Welcome to WeeklyWilson.com, where author/film critic Connie (Corcoran) Wilson avoids totally losing her marbles in semi-retirement by writing about film (see the Chicago Film Festival reviews and SXSW), politics and books----her own books and those of other people. You'll also find her diverging frequently to share humorous (or not-so-humorous) anecdotes and concerns. Try it! You'll like it!
Category: Of Local (Quad Cities’) InterestPage 1 of 55
The category is self-explanatory, but it would include new or old businesses, political elections, trends, restaurants in town, entertainment in town, etc.
“THE PEARL COMB” from writer, director and star Ali Cook is a 20 minute short that has a message about female empowerment (or lack of same). It is set in 1893 Cornwell with beautiful cinematography of the area. The Victorian period sets and costumes, cinematography and music were also excellent. But, best of all, the short packs an unexpected surprise ending—not easy to pull off in twenty minutes.
CAST
“The Pearl Comb” to premiere at Cleveland Film Festival.
The film focuses on a fisherman’s wife, Beatie Lutey (Beatie Edney of “Poldark”). Beatie is being investigated to find out how she was able to cure a young person of tuberculosis. Beatie tells Gregory, the investigator (played by Writer/Director Ali Cook), that the healing gift comes from her husband, Lutey (Simon Armstrong) and his happening upon a mermaid who bestowed upon him the gift of healing in return for his aid.
One line that sums up Beatie’s message to the investigator: ”No one is ready for a female doctor. A woman of learning is far more threatening,” (Sad that this remains true in 2025, just as it was true in 1893.)
Simon Armstrong as Lutey (“Game of Thrones”), Clara Paget as the mermaid (“Black Sails”), Roxana Cook as Edith and Thomas Stocker as Arthur round out the cast.
MAN MEETS MERMAID
Clara Paget as the mermaid. The mermaid (Clara Paget of “Black Sails”) promises Lutey wealth if he will help her return to the ocean. (“Beautiful mortal, help me. Carry me out to sea.”) Lutey sought, instead, the gift of healing to improve his wife’s ailment (prompting the mermaid to say, “You are the first unselfish manthat I’ve ever met.”) To prove to Lutey that he is not just imagining their meeting, the mermaid gives him a pearl-encrusted comb.
The film is a blend of the mystical and the modern. The line from Beatie to her husband when he calls her “beautiful” is modern. Beatie responds, “You ain’t called me beautiful in 30 years!” The long-suffering wife at first thinks her husband has been drinking, but she soon learns that his story, while fantastic, is true.
CONCLUSION
The Pearl Comb.”
“The Pearl Comb” is both beautiful and thought-provoking, with a surprise ending that adds to its impact. “The Pearl Comb” was nominated for five awards at the British Short Film Awards 2024, winning two. Writer/Director/Actor Ali Cook’s previous film “The Cunning Man” won 33 awards.
This is another potential award-winner to watch as it screens at the Cleveland International Film Festival, an Oscar-qualifying festival. “The Pearl Comb” premieres on April 4th at the Allen Theatre at 9:50 p.m. and subsequently will be available on CIFF Streams from April 6-13th.
Director Dan Farah worked 2 and ½ years on his documentary “The Age of Disclosure.” Previously Farah had produced Steven Spielberg’s “Ready Player One” and has numerous other credits on IMDB.com. In “The Age of Disclosure,” which premiered at SXSW on Sunday, March 9th, 2025 at the Paramount Theater in downtown Austin, 34 government, military and intelligence community figures speak out about alien intelligence and UAP, Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. (Formerly known as UFOs).
From “The Hollywood Reporter” (Daniel Feiberg, March 9, 2025): “Almost nothing in The Age of Disclosure is “new,” per se. The documentary uses these 34 talking heads from various levels of the government, military and intelligence community to allege adeep state conspiracy covering up interactions with non-human intelligent life and technology of non-human origin going back 80 years. Many of the people in the documentary have testified before Congress about what they say they know, and more than a couple of them have been in previous documentaries and docuseries recounting their stories with the same level of personal conviction.”
The pilots and scientists who told stories of their encounters with Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena seemed legitimate. Telling the audience that the document is “unprecedented and revelatory” was NOT totally accurate. But it was an interesting and slick documentary that the young audience seemed to totally accept. Director Dan Farah, from the stage, disclosed that he had been told by “key members of the White House” (one a personal friend) that they are going to be using this film. Congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee was onstage as a proponent of additional Congressional hearngs. On March 12th, Burchett, who represents Tennessee’s 2nd Congressional district, appeared on CNN defending DOGE and addressing questions about a potential government shutdown. Burchett is part of the new House subcommittee overseeing President Trump’s DOGE (Department of Governmental Efficiency.)
Tim Burchett (R, TN) is one of the Committee Heads of DOGE, Elon Musk’s Department of Governmental Efficiency and was Committee Chairman for the first Congressional hearings on UAP (until he was removed from that position 18 hours before the hearings).
The “secret war” amongst major nations is a competition to be the first to reverse engineer technology of non-human origin: a contention for which the film offered no real proof. Nor had the term “the Legacy Crash Retrieval Program” been used previously, to my knowledge. Was it coined for this film? The documentary alleges that this secret program goes back to President Harry Truman and 1947, and that Roswell (NM) really happened the way it’s been portrayed in the movies. The film flatly states that there was a boot-shaped aircraft with hieroglyphs or runes within it, 4 non-human bodies that were sent to Wright Air Force Base. [I’ve been to the Roswell, New Mexico “museum” devoted to this crash; it is not persuasive at all, unless you’re “in” to paper mache re-enactments.]
There is a second contention presented as fact that Russia recovered a Tic Tac ship in 1989 and 4 non-human bodies. Proof, again, is not available, all because of the “conspiracy” to keep things secret.
Who would want to keep this secret? And why?
As another reviewer noted, “My problem isn’t the lack of opposing voices. It’s that there could not be experts debunking anything because nothing is proven, therefore nothing can be refuted…If someone insists (as one man in the documentary does), without evidence, that people they can’t or won’t name were killed to keep certain things they can’t tell you about secret, what are you going to say?” What about cell phone video of these encounters in this day and age of cell phones?
