Weekly Wilson - Blog of Author Connie C. Wilson - 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!

Channing Tatum stars in and co-directed the film “Dog,” out now in theaters. His co-director on the project was fellow first-time director Reid Carolin, who also co-wrote the screenplay in collaboration with Brett Rodriguez. The movie clocks in at an hour and 41 minutes and follows the adventures of a Belgian Malinois service dog named Lulu who is being transported to her handler’s funeral in Arizona by Channing Tatum.

Lulu’s previous handler in Afghanistan, Riley Rodriguez, committed suicide-by-car-accident back home in Arizona; the grieving family would like the dog transported to the cemetery, so Channing Tatum, as Jackson Briggs, is elected to drive the dog to the funeral. Briggs hopes to get a pass to deploy for battle once again, but his many tours of duty have left him with some heavy-duty head problems.

In other words, the owner of the dog obviously suffered from PTSD after serving in a combat zone and had a death wish. It would appear that Jackson Briggs (Tatum’s character) shares that death wish, as he is eager to return to a war that will probably kill him. The Ranger brass are reluctant to authorize another deployment. If Briggs will undertake this picaresque journey to Camposanto Cemetery, Briggs might get his wish, foolish though it seems.

Channing Tatum and Reid Carolin do a nice job of keeping the focus on Briggs and the dog (Lulu, as portrayed by three different dogs, named Zuza, Bula and Lana 5). Since his co-star has a non-speaking part, Channing Tatum must suck it up and handle the interaction with his non-human co-star; he has a nice and easy rapport with the animal.

While driving the Pacific highway to their destination, Briggs feels they should also try to have some fun. The clips we see where Briggs pretends he is blind to get a free suite at a posh hotel provide one such detour. Another happens when Lulu gets free and Briggs has to chase the dog through rugged mountain terrain. He stumbles upon an undercover pot operation run by someone even larger and more muscled than himself, which is something. That character (Gus) is played by the heavily tattooed Kevin Nash, and his hippie soul mate in the boonies is the recognizable character actress Jane Adams, portraying Tamara.

There is an attempt by Channing Tatum to find a willing sexual partner for the night in a bar, which fizzles. A decision is made to revisit Lulu’s litter mate brother, who is being trained to re-enter polite society by a former Ranger buddy. There is also a detour during a frightful storm, where Briggs and the dog take shelter in a barn to wait it out.

Finally, as it must, the film gets us to the church on time. Or, in this case, to the cemetery just in time.

Anyone who stays through five minutes of the movie can predict that the ex-Ranger who seemed to be nursing a death wish before meeting the dog now has a reason to live, and, if it isn’t spelled out clearly enough for you in scene after scene, we have the line, “Thanks for saving my life,” with beautiful cinematography by Newton Thomas Segel, coupled with great song selections from Season Kent (music supervisor), with old Kenny Rogers lyrics like “Know When to Hold ‘Em.” The original music by Thomas Newman is also quite good.

So, mission accomplished for both Channing Tatum, Reid Carolin and the audience.

The movie was enjoyable and heart-warming and the dog(s) do a great job of ingratiating themselves to the audience, (as cute canines will.) Since this dog is also a hero, we like Lulu very much. It was one of two new films released on February 18^th (the other was the Mark Wahlberg/Tom Holland opus “Uncharted”) and we selected it over the carefully scripted adventure yarn of buried treasure (Haven’t we had enough of buried treasure ?).

SPOILER REMARK:

One comment regarding a slight reservation about the film. We learn that Jackson Briggs has a three-year-old daughter. He visits her house and mother and is in and out of that house in under five minutes with no dialogue. He spends no time talking about his daughter, nor does he seem particularly intent on seeing her again. Yet, by the film’s end, we know that Jackson Briggs is such a caring individual that he will adopt the combat dog in order to save its life.

So, does this mean that our hero would choose mentoring and adopting a dog over taking care of his own flesh and blood? If so, it does diminish somewhat the likeability and appeal and charisma of our lead character. I’m wondering if this entire sub-plot of the almost non-existent and clearly forgotten daughter would have been better left on the cutting room floor? It did not make me like Briggs more, While applauding his dedication to the lead dog of the story (Lulu), totally ignoring his daughter for a period of years did not come off as admirable or understandable.

“Death on the Nile” is DOA

By Connie Wilson

On February 16, 2022

In Movies, Reviews

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZRqB0JLizw

There’s a scene near the end of “Death on the Nile” that shows Sir Kenneth Branagh walking onboard the luxury yacht/riverboat that is the setting for most of “Death on the Nile.” He is moving very slowly and deliberately. I couldn’t help but think of how that slow walk down the deck represented the entire film.

The beginning of “Death on the Nile,” however, opened in the exciting trenches of WWI, where we learn about Agatha Christie’s ace detective Hercule Poirot in his youth, and why he began wearing his signature facial hair. As another critic wrote, “I wanted to see THAT movie!”

I agree with the critic who wanted to have the vibrancy of the prologue to the “real” film. The 2 hour and 7 minute movie was a slow slog.

Armie Hammer.

The film has had its issues, ranging from Armie Hammer’s cannibalism scandal on down. Unlike some movies that were re-shot to remove a lead involved in a media mess, Armie Hammer stayed. Near the beginning of the film, he performs some salacious dancing with the two female leads. It’s kind of offputting, given what we now know of Armie’s texts to his paramours.. However, Armie is central to the plot, portraying a handsome big lug named Simon Doyle, who is the much-sought-after fiancé of the two female leads: Emma Mackey as Jacqueline de Bellefort and Gal Gadot as the heiress Linnet Ridgeway.

