There's Something About Amy

Confession:  before seeing Asif Kapadia’s documentary, Amy, I had no previous knowledge of Amy Winehouse’s music or career.  I remember hearing stories in the media of her death at an early age, succumbing to the excesses of fame and hard-living.  After watching this documentary, I was completely won-over by both Winehouse as a person and her music.  Winehouse’s voice and style of music seem to recall that of jazz icons of yesterday, such as Ella Fitzgerald and Billie Holiday while always maintaining something completely contemporary, unique and audacious.  As tragic as Winehouse’s story is, the documentary never fails to highlight the shear exuberance of her music while perfectly capturing her charismatic personality.

The film shows that Winehouse was always a drinker and liked to party.  As she became famous however, she slowly began to desire the annihilation of her very self.  Under the unfortunate influence of her boyfriend, Blake Fielder, she turned to crack cocaine and heroin and found that these drugs could erase the pain of stardom and make her “disappear” existentially.  Something deeply ingrained in her psyche had to be the source of this desire, but Winehouse admits that she was never abused in her early life.  She hints at one point that her father leaving her mother when Amy was at an impressionable age and not being present for her may have contributed to this unstable behavior later on.  Interestingly, during her blossoming musical career, the film shows that she allowed her father back into her life.  I believe this speaks to the dynamics of the family in current society.  For one, Amy’s relationship with her previously absent father demonstrates Amy’s forgiving and perhaps needy nature.  It also is a demonstration of the idiosyncratic, fluid, and ever-changing character of family life in 21st century Western society.

The film makes use of old video footage of Amy in her youth in the attempt to paint a contrasting picture between the starry-eyed, innocent girl with huge vocal talent and the emaciated, wasted mega-star she would become only a short while later.  The home video footage at the beginning of Winehouse’s career gives the viewer an intimate connection with the singer, almost as though we know her personally.  There is a total absence of traditional documentary’s talking head style interviews.  The use of talking head interviews would not have made this feeling of connection so palpable.  As the film and Winehouse’s career develops the home video footage starts to wane.  This strategy has an effective way of making Winehouse seem increasingly disengaged, alienated and distant from the viewer, much in the same way that she became to her friends, family and loved-ones.   As the home video footage recedes, the film begins to make use of the media’s footage of her more prominently.  This further reinforces the distancing strategy that Kapadia uses to stress the widening gulf between the familiar, intimate nature of Amy’s life in the earlier parts of the film and the estranged, alienated figure that Winehouse would become towards the end of her life.

In the absence of the talking head style interviews, Kapadia chooses instead to make use of constant voice-over by Amy’s friends, colleagues and family.  This is also an unusual technique because it is used as a replacement of the traditional documentary’s voice-of-God, omniscient narrator.  A traditional narrator would have been more clinical and cold.  The recounting by Amy’s loved ones and acquaintances adds a warm, pacifying dynamic to the film, stressing the strength of her bonds and interpersonal relationships.

Of course, one must not forget the music.  Winehouse could be considered an “old soul.”  The personal nature of the lyrics of Winehouse’s music almost makes one uncomfortable in its intensity and honesty.  This discomfort is balanced by the sultry tonality of her vocal stylings and the soothing, tranquilizing sound of her melodies and backing instrumentation.  Interestingly, at many times throughout the film, lyrics are superimposed on the screen or revealed through shots of written lyrics on paper.  This stress on the words over the music serves to highlight the strength of Winehouse as a lyricist and songwriter while demonstrating the aforementioned, highly-personal nature of the lyrics.

Was Winehouse’s spiral into self-destruction the result of the media’s constant attention or was the media and paparazzi simply focusing and feeding on Amy’s own self-caused damage?  Was her need for self-annihilation independent of her being forced into the international spotlight?  I believe that the two were interdependent and fed off of one another.  Yes, she had self-destructive impulses to begin with as a result of feeling abandoned and from bad influences, but the media’s glare intensified these tendencies and exacerbated her need for self-destruction.  It is this symbiotic relationship that brought about her demise.  One can only speculate on the artistry she could have achieved had she lived a longer life.

Can Hitchcock's The Birds Still Fly?

I recently had the opportunity to see Alfred Hitchcock’s 1963 thriller The Birds on the big screen in a theatre.  The anticipation and excitement in the Niagara Square Theatre was palpable despite it being only half full, but I was skeptical.  Initially, I went in expecting a film that wouldn’t hold up to 2016’s standards of an effective thriller, perhaps because my memories of seeing it before and its reputation for bad special effects.  What I found, however is that The Birds holds up to scrutiny fifty-three years after its release because of its old-fashioned special effects and the fact that it still speaks to the collective fear and paranoia at the heart of society’s collective consciousness.

The year 1963 was obviously a time that preceded the cinema of today’s use of CGI to make the impossible possible.  The Birds is painstaking in its manipulation of real birds, puppets and rear-projection to create the illusion of a massive bird attack on the small town of Bodega Bay on the coast of California. 