DEFENSE CONTRACTORS
Dan Farah, 45, Director of “The Age of Disclosure.” (Photo by Ali Feinstein)
Tops on the list for people with a motive to refuse to reveal the truth of alien spaceship crashes are defense contractors. The contention is that defense contractors have been going to flying saucer crash sites for years, but won’t share the knowledge they glean because they want to keep it for themselves, reverse engineer whatever they find, and become Top Dog. Hence, the Age of Disclosure, since we all can agree that transparency—so far not very forthcoming in any political administration ever—would be desirable. The film even goes so far as to suggest that the Presidents during these 80 years might not have been “in the know” and used the example of former President George Herbert Bush, who was also once the head of the CIA, so…. It seems illogical that Bush I could be kept in the dark, but the film does a good job of making it all seem plausible. And isn’t that enough for the fans of Alex Jones, for instance? Should it be “enough” for we regular citizens who owe it to ourselves and our nation to really dig deep on simply accepting statements as fact (“Your grocery prices will go down on Day One,” for instance, fromone political candidate.) Don’t we owe it to ourselves and our country to ask tough questions, no matter how much we WANT to believe?
TECHNIQUES
One technique for giving some of the speakers legitimacy is to have them stand near monuments like the Washington Monument or have their picture appear right after another better-known individual. Another is to insert a brief snippet of someone like Bill Clinton being asked about alien life on a talk show format and include President Clinton’s neutral-but-open-minded answer. It was former Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton who revealed (on Jimmy Kimmel’s show) that the term, today, for what we had come to identify as a UFO, is now UAP, Unidentified Anomolous Phenomena. Many of the scientists and pilots absolutely come across as telling the truth and some governmental spokespeople seem honest (and some don’t, which I’ll address in another article.)
Another alien existence testifier not in this film, but on Joe Rogan’s podcast, Bob Lazar (Bob Lazar: Area 51 andFlying Saucers) commented that changing the terms the general public uses might well be an attempt to keep the general public from investigating further. Lazar takes no money from his appearance(s) and testimony. He also tries not to make many of them, as he talks about working on a retrieved space ship at Los Alamos many years ago. He, also, experienced the “he never worked here” public denial that was discredited. So perhaps there is a kernel of truth within this slickly put-together documentary. And we’re all interested in getting to the truth, aren’t we?
But is the entire aim to enlighten the public and spark more investigations, or are there other concealed motives at play?
THE EVIDENCE
Typical of the images used in “The Age of Disclosure” to convey gravitas and legitimacy. (Photo credit: Vincent Wrenn).
Owen Gleiberman, in “Variety:” The evidence, if you truly look at it, isn’t all that compelling: blurry black-and-white U.S. government video footage that shows tiny objects zipping forward over the surface of the water. It’s the footage of aerial phenomena witnessed by Navy pilots that we all saw back in 2021, when it was declassified. It’s fascinating to look at but quite inconclusive. It’s hardly the stuff that alien dreams are made of.”
There were a lot of juxtapositions of the officials testifying with well-known figures like Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Were they attempting to give the speakers legitimacy? The pilot or expert would be telling us, as fact, that alien bodies existed, but their existence was “covered up.” The reasons for this ranged from the lust for power by anyone in the know (pick your agency, because all of them are being discredited these days) to this theory, which makes sense: “We must prepare for the unforeseen or whatever we’ve not seen before. It could be a threat to humanity. If this is something they can’t protect us against, they don’t want to tell the public about it.”
So far, so good.
THE WORLD HANGS IN THE BALANCE?
Then comes the statement “We need unprecedented levels of cooperation to face an alien threat from outside this world.” Does this mean that we must completely change our historic allegiances and our positions as “the leader of the Free World” and cozy up to Russia? [Gee! Thatwould be quite a big change, wouldn’t it?] And how would this “unprecedented level of cooperation” work if we recently had placed huge tariffs on most of our biggest trading partners (our old friends and allies) leading to a plummeting stock market and a lot of economic uncertainty in the days ahead, not to mention a fair amount of returned antagonism. In other words, can we even count on Canada and Mexico, our traditional allies, to join us to fight an alien enemy? How popular are we now in Europe, since we seem to have turned our backs on NATO, the Ukraine, and recently voted against the UN resolution censuring Russia for invading Ukraine? Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t our president just say that Ukraine caused the war and Zelensky (not Putin) was a dictator?
What about the concept that other nations (Russia, China, etc.) might be behind the space ship sightings which seem to have increased of late? Are drones somehow to blame for recent increases in UAP sightings?
ABOUT THE DOCUMENTARY
This is a well-done documentary that made me immediately think of the documentary that convicted felon Dinesh D’Souza released to discredit President Barack Obama, entitled 2016: Obama’s America. That was a hit job, full of “facts” that didn’t add up. But it made a lot of money. It became the fifth highest-grossing documentary-style film in the United States during the last four decades,[98] and the second highest-grossing political documentary. He’s made a lot of other questionable documentaries, all of them pushing “facts” that are really D’Souza’s far right neo-Conservative beliefs, with little or no factual foundation(s). The testimony in “The Age of Disclosure” is definitely worth examining and discussing, but intelligent viewers will remain skeptical and keep questioning and asking for proof.
This documentary (unlike any of D’Souzas), on the contrary, has some stated noble goals.
The good: transparency, letting the American people know the truth, establishing a resource for pilots to report what they see while on the job. (“We need to have standardized reporting for bothmilitary and civilian pilots.”) Educating ourselves about potential scientific advances and progress that should be shared with mankind.
The bad?
Stories about “secret organizations” and established organizations refusing to cooperate in sharing important knowledge. Not saying it isn’t true; saying we should continue to question and not gullibly accept everything we are told. Naturally, this theme of “secret conspiracies” leads us to distrust every organization in existence, to the point that we are pitted against each other as Americans. And to the point that many of these organizations (FBI, CIA, IRS, Social Security, USAID, etc.) are currently under intense attack. Seems to be a lot of that going around lately. Maybe it cannot be avoided.