There was a role written into the plot expressly for Annette Bening, as Euphemia Bouc, a painter and the mother of Tom Bateman. The action moves to Egypt and we see her son flying a kite while perched on a pyramid. The plot, based on Agatha Christie’s novel, informs us that the younger Bouc is completely dependent on the good will of his mother. “Behind every kite-flying man there is a woman.” That line, scripted by screenwriter Michael Green, is fairly klunky but leads into the Bouc quote, “Money matters, and mine comes monthly from Eugenia Bouc.”

It’s a bit difficult decoding the various accents of the characters, ranging from Poirot, of course, but, also the French-influenced dialogue of Rose Leslie (“Game of Thrones,” “The Good Fight”) as maid Louise Bouegot.

Green’s script also contains the line, “When you have money, no one is ever really your friend,” which ultimately leads to the death of Linnet Ridgeway, the wealthy heiress in their midst, played by “Wonder Woman’s” Gal Gadot. She will definitely find this out firsthand, as the first (of five) murder victims.

On the plus side, the costumes that Gadot and Mackey wear are gorgeous. There are some sultry scenes in a blues bar where Salome Otterbourne, played by Sophie Okonedo, re-imagines a character for this revamp. In the 1978 film, the character was an erotic novelist.

Okonedo is magic whenever she’s onscreen. She and her niece manager, Letitia Wright as Rosalie Otterbourne, are definite eye candy, especially given two middle-aged characters who used to be a comedy duo who have pivotal roles that seem largely unnecessary. It was also interesting to see that Russell Brand cleaned up nicely to play a doctor named Windlesham, who was once involved romantically with Godot’s rich heiress.

After the opening in the WWI trenches and the night club dancing scenes, with Armie Hammer sexy dancing up a storm with the two female leads, which amps up the “sex scandal” vibe going on IRL, the action moves to Egypt because the newlyweds, Gadot and Hammer, are honeymooning there.

Kenneth Branaugh on the Red Carpet at the Music Box Theater on Thursday, October 21, 2021, at the 57th Chicago International Film Festival.

Hammer’s jilted ex Jacqueline (Mackey) keeps showing up wherever he and the new wife are, (sort of like Jennifer Lopez’s ex Alex Rodriguez, who has been trailing her around to various vacation hot spots now that she’s on Ben Affleck’s arm). [Otherwise, I’d be saying, “Who does that?”]

Jacqueline’s unwanted presence becomes so onerous that the handsome Hammer—who seems to have nothing going for him beyond good looks—takes the entire party down the Nile on a luxurious riverboat.

One question we had was how, exactly, Jacqueline (Mackey) managed to get on the riverboat, when the entire boat was chartered specifically to take the wedding party far away from her. That was weak plot point #1.

Weak plot point #2 was the Grand Finale key murder. In terms of trajectories of weapons, etc., it was mystifying. We watched this thing for over two hours—most of them gorgeously photographed, but boring—and, at the end, it was unclear how, exactly, the final murder could be pulled off. There were only four people in the entire theater; we missed our chance to ask the other couple if they found the resolution of the “key first murder” realistic, because we found it entirely implausible.

The entire plot was pretty implausible, as Poirot lays it out in the movie’s closing minutes in hard-to-decipher accented English. Some have suggested that Sir Kenneth would have been better off if he had simply directed this star-studded offering and not also starred in it.

Since the entire reason for inviting Hercule Poirot onto the boat was to protect the lovebirds from the unwanted attention of the jilted fiancé and make sure they were kept safe, let’s just put it out there that Poirot did an extremely poor job in that capacity. Five mummified bodies are carried off the boat, one by one, during his time on board. (Some detective!)

I wanted to see this movie at the IMAX theater, because the chances of me making it to Egypt are slim to none and the cinematography by Haris Zambarloukos was outstanding. I’ll never get to see the Temple of Abu Sembel up close and personal, so thank you to the expert cinematographer who allowed me to see it this way.

The film finally wound down, slowly and in a confusing and artificial manner. We compared notes on the (somewhat obvious) culprits and asked each other HOW the denouement could be brought about in the manner portrayed.

This movie is not going to keep you on the edge of your seat, although it is a nice travelogue. The plot seems dated and the movie is long. If you know all that going in when it streams, you might enjoy seeing Egypt this way.

Best Actress Nominees: Who Will Win?

By Connie Wilson

On February 10, 2022

In Movies, Reviews

Now that the nominees are ‘set’ for the March 27^th Oscars, let’s take a closer look at who is up for what, (and who should have been up for what):

In the Best Actress category, the nominees are Jessica Chastain (“The Eyes of Tammy Faye”); Olivia Colman (“The Lost Daughter”); Penelope Cruz (“Parallel Mothers”); Nicole Kidman (“Being the Ricardos”); and Kristen Stewart (“Spencer”).

I recently published an entire piece on this blog about Jessica Chastain having a banner year, and mentioned her appearance opposite Michael Shannon in “Take Shelter,” back in 2011. (Shannon told me it was his “favorite film” in Chicago at the premiere of “The Shape of Water.”) Jessica was also the guiding light behind the disappointing female action thriller “355,” one of 16 producing credits; she has not been previously nominated for her body of acting work. I met Ms. Chastain at the Press Red Carpet for Liv Ullman’s directorial debut, directing Jessica and Colin Farrell in “Miss Julie” in 2014.

