ray Bradbury shit they had mashed on us. I knew it. A skin-covered humanoid to bust up our shit.

I don’t want to get political and talk bad about “integration.” Like what a straight-out trick it was. To rip off what you had in the name of what you ain’t never gonna get. So the destruction of the Negro National League. The destruction of the Eagles, Greys, Black Yankees, Elite Giants, Cuban Stars, Clowns, Monarchs, Black Barons, to what must we attribute that? We’re going to the big leagues. Is that what the cry was on those Afric’ shores when the European capitalists and African feudal lords got together and palmed our future. “WE’RE GOING TO THE BIG LEAGUES!”

So out of the California laboratories of USC, a synthetic colored guy was imperfected and soon we would be trooping back into the holy see of racist approbation. So that we could sit next to drunken racists by and by. And watch our heroes put down by slimy cock-suckers who are so stupid they would uphold Henry and his Ford and be put in chains by both while helping to tighten ours.

Can you dig that red-faced backwardness that would question whether Satchel Paige could pitch in the same league with … who?

For many, the Dodgers could take out some of the sting and for those who thought it really meant we was getting in America. (But that cooled out. A definition of pathology in blackface would be exactly that, someone, some Nigra, who thunk they was in this! Owow!) But the scarecrow J.R. for all his ersatz “blackness” could represent the shadow world of the Negro integrating into America. A farce. But many of us fell for that and felt for him, really. Even though a lot of us knew the wholly artificial disconnected thing that Jackie Robinson was. Still when the backward Crackers would drop black cats on the field or idiots like Dixie Walker (who wouldn’t even a made the team if Josh Gibson or Buck Leonard was on the scene) would mumble some of his unpainted Ku Klux dumbness, we got uptight, for us, not just for J.R.

I remained a Giant “fan,” cause me fadder was, even when J.R. came on the scene. I resisted that First shit (though in secret, you know, I had to uphold my own face, alone among a sea of hostile jerks!)

(So what? So Jeckie came on down to DC town and they got his ass to put Paul Robeson down! I remember that, out of the side of my head I checked that. What did it mean? What was he saying? And was it supposed to represent me? And who was that other guy – Paul Robeson? I heard that name … somewhere.)

The Negro League’s like a light somewhere. Back over your shoulder. As you go away. A warmth still, connected to laughter and self-love. The collective black aura that can only be duplicated with black conversation or music.

Posted in Books | Tagged , | 4 Comments

R.I.P. Alan Rickman

image

I paid tribute to the late (so hate saying that) Alan Rickman over at Rogerebert.com, including my memory of seeing him onstage in the unforgettable Broadway production of Noel Coward’s Private Lives, opposite Lindsay Duncan. I still have the poster, although the frame was recently broken. I cherish the poster, and cherish the memory.

12509436_10153464280367632_3713068435597562435_n

R.I.P. great actor.

Here’s my tribute on Ebert.

Posted in Actors, RIP | 33 Comments

Supernatural: Season 2, Episode 19: “Folsom Prison Blues”

fp28

Directed by Mike Rohl
Written by John Shiban

You guys. This post is aggressively insane. But I will paraphrase James Joyce who said, in re: “Finnegans Wake”: “It took me 17 years to write it. It should take you 17 years to read it.” So. It took me 3 days to write this. It will probably take you 3 days to read it.

Let’s Talk About Setting!

I was just talking with my sister, a middle-school English teacher, about “setting”. She was trying to get her kids to understand “setting”, as well as “Plot” and “character”, the Triangle of Importance in literature. She told a funny story about showing the kids the opening 3 minutes of the movie adaptation of Cormac McCarthy’s book, The Road. She had cleared it with the principal, she thought it was one of the best examples of establishing setting that she could think of. The 12-year-olds were not blown away by the setting, they were concerned that what they saw was real. Now, yes, they are kids, but my sister was like, “You guys. No. This is not real. This is a fictional setting. The world has not ended. Don’t you think you would have heard about it? The Rocky Mountains are still functioning properly.” (I can just hear my sister saying all of this. I loved “The Rocky Mountains are still functioning properly.”) Once she whipped them into shape with a lecture about the Reality of reality, they started to get the concept of “setting”, and how important it was to Story.

In the first three, four seasons of Supernatural, one of the strengths of the series, outside of the two main actors, was its clear superiority in establishing setting.

Continue reading

Posted in Television | Tagged , , , , , | 258 Comments