Discrediting all legitimate news sources and refusing to allow agencies like the Associated Press to cover White House briefings (ostensibly because they haven’t begun calling the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America) is not good for us as a nation or for the stock market, as we are all currently experiencing. A free press is the people’s friend and trying to “control” the dissemination of all news is a page right out of Putin’s playbook Distrusting the courts—the last bastion of protection against the chaos being perpetrated by DOGE— not good. What could happen if all of the citizenry rise up in rebellion? (Did you see Alex Garland’s “Civil War,” 2024?) Personally, I’d like to see a return to the days of presidential decorum when the incumbent didn’t berate and belittle his predecessor non-stop, but acted “presidential,” responsible, moral, compassionate and reasonable. Enough with DOGE and firing thousands of loyal government servants. Let’s slow down and do some serious thinking about the repercussions of such drastic acts, shall we? But I digress.
Some of the 34 talking heads who appeared in “The Age of Disclosure,” onstage at SXSW on March 9, 2025. (Photo by Connie Wilson).
CONCLUSION
“Mulder, the truth is out there,” says FBI Special Agent Dana Scully in Episode 17, “but so are lies.”
Either the things that the people in “The Age of Disclosure” are talking about are alien spaceships…or they’re not. Many who see the film will come away thinking that they are real, says Owen Gleiberman in “Variety,” because the film is well-done (Kudos to Editor Spencer Averick, Cinematographer Vincent Wrenn and Blair Mowat’s music. Mostly, the documentary is talking heads stating things as facts for 109 minutes with no real proof except our own intrinsic willingness to believe that “we are not alone.”) I’m as open-minded about accepting these testimonials and as willing to believe as anybody, but I’m also a born skeptic.
Is there another “hidden agenda” operating here? Think about that, too, before accepting every word or supposed “fact” as Gospel.
Crew: Director: Dan Farah. Camera: Vincent Wrenn. Editor: Spencer Averick. Music: Blair Mowat.
With:Lue Elizondo, Chris Mellon, Marco Rubio, Hal Puthoff, Jay Stratton, James Clapper, Kirsten Gillibrand, André Carson, Brett Ferrderson, David Fravor.
(*Read the companion piece, “A Funny Thing Happened to Me on My Way to the Documentary”).
Director/Co-writer Matthew Skoglund of “The Home” at SXSW 2025. (Photo by Malin LQ).
“The Home,” a Swedish horror movie, based on the novel by Mat’s Strandberg, premiered at SXSW on March 10, 2025, with its Director Matthias Skoglund and stars Gizem Erdogan and Philip Oros present. The movie focuses on a son (Joel, played by Philip Oros) putting his ailing mother, Monika (Anki Liden) in a nursing home in Sweden called Ekskuggen. “The Home” will screen again on March 12th at 3 p.m, at the Alamo Drafthouse on Lamar (Theaters 1, 8 and 6).
PLOT
The synopsis provided by the filmmakers read: “Many years after leaving the small town behind, Joel returns to move his mother Monika into a home for the elderly struggling with dementia. However, Monika’s health takes a turn for the worse soon after her arrival. She experiences terrifying visions of her late husband, Joel’s abusive father, and begins exhibiting violent behavior. Joel begins to believe that something malevolent and supernatural has taken control of his mother. But with his own history of substance abuse and mental instability, can he trust his own perceptions? As Monika’s memories fade, Joel must confront the demons of his own past, dredged up by his return to the home where he grew up.”
Director Matthew Skoglund of “Home” at the party hosted by the Swedish consulate on March 10, 2025 at SXSW. (Photo by Connie Wilson).
Monika Eddington, during her life, had a stroke. For a brief period of time, she was technically dead. During that time something supernatural may have breached the barrier between life and death. She now “knows things she shouldn’t know” and bad things are happening in the nursing home.
Son Joel (Philip Oros) had a troubled relationship with his dead father throughout his life. His father constantly called him horrible names, accused him of being a drug addict, and was physically abusive. His mother was not immune to such perverse treatment at the hands of her husband, Bengt. Bengt is now deceased. (Or is he?)
As the film opens, Monika is in her kitchen and things are out of control. Soapsuds are rising in the unattended sink. Everything is in disarray, and the elderly woman mentions Bengt (her deceased husband), “is waiting for me on the other side.” Monika is confused about Joel’s identity, at first, and seems fragile and unhealthy.
DIALOGUE
Aside from a humorous reference to the home (Ekskuggen) as the Hotel Incontinental, the exchange between Monika and her son, Joel, is far from humorous. At first, exhibiting signs of dementia, she confuses him with her older son Bjorn, the owner of a successful business. Then she asks, “Are you really going to leave me here. What have I done wrong?…But I’m not supposed to be here. This must be a mistake.” Those scenes are heartbreaking. They are often also universal in a world where the Baby Boomers are rapidly aging.
As someone who has had to put her mother into a home (Lantern Park, Coralville, Iowa), the placing of an elderly relative in custodial care is, indeed, traumatic for both sides. In my own case, I moved my mother between the home and her apartment three times, in an attempt to keep her independent, which was her desire. (The home said I “held the record” for multiple moves.) Type II 4-shots-a-day diabetes and poor eyesight eventually forced her into the home full-time, where she lived for 3 full years.
Director Matthew Skoglund, Philip Oros, Gizem Erdogan and Producer Siri Hjorton Wagner at the Premiere of “The Home” at SXSW, March 10, 2025 (Photo by Connie Wilson).
The three lead characters (Monika, Nina and Joel) were convincingly portrayed. Anki Liden, who played the elderly Monika, did a great job, and Joel (Philip Oros) and Gizem Erdogan (Nina) were supported by an actress playing Olivia (Malin Levanon), another attendant in the home, who also did a fine job. While Anki (Monika) joined the project only one month before shooting started, Gizem was in from the beginning (2017), having read the novel, She said, “I really loved the novel and joined the project early.” Gizem came aboard during an early version of the script that later removed much of the detective speak that originally dealt with Monika’s mysterious injuries. Director Matthias Skoglund worked with the novelist (Mat Strandberg) to craft the script, which also changed to keep the focus on the three major characters, an adaptation from the book.