Considering that her body of work includes such films as “The Tree of Life” (2011), “Zero Dark Thirty” (2012), “Molly’s Game” (2017) and this year’s “The Eyes of Tammy Faye,” she is certainly an accomplished actress who has gone somewhat unrecognized for her previous appearances. “Take Shelter,” where she played the unhinged Michael Shannon’s long-suffering wife, was eleven years ago, so we are talking about a body of good work that has existed for over 10 years, without previous nominations. She has 57 acting credits, but has moved into producing, with 16 credits, including this year’s “355” foray into the area of female empowerment action films, (which quickly has become a genre of its own with films like Charlize Theron’s “Atomic Blonde” and 2019’s “The Kitchen” with Melissa McCarthy and Tiffany Haddish). So, the relatively slight recognition given to Jessica Chastain over the years mitigates for her to win in this category, over the much-more heralded Nicole Kidman, who has been nominated 5 times in the past 20 years and won in 2003 for “The Hours.”

On the other hand, anticipating that the Academy will want to give it to the most-heralded film gives the nod to “Being the Ricardos,” which has more overall nominations, including Javier Bardem for Best Actor in a Leading Role and Best Supporting Actor for J.K. Simmons. If the Academy really wanted to reward the least-recognized of the lot after years of good work, probably Penelope Cruz for “Parallel Mothers” would merit that distinction, but it will be the least-seen of the films. Those that have seen “The Lost Daughter” with Olivia Colman are pretty well split about the film, itself, while recognizing that Olivia, as always, was good in it. And let’s not forget that Ms. Colman came out of nowhere to win the Best Actress award in 2018 for “The Favourite.”

So, if I were a betting woman, I’d put my money on Jessica Chastain or Nicole Kidman to win the Best Actress award this year. The “Spencer” film may have had an acceptable performance from Kristen Stewart, but, overall, it was a dreadfully dull film, and one without many facts on which to base the drama (such as it is). Kristen Stewart is the female equivalent of Keanu Reeves. She looked great in the Diana wear, and she held up her end of the action in a film where the Most Exciting Thing that Happens is Diana retrieving her sons from a fox hunt that they were about to participate in and getting weighed in a chair. (No explanation for that latter bit; you’ll have to suffer through the film if you want to know more.) MANY shots of food being prepared in the mansion kitchen (Yawn). I don’t think that Olivia Colman, Penelope Cruz or Kristen Stewart have a real shot this year, but, if I’m wrong, I’d point to Penelope Cruz in a year when ethnicity matters.

If you want to know who should have been nominated, you can check out the gripers on IMDB.com, but the list could start with Ana Taylor-Joy in “Last Night in Soho,” move on to Lady Gaga in “House of Gucci,” and continue through “Cruella’s” Emmas (Stone and Thompson).

2022 Oscar Nominations: Which Best Pic to See in Terms of Entertainment Value

By Connie Wilson

On February 9, 2022

In Editorial, Movies, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Reviews

Sir Kenneth Branaugh on October 21, 2021, with his Lifetime Achievement Award from the Chicago International Film Festival.

The Best Picture nominations for this year are: “Belfast;” “CODA;” “Don’t Look Up;” “Drive My Car;” “Dune;” “King Richard;” “Licorice Pizza;” “Nightmare Alley;” “The Power of the Dog;” and “West Side Story.”

Of that number, I have seen all but “CODA” and “Drive My Car” (which is also nominated in the category of Best International Film).

The fact that I have not seen the latter two should not be taken as a sign of personal preference, but of the availability of the films to the general public. I live “off the beaten path” in what is considered rural Illinois.

When I am in my place in Chicago, I can usually find the lesser-known films at art houses, but I’ve been stuck in the Quad Cities with ill health and surgery. I will stream “CODA” and “Drive My Car,” [hopefully before the awards show on March 27^th], but it is unlikely that either of those little-seen films really has a shot at Best Picture honors, so let’s take a closer look at the remaining eight nominees.

Here they are in the order in which I enjoyed them, with commentary:

“West Side Story” – a superb re-imagining of the original 1960s film, with fantastic performances from the two leads, Ansel Elgort (who was much better than the original Tony in every way) and from new “find” in the Natalie Wood part, Rachel Zegler. The fact that only Ariana DeBose was nominated as Best Supporting Actress, for her role as Anita (made famous by Rita Moreno’s win in the part) seems almost criminal. Scuttle-butt from the social media suggests that a concerted campaign to discredit Ansel Elgort in a “Me/Too” fashion may have dampened some of the film’s early buzz. All I know is that I went to our IMAX screen early in the week before it opened, to secure tickets for a couple in from out-of-town, so that we could go to it late on the Saturday afternoon it opened (weekend of December 10^th). Imagine my shock when there were only 4 people in the entire theater for the late afternoon showing of this tremendous film on Opening Weekend. Then I read that Spielberg’s film was being “banned” in some countries because of its representation of the trans-gender world, and he was garnering praise for casting actors in their parts who were actually ethnic. Our friends humored me and agreed to watch the original film, back-to-back with this remake; we all agreed that the dancing and singing were superior in the remake. Also, the leads (Ansel Elgort and Rachel Zegler) should have been nominated for Best Actor and Best Actress. The film was one of the most enjoyable and best-updated films of the year, and I would happily see it carry off the honors for Best Picture.

“Nightmare Alley” – I’m always a fan of Guillermo del Toro’s films and loved “The Shape of Water.” While this film is not quite as appealing to me as that earlier Best Picture winner, it was a beautifully done and well-acted film, which has garnered nominations, as well, for Cinematography, Costume Design and Production Design. The film had the kind of cast that virtually guarantees a great end product, with Richard Jenkins, Bradley Cooper, Willem Dafoe, and Cate Blanchett. Most critics felt that it was 2 different movies, with the early circus-themed charlatan days of Bradley Cooper leading to the later con-man rise to power of Bradley Cooper’s character. It isn’t until the movie is half over that Cate Blanchett, for instance, enters. I felt like that was a specious objection, as we have the saga of Donald J. Trump in his early days as a real estate mogul leading to his later heady rise to power, which saw him consorting with a completely different cast of characters in later life than in his early days as a real estate baron. That’s the way life goes. As the film explores in a circular fashion, what goes up must often come down and it’s not “two different stories” but the tragic continuation of the original story.