CINEMATOGRAPHY
The camera work by Malin LQ was well done. There were shots of the full moon over the shoulder of a main character or a field of waving grass that were beautifully composed. But the creepiness of the home was key. Unlike some films with dark scenes, it was clear what we were looking at. My only criticism would focus on the pacing of the action, as there are enough violent action and intense scenes, ranging from “jump scares” on, but the time between these beats dragged at times.
This is the third film or TV series I’ve seen recently that went inside a custodial care facility seeking horror. John Lithgow has a 2024 release “The Rule of Jenny Pen,” while Ted Danson’s current “Inside Man” television series is a lighter approach to what goes on behind the doors of nursing homes. Bubba-Hotep all the way back to 2002 is a precursor, with Barbara Hershey’s turn in “The Manor” in 2021 an Amazon Original movie with a horror-themed look at the topic.
SOUND
The leads of “The Home” answering questions during the Q&A for “The Home” on March 10, 2025 at SXSW. (Photo by Connie Wilson).
I was impressed by the sound design (Matis Rei), music (Toti Gudnason) and general creepiness of effects like the crashing noises in the kitchen or the point in the film where I wrote: “This sounds like an avalanche.” Director Mathias Skogland explained that he comes from a radio and podcast background “so sound was very important.” He worked with an Icelandic composer and an Estonian sound design team; the result was impressive.
Lead Philip Oros described the project: “It was fun, but also difficult. I hadn’t really done anything with supernatural elements before.” Producer Siri Hjorton Wagner said that the group began working on the project in 2017. The film shows one more time here at SXSW (Wednesday, March 12th) and joins the ranks of “Horror Movies with Nursing Home Settings” that are worth taking in, (if you don’t mind the scary side of the street and subtitles.)
“My Uncle Jens” is a joint Norwegian/Romanian production which marks the feature film debut at SXSW 2025 of Screenwriter/Director Brwa Vahabpour. Uncle Jens might more accurately be dubbed Uncle Khdr, as the main character has come to Oslo from the Iranian part of Kurdistan. He adopts the alias Jens. Brwa Vahabpour is writing about a culture he knows well. He attracted positive attention for his 2020 short film “Silence” that was featured at the Palm Springs International Shorts Fest.
The plot focuses on a young literature teacher in Oslo (Norway) named Akam (Peiman Azizpour), who receives a late-night visit from his estranged Uncle Khdr, his father’s brother. Why is the movie not entitled Uncle Khdr, rather than Uncle Jens? That explanation goes back to the common ploy of trying to “blend in” to a strange land by adopting a more common surname. In Khdr’s case, he begins using the Norwegian first name Jens after a conversation with a friendly cab driver.
Jens (Hamza Agoshi) claims he is in town for a surprise visit.
THE PLOT
Akam (Peiman Azizpour) doesn’t live alone. He has two roommates, a young girl (Theresa Frostad Eggesbo) and a tall, lanky yellow-haired stork-like Norwegian male, Stian (Magnus Lysbakken). Lysbakken as Stian represents the stereotype of “yellow-haired people” that Uncle Jens references when he says, to Akam, “You’re probably busy with those yellow-haired people.”
Uncle Jens immediately begins shaming his nephew into hosting him in his cramped apartment. He uses the term “peshkesh,” meaning “from me to you.” Uncle Jens is loud, he snores, he takes the one single bed (while Akam sleeps on the floor). Jens has many other annoying and obnoxious habits, including smoking in the apartment, which the roommates object to. Jens also constantly leaves water all over the bathroom floor, throws away the community kitchen brush in favor of a sponge, and just generally behaves as though he is moving in for good. When the roommates ask Akam how long Jens is staying, the answer is always “just a couple days.” In reality, Jens shows no signs of ever leaving.
THE PLOT THICKENS
“My Uncle Jens” (Photo by Jorgen Kluver).
It isn’t until Jens and Akam are out together that Akam begins to find out that his uncle has actually been hanging around a local café owned by a man known as Hussein for a couple of months. Akam begins to realize that Uncle Jens’s “surprise visit” may never end, and he finally begins to realize that maybe his uncle is not in the country legally. What, then, does that mean for him?
Akam is advised by a friend to beware of guests who arrive in the middle of the night. The friend directs him to a girl named Elina (SarahFrances Braenne), who works for the Directorate of Immigration in Norway and knows the country’s immigration rules.
THE RULES
Akam devises a clever ruse to try to find out what rules apply to people visiting Norway from other countries. He pretends to be writing a short story about a Norwegian girl whose aunt arrives unexpectedly to visit. He asks about Norway’s rules for visitors. For openers, says Elena, visitors should have a written invitation from the person in Norway in order to qualify for a visitor’s visa. Also, the visitor has to have state proof that they are able to return to their country of origin (Iran). Elena adds that, if the visitor is up to no good (human trafficking, etc.) that can lead to deportation for them and for those who might be harboring them. She suggests that the visitor has to have proof of employment and other such signs of being an upstanding individual. Meanwhile, Akim and Elena are hitting it off as a couple which will complicate matters.
What is going through Akam’s mind is “Yikes!”
At one point, Akam almost anonymously turns his uncle in, but when they ask what address the suspect is at, he hangs up, realizing that he will be implicating himself, as well.
DENOUEMENT
“My Uncle Jens” lead, Akam, portrayed by Peiman Azizpour. (Photo by Jorgen Kluver).
As Akam and the rest of us feared, there is finally a visit from the representatives of the Directorate of Immigration. They are very polite, but they do search the house, looking for Uncle Jens. It is time for Jens to go, but, before he leaves, he has caused the downfall of the Elena/Akam relationship and has told a harrowing tale of his escape from Iran and assuming the alias Sabir Salehi.
A STORY FOR OUR TIMES
Much like the illegals attempting to flee violence and economic insecurity in their homeland, Uncle Jens has been both physically assaulted and threatened to the point that he made the harrowing journey to Turkey (Istanbul) and, by boat, to Greece. He was placed in various holding facilities while he awaited a ruling on his request for asylum. Unfortunately, the authorities rejected his application and he received a deportation notice. Among other things, Jens says, “I have to prove that my life is really in danger.” Ironically, he asks his nephew, “Can’t you see your lies affect all those around you?”
CONCLUSION
It is easy to see the parallels between Uncle Jens and every immigrant on the run. The country may not be Norway, but there are so many countries in turmoil and so many refugees wanting to settle in a country that can offer them a better life. That list would go on for a very long time. Two people on that list would have been my Grandfather (Ole Monson) from Norway and my Grandmother (Rena Stietske Weirda) from the Netherlands.
This film makes a real effort to show us the hurdles that immigrants face on a personal and psychological level. It also underscores the very real dangers that newcomers face and the lengths they will go to to seek a better life for themselves and their families. Can we blame them for these efforts? Recently, it appears that we do, which is sad, and, to me, un-American. “My Uncle Jens” is a tribute to every new citizen to any country. The directorial touches (ringing phone bookending the action; symbolic watch) are nice aspects of a touching movie.
A United States Premiere of “The Beguiling,” a 15 and ½ minute short about native American Indians, premieres at SXSW Film and TV Festival Sunday, March 9, at the Rollins Theater at the Long Center. The shorts start at 9:45 and run until 11:30 p.m. A second showing will be held at the Alamo on South Lamar on March 13th, Alamo Theater #9, 10:15 p.m. until 12:06 a.m. (Midnight Shorts Category).
The film, written and directed by Ishkwaazhe Shane McSauby, explores the romance between two young native Americans, portrayed by Benairin Kane as Billy and Kim Savarino as Riley. As the plot summary put it, “Deceit turns their romantic evening into a darkly comedic nightmare.”
Reviewer Alex Heeney (“Seventh Row”) said: “This horror-inflected film addresses some hard-to-discuss-without-stepping-in-it issues. Wait for the fantastic needle drop, which offers a lot to unpack..”
Attempting to address some of the plot points, without stepping in it, here is my unpacking.
SYNOPSIS
The plot summary might more accurately have described this short as being an investigation into the phenomenon of “Pretendians” or “self-Indigenizers,” people who are not of Indian ancestry misrepresenting themselves as Indian. If you don’t remember Senator Elizabeth Warren’s claims to have some native American ancestry, those remarks caused her to be belittled at Trump’s March 4th Address to Congress(DJT’s “Pocahontas” jab. (Leave it to Donald J. Trump to attack a respected female United States Senator with what he apparently intended to be a racist jab.) That makes “The Beguiling” an even more timely topic.
PRETENDIANS
A New Yorker article by Jay Caspian Kang laid out the case of a Professor at Berkeley, Elizabeth Hoover, who rose quickly through academia based on her claimed Indian heritage. One observer, who described the woman as showing up at every faculty meeting to spend the entire meeting beading said, “It looked like an entire Etsy store had exploded on her.” So, “Pretendians” or “self-Indigenizers” are a fact of life if you are of native American Indian ancestry.
Hoover (one of many, it should be noted) ultimately released a “Letter of Apology and Accountability” for the “broken trust” that she had caused. She maintained that her deception was in no way intentional. She insisted that posing as native American was simply what she had been told about her heritage as a young child, ancestry which she had accepted without questioning it or investigating it more fully. Hoover’s public apology labeled “Identity Crisis” was released on March 4, 2024.
Therefore, the background for this 15-minute short has its roots in recent history. In the pre-Trump days, when diversity and inclusion mattered, sometimes it was advantageous (especially in academia) if a white person had Indian blood.
DENOUEMENT
“The Beguiling” at SXSW. (Photo by Shaandiin Tome)
In the lead-up to an emerging romantic tryst between Riley (Kim Savarino) and Billy (Benairin Kane) in “The Beguiling,” Riley bites Billy a bit too aggressively in the neck. Billy goes in search of a bandaid. What he finds while searching for a bandaid in Riley’s bathroom medicine drawer and cabinet makes him suspicious about Riley’s authenticity.
Is Riley trying to convince Billy she is “a real Indian” when she’s not? If so, why?
You’ll have to journey to the Midnight Shorts at SXSW for those answers.
COMEDY OR DRAMA?
The young lovers’ romantic tryst veered a bit off the romance trail and into thriller, drama and comic territory, merging all three. For me, with my sympathies heavily on the side of the Anishimabemowin natives, the short was another sobering moment in considering the injustices of early West settlement and colonization in this country. I’ve toured the Holocaust Museum in Skokie, Illinois. Nothing funny there on that Museum’s lower level, which is devoted to Indian interment camps in Canada where indigenous Indian youth were imprisoned and mistreated.
The still-emerging details make instances of whites mistreating American (or Canadian) Indians in more modern times a hard sell for humor, for me. Don’t get me started on the rest of history! I used to teach at Black Hawk Junior College. Looking back on our historical treatment of Indian tribes just makes me mad, much like the DJT speech remark on March 4th, 2025 makes me both mad and sad. In other words, to me, it’s not “funny;” it’s just a continuing injustice that should be stopped and redressed. Historically, I’m with Marlon Brando on this (despite the unfortunate Sacheen Littlefeather Pretender incident at the 1973 Oscars.)
CONCLUSION
Writer/Director Ishkwaahe-shane-mcsauby of “The Beguiling” short at SXSW. (Photo by Gareth Cattermole).
The heavy-duty emphasis on native Indian history on “date night” (Which camp: Carlisle or Haskell? Genocide. Colonization. Wild rice /manoomin) made me wonder about Billy’s taste in women. Flirtation has definitely changed. In today’s America, I’m told, there are Big Discussions about party affiliation before a girl even accepts that date with the cute guy hitting on her. An interesting peek into how divided things have become in the United States of America. And it seems to be getting much, much worse. Hmmmm…I wonder what we can all do about that, as voters?
The synopsis asserted that the piece was “darkly comedic.” For me, the film leaned more heavily to the former (“Dark”) than the latter (“Comedic”). If anyone doubts the timeliness of the underlying debate about authenticity and the issue of dubious claims of native American Indian heritage, we need only direct them to rewatch the supposed Leader of the Free World (is he still?) baiting a female United States Senator Elizabeth Warren on live television (March 4th, 2025), with a snide remark (“Pocahontas”) during a live Address to Congress. That was just a few short days ago. I’m still upset about it (so was Jimmy Kimmel on his March 5th monologue).