“The Power of the Dog” – I thoroughly enjoyed this streaming service film, but, when it came to guessing which “movies” would make the cut for Best Picture, I dismissed this Netflix film that has garnered the most nominations (12) from my mind. Those were the “olden” days, when a film that was streamed was not considered the equal of those that also played in first-run theaters. Now, streaming is coming into its own and this may well be the first film made for a streaming service (Apple) that breaks through the barrier that previously existed in critics’ and audiences’ minds. All of the cast of this western were nominated for their portrayals, which means Benedict Cumberbatch. Newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee as the scheming son of Kirsten Dunst, and the married IRL couple Kirsten Dunst and Jessie Plemens. The film was also nominated for Best Director for Jane Campion (“The Piano”). That would seem to be a plus for her in a decade that has seen objections to the scarcity of female directors be mentioned time and time again. Other nominated areas for “The Power of the Dog” include Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography, Film Editing, Best Original Score, Best Production Design and Best Sound. “The Power of the Dog” stands alone in seeing all of its leads nominated in their respective categories (Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor, and Best Supporting Actress.) I would have liked to have seen “The Tender Bar” and Ben Affleck and George Clooney (Best Actor and Best Director) break the streaming barrier, too.

“Belfast” – I attended the Premiere of “Belfast” in Chicago at the Chicago International Film Festival with nominated Best Director Kenneth Branagh appearing in person. I liked the film, especially for the lead performances from the young boy portraying Branagh as a child (Jude Hill as Buddy) and the actors portraying his mother and father (Jamie Dornan of “Fifty Shades of Gray” and Caitriona Balfe of the “Outlander” TV series). I am not surprised that old-timers Dame Judi Dench and Ciarian Hinds emerged with the nominations for Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress, but their contribution was matched by the two young leads and it seems that public and/or critical sentiment is supportive of “The Power of the Dog” for recognizing the entire cast, but that thinking was cast aside for the really outstanding work that Jamie Dornan and Catriona Balfe also contributed. The film was split between black-and-white scenes and color scenes; I preferred the use of color. It was a good film, but it definitely comes down my list after the three above, to see immediately. It could have been shorter and had the earmarks of the sort of film that Old Hollywood always wanted to reward with Oscars.

“Licorice Pizza” – I enjoyed “Licorice Pizza,” primarily for the brief cameo appearance of Bradley Cooper as Jon Peters. It seems to be quite a snub that Bradley Cooper did not get a Best Actor nomination for “Nightmare Alley” in a year when he also turned in this extremely funny impersonation of Hollywood icon (and former Streisand squeeze) Jon Peters. Somebody up there DOESN’T like him? My husband did not stay awake throughout the entire run time of “Licorice Pizza,” but my daughter and I enjoyed it and I liked the introduction to Philip Seymour Hoffman’s young lookalike son. Still, not as good a film as the others above this, and not as good a film as “Last Night in Soho,” which was totally ignored. Anya Taylor-Joy deserved a nomination for her role in that last film, especially after “The Queen’s Gambit” on television.

“King Richard” – I saw this film and it failed to register, for me, as Best Picture of this (or any) year. Will Smith did a good job, but if I have to sit through one more commercial of Serena Williams hitting tennis balls in a mall, I think I am going to scream. I found the supporting stint of Jon Bernthal (“The Walking Dead”) as agent Rick Macci offputting. I also do not think that the role of Anjanue Ellis as “Brandy” Williams was worthy of a Best Supporting Actress nomination. She was good, yes, but she was not any better than Cate Blanchett in “Nightmare Alley” or Caitriona Balfe in “Belfast” or the leads in “Cruella” or Anya Taylor-Joy (“Last Night in Soho”). At least there won’t be the ”Oscars So White” outbursts this year that occurred the year that Will Smith didn’t get a nomination for “Concussion” in 2015. He has, however, received nominations, previously, for “Ali” (2002) and “The Pursuit of Happyness” (2006), so maybe this is the year for Will Smith. (It’s definitely not the year for Bradley Cooper, which seems indefensible.)

“Dune” – I took myself to see this on the IMAX screen. It was gorgeously done, but I’d have to go back and read the books to connect more with the plot, which was extremely involved and complicated. I loved the cast, especially seeing Oscar Isaac in anything and enjoyed the ambitious special effects. A film definitely deserving of nomination (every scene looked like Big Bucks had been spent) but not my Best Picture of the Year. Sci-fi afficionados will feel differently, and rightfully so.

“Don’t Look Up” – This should have been right up my alley. A star-studded cast, all of whom I truly enjoy. Adam McKay. A great allegorical story about how we ignore the dangers heading towards us, like global warming. I did think Jennifer Lawrence was good in her part, although the verdict is still out on Meryl Streep (who was over-the-top) and Leonardo DeCaprio. Again, very surprised that it wasn’t better, given all the talent that went into it.

So, as we enter the final weeks of February and look forward to March 27^th (the Oscar date), the order above represents my personal take on the nominated films. There are way too many performances that should have been nominated, but weren’t, and the two films I haven’t seen are likely to have little to no chance, given the fact that if I haven’t seen them—trying hard, as I am—probably nobody much has.

I feel that “Nightmare Alley” and “The Power of the Dog” are tied, in my mind, as to “which is best,” but it appears clear that the nod is being given to the latter, given the sheer number of nominations it garnered. If you want to see the nominated films in the order in which they are enjoyable, follow the list above, since I am always in search of entertainment as well as enlightenment.

The only thing that would make Jane Campion a better potential winner of the Best Director award in these P.C. times would be if she were a Black female director. As it is, she has checked one important box and, with “The Power of the Dog”, we may see the first “streaming” movie walk off with the top prize. I’d be okay with that, although, in my mind, there is still a distinction between an extravaganza like “Dune” or “West Side Story” and a well-told story like Campion’s previous award-winning film “The Piano.”

Looming Constitutional Crisis?

By Connie Wilson

On February 7, 2022

In Essays on Politics: Best Political Essays & Ideology, News, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Politics

BEE GONE: A POLITICAL PARABLE

According to Bruce Ackermanand Gerard Magliocca of Politico, if Donald Trump does run for president in 2024, it “will provoke a genuine constitutional crisis” that will make January, 2021, seem tame.

The “disqualification clause” of the 14^th Amendment expressly bars any person from holding office if he “engaged in insurrection.” Democrats are already exploring using this clause to prevent Trump from running again. As more and more details of Trump’s complete involvement in the coup d’etat of January 6^th emerge, it is surprising that Democrats have not pushed for this much sooner.

Under our election laws, every state would have to decide whether to bar Trump from being on the ballot. Inevitably, more liberal states would disqualify Trump, while conservative states would insist Trump did not engage in an insurrection. Trump is likely to promote a stand-in candidate in the blue states, but with three candidates in the race, none may win the necessary 270 electoral votes.

Under the 12^th Amendment, the House would then pick the president. But if a majority of state delegations choose Trump, as is likely, Democrats will challenge the legality of his presidency in the House and in the courts.

Months may go by with no clear President of the United States, amidst massive, violent street demonstrations. (Think January 6^th on steroids).

The Supreme Court and the military would be forced to choose sides. The Supreme Court has, historically, “chosen sides” in some very twisted fashion, based on the underlying biases of the constituents. Consider this example, as outlined in the new book “Justice Deferred: Race and the Supreme Court.” Orville Vernon Burton & Armand Derfner)

The Dred Scott free-or-slave case caused the Chief Justice, Taney (a pro-slavery slave owner), to hold that “no Black person could ever be an American citizen” and that no Congress could ever stop slavery from spreading everywhere. (This was the first act of Congress In 50 years to be declared unconstitutional, the first since Marbury v. Madison in 1803.)

If the Supreme Court thought its pro-slavery pronouncements resolved all disputes over slavery, that notion exploded in the Civil War of 1861-1865.

“American democracy may never recover from this collapse of the rule of law.” The precept involving the “peaceful transfer of power,” necessary for the continuation of our democracy, will be seriously impaired or destroyed by Trump’s refusal to stop spreading the Big Lie re “Stop the Steal.”

“Station Eleven:” Futuristic Series Set in Chicago

By Connie Wilson

On February 2, 2022

In Pop Culture, Reviews, Television

We’re watching “Station Eleven,” a 10-part mini series that Patrick Somerville adapted for the screen. Somerville was the show runner (and writer) for “The Bridge,” (2013-2014) followed by two years on “The Leftovers” (2015-2017) and “Maniac” in 2018.

When I first obtained my condo in Chicago in 2003, I took an evening class in Writing the Novel at the University of Chicago. Patrick Somerville was the instructor. He was, at that time, a noted “metrosexual” serious fiction writer.

The class had been meeting for some time, so I had to have permission to join the already-assembled group. When I entered, I was asked to tell the group something about myself. The group was largely female and consisted of very highly-educated women— doctors and lawyers who, apparently, wanted to write a novel. (I had already written a novel at that time, “Out of Time,” so I had a bit of an idea what I was in for.)

Looking around at the assembled group, I decided to hit them with my best shot. I told them that I was “an active, voting member of the HWA,” which stands for the Horror Writers’ Association. I figured that would get their attention, although not necessarily in a good way. It was true at that time, although I have moved on to ITW (International Thriller Writers) since then.

Patrick Somerville was very interested in hearing about HWA. I think that, even then, he was planning his escape to L.A. to write for Hollywood. He was never very chummy with me. He would hang out with the women who were always smoking and, sometimes, someone would bring a bottle of wine to class. I still remember there was a woman doctor in the class who was writing a novel set in a nudist colony in pre World War I. Odd. We would have to read parts of our writing to the class and there did not seem to be any “real” writers in the class—unless you count me, and I’ll leave that up to you. We read and discussed “The Plague” by Albert Camus and it was a totally worthless exercise in learning (or teaching) someone how to write a novel.

Now, Patrick Somerville is involved in a partnership with David Eisenberg called Tractor Beam productions for film and TV production.

Right now I’m watching actors act out a scene in a high rise that could well be the Hancock Building in Chicago. “We gotta make moves. Never, ever, ever can we fake moves.” Rapping. This sudden deterioration into rap music is but one of many signs that this series has jumped the shark for me. I think the vast array of writers responsible may be part of the issue, but the biggest crime is the jumping around in time that leaves you wondering if the dead character is supposed to be a “flashback” or “imaginary” (see the new “Dexter”) or what, exactly, is going on. (Where is Ridley Scott’s linear approach when you need him?)

It was going along swimmingly with this log line:“A post apocalyptic saga spanning multiple timelines, telling the stories of survivors of a devastating flu as they attempt to rebuild and reimagine the world anew, while holding onto the best of what’s been lost.”