Let’s keep fighting for diversity and inclusion and fair and civilized treatment for all. This short has exposed one small example of exploitation of a minority amidst the cultural mosaic that is the United States of America. Let’s hope that by highlighting such injustices, they can be eradicated. “The Beguiling” calls this particular version of inequality out for what it is: wrong now, then, and forever. A good effort in the fight to restore dignity and equality for everyone by making the public more aware.
Paul Feig, Director of SXSW Opening Night film “Another Simple Favor” on March 7, 2025 (Photo by Connie Wilson)
Opening night of SXSW 2025 was a star-studded affair. Paul Feig, Director of “Another Simple Favor” was present with Blake Lively, Anna Kendrick and numerous co-stars in attendance. He was fashionably attired in a very western fringed soft leather look.
Director Paul Feig of “Another Simple Favor.” (Photo by Frank Miceletto)
Suffice it to say that the true fans in the audience seemed happy. Among the celebrities present on the Red Carpet, were Blake Lively, Anna Kendrick, Henry Golding, Michele Morrone, Andrew Rannell, Bashir Salahuddin, and Alex Newell. The film picks up directly where the first left off and takes viewers to Capri, Italy.
Since the first film was not on my Must See list, the plot was incomprehensible to a newbie. Writing credit goes to Lada Kalogridis and Jessica Sharzer, who crafted some good zingers. There was the remark to Joshua Satine playing Miles Smothers (Blake Lively’s character’s son), who is launching a drone, “You don’t need a drone to find your Mom. Just follow the trail of destruction.” I snickered at the character who asked for “enough booze to kill a small show pony.”
But, other than the sets and costumes, which were fantastic, I was not the audience for this one. Andrew Rannells said that, of eleven scenes he had that were supposed to be set in Connecticut, all were actually filmed in Rome. The listed Capri settings were J.K. Place Capri for the elegant wedding scenes, as well as Lido Del Faro (a west coast beach club) and Villa Jovis (ancient ruins), but the sign on the back of one hotel door said Grand Hotel Quisisana, which is only 2,750 feet from the beach; the entire area was gorgeous. Costuming of Lively at one point in something that looked like it came right out of “Bride of Frankenstein” was odd, but, again, not an expert on the effect desired.
The new “lead” who portrays Blake Lively’s husband-to-be in the film (Michele Morrone) was a handsome hunk of eye candy. So far, there have been no stories of the two not getting along. There were a few implied jabs at the relationship between Blake Lively and Anna Kendrick, but everyone played nice. (No lawsuits, to date.)
Feig directed “Snatched” with Goldie Hawn and Amy Schumer, which I liked very much. (Where was Amy Schumer when we needed her?) This film was beautiful, with wonderful sets and costumes. Director Paul Feig told IndieWire that he had never done a sequel and was trying to make his “Godfather 2.” (I’m thinking, “No.”)
Henry Golding (Ex-husband of Blake Lively’s Emily Nelson) in “Another Simple Favor on the Red Carpet at SXSW on March 7, 2025. (Photo by Connie Wilson).
Anna Kendrick on the Red Carpet at the Premiere of “Another Simple Favor” on March 7, 2025 at SXSW. (Photo by Connie Wilson).
Blake Lively, up close and personal at the Premiere of “.Another Simple Favor” on March 7, 2025 at SXSW. (Photo by Connie Wilson)
Star Blake Lively of “Another Simple Favor” with co-star Michele Morone who portrays Dante Versano, embracing as they meet outside the Paramount Theater in downtown Austin on March 7, 2025. (Photo by Connie Wilson).
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unleashed a historic speech scorching Donald Trump’s idiocy over his disastrous new tariffs: “This is a very dumb thing to do.”
“The United States launched a trade war against Canada, their closest partner and ally, their closest friend. At the same time, they’re talking about working positively with Russia, appeasing Vladimir Putin, a lying murderous dictator,” began Trudeau.
“Make that make sense.”
Trump’s 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico took effect today and the markets are in free fall. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has already plummeted 662 points after plunging 650 points on Monday. The S&P 500 lost 1.3% and the Nasdaq Composite lost 0.9%
The gullible fools who thought that Trump would be “good for the economy” have had the rug pulled out from under them in record time.
“Canadians are reasonable and we are polite,” Trudeau continued. “But we will not back down from a fight, not when our country and the well-being of everyone in it is at stake. At the moment, the U.S. tariffs came into effect in the early hours of this morning and so did the Canadian response.”
“Canada will be implementing 25% tariffs against $155 billion worth of American goods starting with tariffs on $30 billion worth of goods immediately and tariffs on the remaining $125 billion of American products in twenty-one days time,” said Trudeau. “Our tariffs will remain in place until the U.S. tariffs are withdrawn and not a moment sooner.”
“And should these tariffs not cease, we are in active and ongoing discussions with provinces and territories to pursue several non-tariff measures, measures which will demonstrate that there are no winners in a trade war,” he threatened.
“Now just like I did a month ago, I want to speak first directly to the American people. We don’t want this,” said Trudeau. “We want to work with you as a friend and ally and we don’t want to see you hurt either.”
BEE GONE
“But your government has chosen to do this to you,” he stated bluntly. “As of this morning, markets are down and inflation is set to rise dramatically all across your country.”
“Your government has chosen to put American jobs at risk at the thousands of workplaces that succeed because of materials from Canada or because of consumers in Canada or both,” he went on.
“They’ve chosen to raise costs for American consumers on everyday essential items like groceries and gas, on major purchases like cars and homes, and everything in between,” he continued.
“They’ve chosen to harm American national security, impeding access to the abundant critical minerals, energy, building materials, and fertilizers that we have and that the United States needs to grow and prosper,” he explained.
“They’ve chosen to launch a trade war that will first and foremost harm American families. They’ve chosen to sabotage their own agenda that was supposed to usher in a new ‘Golden Age’ for the United States,” said Trudeau, taking a direct shot at MAGA’s latest inane rhetoric.
“And they’ve chosen to undermine the incredible work that we’ve done together to tackle the scourge that is fentanyl, a drug that must be wiped from the face of the Earth,” he added. “So on that point, let me be crystal clear. There is absolutely no justification or need whatsoever for these tariffs today.”