Well, class, I think we can all relate to that theme, at this point, 3 years into Covid-19.

The early episodes of the series, sketching the arriving pandemic were good. “What would you have done, if you knew the flu was coming?” asks the small girl. The character says he would have come home earlier and spent time with his mother, who died from the flu. “I would have made the choice I wanted to make—you know?”

The little girl who asked the question said she would have said good bye to Arthur Leander, (portrayed by Gael Garcia Bernal, who appears in only 4 episodes) and notes, “I didn’t get to say good-bye to anyone.”

I had a passing ships-that-pass-in-the-night relationship with Gael Garcia Bernal, who showed up at the premiere of a film he had directed and starred in. I had never seen such a huge crowd for any celebrity in Chicago before or since! The largely Spanish-speaking audience packed the theater to the point that they were seated on the steps leading down to the stage. I finally got up and left so that the audience would have an extra “real” seat.

Himish Patel, who was so good in “Yesterday,” plays Jeevan Chaudry in “Station Eleven.” He and his brother Nabhaan Rizwan as Frank Chaudry, and a young woman (Mackenzie Davis as Kirsten Raymonde) and a small girl (Matilda Lawler as Young Kirsten) are fighting for the apartment in what may be the Hancock Building. The group was re-enacting a play written by Young Kirsten, before going out to see if there is anything left of Chicago. They are either going to starve to death in 90 days or freeze to death in what looks like a very cold Chicago winter.

I wonder if the Chicago location was chosen by Patrick Somerville because of his past association with the Windy City? I’m even more surprised to read in the credits that principal shooting was in New York City, but there definitely are some real Chicago exteriors, as well.

Like most of the things I’ve mentioned, there was a lot of jumping around in time, which made it very difficult to figure out what was going on. Still, the use of the Cubs stocking hat and the exterior Chicago locations is welcome to a Chicago quasi-native.

Frank has just been dispatched in the plot by an intruder. But young Kirsten is being told to go forth with Jeevan and that look like what is going to happen. They are leaving the high rise for the first time in a long time.The music is ponderous and moody, but the exterior shots of Chicago, with “The Present” typed on the screen, are what remains in my mind. The female lead has apparently stayed behind (Kim Steele wrote this episode based, as all episodes are, on the book by Emily St. John Mandeville).

The biggest thing about the future after the Apocalypse is preserving respect for the Bard, apparently. Odd that Shakespeare is so cherished when it is possible to graduate from a Big Ten university these days with an English degree, but without having taken a single Shakespeare class, I’m told.

“I stood looking over the damage, trying to remember the sweetness of life on Earth, but I couldn’t remember.” (oft repeated in several episodes)

“We don’t even know if it’s like it was before.”

“There is no before. Or after. The past is safe; everything else changes.”

And from that post-Apocalyptic scene, the dead character Arthur Leander (as King Lear) enters the dressing room to be with Clark (David Wilmot). This makes it really difficult to know where we are in time, since Arthur has been dead.

“You say I only hear what I want to” by Alanis Morrissette is playing in the background. This is part of a traveling troupe of actors who keep culture alive by traveling the countryside performing Shakespeare (and other plays).

Sarah, as portrayed by a truly ravaged-looking Lori Petty, is a composer.

Elizabeth Colton, as portrayed by Caitlin Fitzgerald, is one of the better-known actresses in the series, as she played Libby Masters in “Masters of Sex” (2013-2016).

“Ghostbusters: Afterlife:” First 3/4 = Enjoyable; Ending? Flawed

By Connie Wilson

On January 26, 2022

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

We were looking for a movie we had not seen to take in at our local Cineplex. We discovered that most of the offerings that were good had come and gone right at Christmas time, but “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” was still playing, so we took it in.

The first thing I’d like to say about this Jason Reitman-directed film is that the appearances of the “old” Ghostbusters gang (Bill Murray, Dan Akroyd, Ernie Hudson), as seen on various late-night television shows, is quite misleading. The trio appears for less than 20 minutes onscreen and they do literally nothing. It was a nice tribute to have the holographic participation of the fouth “Ghostbuster,” Harold Ramis, but he did not speak.

The movie began at 4:10 p.m. Up until 5:45 p.m.—things were going quite well. Carrie Coons as the mother was good and People’s “sexiest man alive, “Paul Rudd was the love interest. It was far better than I had anticipated for the first (roughly) 100 minutes of the 120 minute film.

The young talent were quite good, especially Finn Wolfhard (“Stranger Things”) and McKenna Grace as Phoebe, a bespectacled science nerd. They were very effective in their lead roles. Able support was provided by Asian youth Logan Kim as Podcast and Celeste O’Connor as Lucky.

McKenna Grace was born in 2006, which means that, IRL, she was 15 when the film was shot, but was playing a 12-year-old. She has previously appeared in “The Handmaid’s Tale.”

The film had real promise until 20 minutes from the end, when it totally jumped the shark. CGI special effects took over any semblance of a plot at that point.

I cannot recommend the ultimate denouement, but I think that my 13-year-old granddaughters will like the movie.

Katie Couric’s “Going There” Autobiography Entertains

By Connie Wilson

On January 16, 2022

In Books, Politics, Pop Culture, Reviews, Television

Katie Couric autobiography.

I just finished reading Katie Couric’s autobiography, “Going There.”

I had read that she “burned a lot of bridges” but now, at 64, maybe that doesn’t matter to her.

The NBC “Today” show years with co-anchor Matt Lauer come off as her “best” times, and the move to CBS to become the first solo female anchor of an evening newscast seems to have been a mistake. She was not welcomed with open arms and the deal for her to do pieces on “Sixty Minutes” was especially problematic. Oprah Winfrey came and went in a nano-second on “Sixty Minutes.” You can sort of figure out why when you hear about the lack of a warm, collegial feeling amongst the staff. A direct quote from Lesley Stahl to the Hollywood Reporter is, “I just wanted to be a survivor.”

Couric’s stint as the global news anchor of Yahoo News sounds the least productive, among those jobs where she was employed by a large organization. When Yahoo hired Katie for a pretty penny, they fired the staff of veteran journalists around the country, of which I was one. We didn’t make a lot of money reporting on the news in our local areas, but many of the journalists nationwide, like me, were as well-qualified as Ms. Couric to report on our particular neck of the woods. Our money went to Katie, so we were all summarily fired, without even enough time to get our stories down from the Associated Content website. I must admit that this impacted my opinion of Katie Couric, at the time.

I’ve mellowed some since that abrupt uprooting, and it did lead to two books on the 2008 Obama campaign (“Obama’s Odyssey: The 2008 Race for the White House”), which, otherwise, would have remained blog ramblings from the field that took place over 24 months of time. After I learned, unexpectedly and with no warning, that none of our writing would be preserved, I hired two teachers who were off for the summer and we split up the areas by topic.

Katie Couric’s current “job,” supported/organized by her second husband John Molner, is something known as Katie Couric Media. She admits, in the book’s closing chapter that, “It’s an adjustment when the white-hot spotlight moves on.” That seems to be true. She founded KCM in 2017, after a short-lived stint with Yahoo, usurping local reporters.

She also wrote this autobiography. Katie’s second husband, John Molner, told her, “If you’re not going to be honest, don’t write a book.”

That certainly seems like sound advice. Katie seems to have been honest even past the point of no return. She shares that she had breast reduction surgery, and she endured a colonoscopy on live TV, following the death of her husband Jay Monahan from colon cancer at the age of 43. She was certainly giving viewers an in-depth look into Katie Couric.

Katie is also very up front about her dating life before and after Jay. We learn how Larry King hit on her when she was an unknown. (He accepted her rejection of him in a gentlemanly fashion.) She talks about her cougar romance with a young swain, Brooks Perlin. One admirer who got away (and broke up with her) was Tom Werner, one-half of the powerhouse producing team Carsey-Werner, responsible for such hits as “The Cosby Show” and “Roseanne.” Werner comes off as a moneyed narcissist with all the sensitivity of Donald Trump.

Speaking of which DJT does make an appearance in the book, in ways both positive and negative. She is able to secure permission for filming in Central Park from Trump, but they have a falling out and he bad-mouths her to the press as a “third-rate journalist.” Even though she had attended the Donald’s marriage to Melania, when their paths cross in a restaurant, he pointedly ignores her.

She mentions an attempt to fix her up with Michael Jackson, an ill-fated attempt that goes nowhere. Her 50^th birthday bash is described in some detail, as is the going away party when Katie leaves NBC. We should all be so lucky as to have Tony Bennett serenading us on our birthday(s).

The plot of Jennifer Anniston’s “The Morning Show” is pretty much limned in Katie’s many remarks about her on-air partnership with Matt Lauer. You definitely get the feeling that she liked the Matt she knew and—-just like Jennifer Anniston’s character on the television show—-she says she never saw the seamy side of Matt Lauer. After his fall from grace, sadly, they basically never speak again in any meaningful fashion.

The name-dropping of journalistic names is non-stop—Charlie Rose, Sarah Palin, Tom Brokaw, Bob Schieffer, Scott Pelley— but the down-to-earth tributes to her mom and dad and two sisters are just as omnipresent. We learn of her brave struggle alongside husband Jay Monahan, who died at only 43, leaving Couric as the single mother of two little girls. Later, as she explores her husband’s Southern roots and his love of Civil War re-enactments, Couric gets in a plug for racial equality as revealed by her now-grown daughters’ insights. (They are horrified by what their father’s obsession with the Old South represented.)

It’s a snapshot of the historic times that Couric covered as a reporter and, while her profile as a broadcaster doesn’t seem to be extending as far into the senior years with as much pizzazz as Barbara Walters’ career did, she still has had one hell of a ride.

“Being the Ricardos” on Amazon Explores Lucille Ball’s Storied Career

By Connie Wilson

On January 14, 2022

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews, Uncategorized

“Being the Ricardos” was scripted and directed by wunderkind Aaron Sorkin. It won screenplay awards and acting kudos from SAG for its leads: Nicole Kidman as Lucille Ball and Javier Bardem as Desi Arnaz. Beyond those top-notch talents, you have J.K. Simmons as William Frawley, Tony Hale as Jess Oppenheimer, and Nina Arianda as Vivian Vance. The Screen Actor Guild awards are considered a good indicator of Oscar nominations and have achieved even more prominence since the demise of the Golden Globes.

Lucie Arnaz and Desi Arnaz, Jr., are listed as Executive Producers and Lucie Arnaz’s reaction to the film was as follows:

Lucie Arnaz released a video on her YouTube Channel on 17 October 2021, in which she called the movie “freaking amazing.” She complimented Aaron Sorkin for making a great movie that really captured the time period and had wonderful casting. She also said that Nicole Kidman “became my mother’s soul.” Little Lucie said that Javier Bardem didn’t look like her dad but, “he has everything that dad had. He has Dad’s wit, his charm, his dimples, his musicality.”