Trudeau then shifted gears to go after Donald Trump directly, the clueless mastermind behind this entire disaster—
“Now I want to speak directly to one specific American: Donald. In the over eight years you and I have worked together, we’ve done big things,” said Trudeau, appealing to Trump’s ego.
“We signed a historic deal that has created record jobs and growth in both of our countries. We’ve done big things together on the world stage as Canada and the U.S. have done together for decades, for generations,” he continued. “And now we should be working together to ensure even greater prosperity for North Americans in a very uncertain and challenging world.”
“Now, it’s not in my habit to agree with The Wall Street Journal but Donald, they point out that even though you’re a very smart guy this is a very dumb thing to do. We two friends fighting is exactly what our opponents around the world want to see,” said Trudeau.
“And now to my fellow Canadians: I won’t sugarcoat it. This is going to be tough even though we’re all going to pull together because that’s what we do,” he added. “We will use every tool at our disposal so Canadian workers and businesses can weather this storm.”
(*A last-minute exchange on Trump’s Truth Social Network suggests that Trump might now use this 25% tariff, scheduled to go into effect on March 5th, as a bullying tactic against Canada, much as he used the threat of discontinuing Ukrainian military aid to extract a promise from that war-torn country to hand over precious minerals to the U.S.
CNN called Trump’s threats “a game of economic chicken.”
Trump sees everything in terms of money and power and will use any means to seize and hold both, even if it means abandoning moral principles our country has espoused for many
generations, such as USAID. To put it in simpler terms, DJT finds the far-right groups easier to manipulate, since they will blindly follow a figurehead without thinking through that Talking Head’s positions to determine if they are really advantageous to them, personally. DJT and Elon Musk are overthrowing the traditional values of free speech (and, soon, free elections) because a “free” election might throw them out of power. And, as mentioned, DJT is all about seizing and maintaining their power and wealth. There is no morality to thinking this way, but, then, we’re talking about a man not known for his morality or his compassion or his concern for anyone but Donald J. Trump.
We are talking about a man who is squandering our (former) position as the Leader of the Free World. The message to the world is that the U.S. cannot be counted on. This is not about DJT. This is about the American people and DJT is not keeping the American people (and America) safe on any level.)
“Am I the sucker? For as long as I can remember I thought that the United States stood for democratic values and individual liberty. These were supposed to be the guiding lights of American foreign policy, even if the principles might not always be absolute or the path to them always direct. Critics of the U.S., both external and internal, insisted that this was a delusion at best, and more likely simply a lie. Yet for most of the post-World War II era these ideas served the U.S. very well. To put it bluntly, Thanks to them, we won the Cold War.
OR SO I THOUGHT.
But obviously President Trump and those who have Trump’s ear think differently. He never had much interest in the “suckers and losers” (his words about the American soldiers who died in France) who bought all that stuff about defending democracy. Trump, like Vice-President J.D. Vance and others in his orbit, prefers a hard-nosed realpolitik. If Ukraine shares its wealth, we might help in its defense. Or we might not.
JUSTIFICATIONS
Trump justifies this by calling Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a dictator and saying Ukraine started it all anyway—making mincemeat of the truth and decades of U.S. foreign policy goals in a single tweet. The idea that Russia is not to blame for the Ukraine war is not original to Trump. University of Chicago political scientist John J. Mearsheimer has been saying that for over a decade, starting with the paper titled “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault.” The “realists” like Mearsheimer urge us to drop talk of freedom and principles and see the world as just the sum of the great powers’ spheres of influence.
THE GREAT POWERS
This is how Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping see the world. They would like nothing more than to sit down with Trump and carve up the globe—taking a nibble of Latvia, tightening the noose around Taiwan. (*If you were paying attention during the Oscars last night, the Latvian team that collected their Oscar for “Flow” referenced the fighting already going on on one of their borders, which the world does not hear about.)
Jan. 6 siege of the Capitol
Each bargain might make sense to a deal-maker like Trump. But eventually losing our principles will mean losing our influence. And, in the end, it will be the U.S. that looks like the sucker at the table.”
POST SCRIPT
Later, within the magazine he manages, we learn from Charles P. Pierce (“Esquire”) that Trump specifically fired the lawyers charged with resisting illegal presidential orders. Nor was it reassuring when Hegseth explained that the JAGs had been fired to stop them from being “roadblocks to anything that happens.” Paul McLeary in “Politico” said that the former Fox News host promotes a swaggering “warrior ethos” that rejects the Geneva Convention(s).
Trump’s purge, said Tom Nichols in “The Atlantic” is “the next step in his pursuit of total power. After capturing the intelligence services, the Justice Department, and the FBI, the Pentagon is the last piece he needs to establish the foundations for authoritarian control of the U.S. government. With his generals in charge, Trump can start building a military that is loyal to him and not to the Constitution. And the Black general that Trump recently fired, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr., was replaced by a man he met while on a trip to Iraq, three-star general Dan “Razin” Caine. a white retired three-star general (retired and has to be brought back from retirement) who met Trump while wearing a red MAGA hat and said, “I think you’re great, Sir. I’ll kill for you, Sir.”
And if he wouldn’t, there are always the recently-released-from-prison Proud Boys.
An intriguing analysis has been circulating online regarding the psychological aspects of Zelensky’s meeting with Trump and Vance, conducted using ChatGPT.
From this analysis, it becomes evident that we have witnessed a true masterclass in gaslighting, manipulation, and coercion on the part of Trump and his entourage.
Let’s break down the key points:
1. Blaming the victim for their own situation
Trump explicitly tells Zelensky: “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This is classic abuser rhetoric—blaming the victim for their suffering. The implication is that Ukraine itself is responsible for being occupied by Russia and for the deaths of its people.
2. Pressure and coercion into ‘gratitude’
Vance demands that Zelensky say “thank you.” This is an extremely toxic tactic—forcing the victim to express gratitude for the help they desperately need, only to later accuse them of ingratitude if they attempt to assert their rights. (Zelenskyy had actually expressed gratitude to the U.S. at least 33 times.)
3. Manipulating the concept of ‘peace’
Trump claims that Zelensky is “not ready for peace.” However, what he actually means is Ukraine’s capitulation. This is a classic manipulation technique—substituting the idea of a just peace with the notion of surrender.