Besides A Few Good Men (1992), Sorkin wrote The American President (1995) and Malice (1993), as well as cooperating on Enemy of the State (1998), The Rock (1996) and Excess Baggage (1997). He was invited by Steven Spielberg to “polish” the script of Schindler’s List (1993). Sorkin’s TV credits include the Golden Globe-nominated The West Wing (1999) and Sports Night (1998).As of 2021, has written three films that were nominated for the Best Picture Oscar: A Few Good Men (1992), The Social Network (2010), Moneyball (2011), and The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020). His screenplays are often noted for the long speeches the actors must master, and he has done uncredited rewrites on some other major Hollywood pictures.

Despite his list of acclaimed scripts, Sorkin has only directed three films: 2017’s “Molly’s Game;” 2020’s “The Trial of the Chicago Seven;” and 2021’s “Being the Ricardos.” It looks like he is finally coming into his own with this behind-the-scenes look at the tumultuous marriage/love story/career of Lucille Ball. I had read much of the source material, which explored her desire for a home and family, which was in conflict with the womanizing reputation of Desi Arnaz, whom she met when he was only 22. A Cuban singer and bandleader, the chemistry between them was undeniable but Desi’s free-spirited high-rolling life proved to be too much for the woman who was the first actress to portray a pregnant woman on television, as she gave birth to Desi while also filming the popular television series “I Love Lucy,” watched by as many as 60 million viewers weekly.

It is while they are dating that Desi—whose father was once Mayor of Cuba’s second-largest city—tells her that she “has a way with kinetic comedy,” meaning that Lucy—like Chevy Chase later on “Saturday Night Live”—had a genius for pratfalls and physical comedy. The script explores Lucille Ball’s journey through the studio system, ultimately being cut by studios even though she had just had a successful appearance opposite Henry Fonda in 1942’s “The Big Street.” Lucy’s path through radio (“My Favorite Husband” radio show in 1948), which was ultimately turned into the TV show “I Love Lucy” in 1953, showcases the redhead (who was not a redhead for her entire career) as a smart, savvy woman who understood physical comedy and went to the wall to insist that her on-air television husband would be played by her real-life husband, Desi Arnaz.

Desi, at the time, was leading a band that played at Ciro’s night club and singing such songs as “Babaloo” and “Cuban Pete.” His free-wheeling lifestyle was out-of-synch with what Lucy wanted for her children. At the end of her life, Lucille Ball was married to Gary Morton. Her tumultuous marriage to Desi lasted for 20 years (with a nearly-filed divorce affidavit only 2 years in), while her marriage to Morton lasted for 28 years, until her death in 1989 at the age of 77 from a ruptured aneurysm. On March 3, 1960, a day after Desi’s 43rd birthday (and one day after the filming the final episode of The Lucy-Desi Comedy Hour), Ball filed papers in Santa Monica Superior Court, claiming married life with Desi was “a nightmare” and nothing at all as it appeared on I Love Lucy. On May 4, 1960, the couple divorced; however, until his death in 1986, Arnaz and Ball remained friends and often spoke very fondly of each other.

Much of the drama of this version of Lucille Ball’s life hinges on how Arnaz skillfully defused accusations against Ball that she was a Communist. One interesting bit of trivia: Ball was being considered for the lead female role as the mother in “The Manchurian Candidate,” but director John Frankenheimer insisted on Angela Lansbury for the pivotal role of Laurence Harvey’s scheming power-mad mother.

The film treatment by Sorkin, with music by Daniel Pemberton and music supervisor Mary Ramos features Javier Bardem doing his own singing and conga drum playing as Arnaz. The film is playing on Amazon Prime.

“Take Shelter:” Jeff Nichols-written-and-directed 2011 Drama (Another Jessica Chastain Film)

By Connie Wilson

On January 12, 2022

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

Jessica Chastain, with co-star (“Nick) on latest film “355.”

Last night, browsing through late-night offerings on television, Michael Shannon’s performance as a mentally-ill husband in “Take Shelter” (2011) caught my eye. If you’re a Michael Shannon fan, as I am, you’ll want to see it.

We turned over to watch it, and I was reminded that Shannon’s co-star in this intense psychological study was (drum roll, please): Jessica Chastain. It seemed only fitting that I re-watch this film, which I thoroughly enjoyed when it was new eleven years ago (when Jessica was 33).

In fact, when I had the opportunity to speak with Michael Shannon in Chicago at the premiere of Guillermo del Toro’s “The Shape of Water,” I asked Michael Shannon what his favorite film role had been. Rather than dodging the question (a question which is a little like asking, “Which of your children is your favorite?”) he immediately said “Take Shelter.”

In the film, Shannon’s character had a mother who was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic at about the same age that he is, in the film. His character is obsessed with the thought that a tornado is going to devastate the town, his house, and his family, and he is taking steps to put in a below-ground storm shelter. There is a climactic scene at a school cafeteria when Shannon mesmerizes as he erupts with emotion, warning the townsfolk that they are totally unprepared for what he sees as a coming apocalypse.

Of course, by then, he has been fired from his job for having taken equipment from the construction sites he worked on to build his underground tornado shelter. His wife’s patience, what with coping with her husband’s obsession and with their young deaf daughter, seems about to collapse.

The film has a somewhat ambiguous ending, but Shannon’s performance was dynamite, and it is safe to say that Jessica Chastain’s performance as his long-suffering but devoted wife helped. (I met Chastain at the premiere of Liv Ullman’s directorial debut of the film “Miss Julie.” Her co-star in that film was Colin Farrell.)

Jessica Chastain is now 44 years old. She seems to be moving towards directing, as articles suggest that it was her idea to put together the concept for her latest film “355.” Unfortunately, the female buddy genre, which seemed fresh, creative and new when suggested in 2018, had been co-opted by 2022. “355” is currently playing theaters, only.