4. Refusing to acknowledge the reality of war
Trump repeatedly insists that Zelensky has “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” This is yet another abusive tactic—undermining the victim’s efforts by asserting that they are powerless without the mercy of their ‘saviour.’
5. Devaluing the victims of war
“If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying,” Trump says. Yet, he ignores the fact that a ceasefire without guarantees is merely an opportunity for Russia to regroup and strike again.
6. Dominance tactics
Trump constantly interrupts Zelensky, cutting him off: “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” and “You’re not in a position to dictate to us.” This is deliberate psychological pressure designed to establish a hierarchy in which Zelenskyy is the subordinate.
7. Forcing capitulation under the guise of ‘diplomacy’
Vance asserts that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy.” This is a classic strategy where the aggressor is given the opportunity to continue their aggression unchallenged.
8. Projection and distortion of reality
Trump declares: “You are playing with the lives of millions of people.” Yet, in reality, it is he who is doing exactly that—shifting responsibility onto Zelenskyy.
9. Creating the illusion that Ukraine ‘owes’ the US
Yes, the US is assisting Ukraine, but presenting this aid as “you must obey, or you will receive nothing” is not a partnership—it is financial and military coercion. It was similar coercion during a phone call between the two men (DJT asking Zelenskyy to investigate the Bidens) that led to Trump’s first impeachment. A notoriously thin-skinned man, he has not forgotten this snub and the set-up on 2/28 reflected that.
10. Undermining Ukraine’s resistance
Trump states that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks.” This is an attempt to erase Ukraine’s achievements and portray its efforts as entirely dependent on US support.
Conclusion
Trump and his team employed the full spectrum of abusive tactics: gaslighting, victim-blaming, coercion into gratitude, and manipulation of the concepts of peace and diplomacy. This was not a negotiation—it was an attempt to force Zelenskyy into accepting terms beneficial to Russia but potentially fatal for Ukraine. (Who negotiates peace without inviting both warring parties to the table?) No less a GOP voice than former Security Advisor and Ambassador Susan Rice immediately called out the embarrassing display for what it was: a set-up intended to “get even” with Zelenskyy for not submitting to DJT’s wishes at every turn and a backing of his favorite strongman, Putin.
All of what has been happening makes perfect sense if we remember that Russia has been “stroking” Trump in an attempt to convert him to a Russian asset for years. It seems to have worked better than Vladimir Putin could have imagined. Now the oligarchs will divide up the wealth and go about their business, completely ignoring the average citizen, for whom Trump seems to have absolute contempt, since he lied to all of us repeatedly. (How do you feel about your grocery bills now that eggs and beef are more valuable than some precious gems?)
I have some small hope that all of the destruction we have seen being inflicted on all institutions can be reversed, but it will take years. This is one of the few times that I honestly am grateful that I am not going to be around for decades to see all the hard work that it is going to take to UNdo the damage Trump is doing. I came in on JFK, campaigning for him as a high school girl (not old enough to vote). Now I will probably go out on Trump and his band of corrupt cronies. I’ll be bringing out my hopeful feelings of 2008 (expressed in my 2volumes “Obama’s Odyssey: The 2008 Race for the White House”) when we elected a decent, intelligent, compassionate man President. And now we have Trump. From the sublime to the ridiculous.
Elon Musk claims DOGE is uncovering all kinds of waste and fraud, outrageous scams perpetrated on the American people. These scams are so blatant and obvious that even youngsters untrained in forensic accounting can find them in moments. The implication is that federal workers, who are experts in their fields are either too stupid to have seen them or irredeemably corrupt. Look at the Social Security Administration, for example. Musk posted that his minions had found more than 20 million entries in the database with ages over 100 years old, including millions of people listed as over 150. It’s “the biggest fraud in history,” Musk said.
Except, of course, it’s nothing of the sort.
Because of a coding quirk in the vintage computer program the agency uses, an unknown birth date defaults to 1875, 150 years ago. These people are listed in the system, but they aren’t receiving Social Security checks—as a 2023 inspector general’s report had already concluded. In reality, only some 44,000 centenarians are alive and receiving checks, a figure that jibes with census data. And while there are certainly some fake numbers, even the conservative Cato Institute says those are mostly illegal immigrants who use them to get jobs, which means they pay into the system but get nothing out of it.
What else has DOGE turned up?
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was eager to tell us, saying last week, “I love to bring the receipts!”
But the only examples she offered were a few programs related to equity and inclusion, such as a $3 million Patent and Trademark Office program offering internships to minority inventors, and a $57,000 award for climate mitigation in Sri Lanka. Those may go against current administration protocols but they certainly don’t amount to fraud, since the money for them was duly appropriated by Congress. And cutting them will hardly engender significant savings in a $7 trillion budget.
You know who does know how to find waste and fraud?
The Inspectors Generals in our government agencies.
But Trump fired them all.
*****
Elon Musk.
Elon Musk’s claim to have cut $55 billion is already a fantasy—this week DOGE claimed an $8 billion savings for cutting a contract actually worth only $8 million.
Catherine Rampell (“The Washington Post”): “Trump voters want a shake-up and many cheer the wrecking ball. There are legitimate problems with the status quo, but the fix isn’t to indiscriminately fire air traffic controllers, gut public health agencies, or cut funding for cancer research. Trump is not fixing the problems MAGA voters care about. He’s creating new, much scarier ones.”
Said Martin Wolf in “Financial Times: “It’s a coup that will pave the way for autocracy, plutocracy and dysfunction. You can’t boost efficiency by hacking away at a complex bureaucracy, but you can chase out conscientious workers and replace them with loyalists who’ll do your every bidding. And once Trump and Musk achieve their goal of dismantling the civil service, it won’t be easily rebuilt. “This is destruction, not reform and whatever they have been told, ordinary Americans will not benefit.”
But we know who will.
(The lyrics to Joni Mitchell’s “Big Yellow Taxi” that contain the phrase “they paved paradise and put up a parking lot” are: “They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot. Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you got till it’s gone.”)
“BEE GONE,” warning about all the above, can be purchased on Amazon. Read about it here: https://conniecwilson.com/product/bee-gone-a-political-parable/