The problem with CGI in today’s cinema is that it takes the life and soul out of many films in its attempt to create a seamless depiction of reality.  Episodes one to three of the Star Wars franchise is an example of this claim that an overabundance of computer-generated effects created a world that felt artificial and soulless.  By contrast, episode four to six of the Star Wars films, before its digital makeover, was effective because it used special effects that weren’t added afterwards with computers, but were actually contained in the pro-filmic world of the movies.  Similarly, it is “refreshing” to see a film like The Birds where most of the special effects are achieved through things taking place before the camera.  The effects may be seen as somewhat dated and unrealistic.  There are scenes where it is clear that the birds are puppets or mechanical props.  But the majority of The Birds demonstrates a painstaking realization of real chaos.

The question arises as to why do films like The Birds with seemingly “unrealistic” special effects still manage to shock and terrify their audiences.  I believe the answer to this lies in the psychological investment that the viewer has in such films.  Filmmakers like Hitchcock were great at creating psychological identification with his characters and situations.  By building up character nuances, creating characters that the viewer can be sympathetic towards, and creating a realistic environment and relatable situation in which the characters exist, audiences may be able to look past an assortment of special effects that may, especially by today’s standards, seem quite “fake”.   An example of this would be the scene of the birthday party:  the children and some adults are enjoying themselves on a sunny afternoon when all of a sudden there is a frightening attack from a bunch of seagulls.  Some of the gull attacks look very phony:  a child is seen flailing about on the ground, kicking her legs while an obviously animatronic bird is pecking at her head.  The scene works however, because of our sympathy for children and adults who we had previously seen enjoying themselves.  The situation as well, is one in which we all can identify with and perhaps have participated in in our own lives.

Finally, The Birds speaks to the fear and paranoia in society’s outlook, then and now.  At the time of its release, there was a widespread fear of nuclear annihilation and catastrophe.  The film spoke to this underlying anxiety in its presentation of a modern day apocalypse.  From today’s perspective, the film still works in this regard.  We in Western society are still presented with a collective fear and paranoia at the constant threat of terrorism, global warming, police brutality, and war.  Thus, The Birds still is effective at speaking to our collective anxieties as a culture. 

The film is an allusion to the age-old philosophical theme of man versus nature (sometimes referred to the conflict between man and his environment).  In our culture’s collective consciousness and unconsciousness there is a pervasive fear of what our untamed, natural, and base surroundings can inflict upon us if we are not careful, prepared or respectful.  Perhaps the birds attacks in The Birds are a way to comment on the threat of our environment and natural world if we do not show respect or are constantly ignorant of things such as pollution, global warming and a lack of consideration towards our environment.

The Birds still works today for a variety of reasons.  With its special effects and commentary on society it is a film emblematic of a time in film history when filmmakers didn’t resort to a constant bombardment of thrills, gratuitous CGI, or vapid, two-dimensional commentary on society.  The Birds still resonates with viewers fifty-three years after its initial release. 

The Magic of Mississippi John Hurt

With the passing of time, unfortunately many of yesterday’s brilliant musicians and performers are
largely forgotten in our culture’s demand for newness.  Mississippi John Hurt is not well-known today in popular culture but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t of monumental importance to music and specifically the blues in his time.  Hurt transcended his genre to display a totally original musical outlook and personality.  In fact, John Hurt deserves more credit and listenership because his unique musical style and character.

I first came across Mississippi John Hurt’s music from a single song on a 6 CD box set entitled Roots N’ Blues: The Retrospective, 1925-1950.  The box set was a compilation of seminal roots and blues recordings from the first half of the 20th century.  In it, Hurt’s 1928 recording “Big Leg Blues” captured my mind and attention.  It had a unique quality in many regards.  The soft-spoken, quiet nature of Hurt’s voice sounded totally unique and seemed to put forth a personality unlike any other I’d heard in the blues.  Already I could see his persona paving the way for mellow, laid-back and more introspective folk artists that would appear several decades later:  the folky side of Bob Dylan, Simon and Garfunkel, Nick Drake and Donovan. 

This initiation into the world of John Hurt was followed by my further investigation into his history.  I learned that after recording several songs in 1928, Hurt disappeared.  He was only rediscovered in the early 1960‘s, in his seventies, when researchers and music fans, going by the lyrics of his 1928 recording “Avalon Blues” located him near his hometown of Avalon, Mississippi. The lyrics hinted at Hurt’s whereabouts:

Avalon, my home town, always on my mind
Avalon, my home town.

This rediscovery would lead to a renaissance in Hurt’s elderly years as well as contributing to what was known as the “Folk Revival” of the 1960’s.  Hurt recorded three studio albums leading to critical and commercial success.

After hearing “Big Leg Blues” and learning more about Hurt, I bought a three CD pack Mississippi John Hurt:  The Complete Studio Recordings, a collection of his 1960’s albums.  After listening to this, I was hooked for life.  There is a warmth and closeness of the 1960’s albums, because of the better recording methods, that really brings out the quality of Hurt’s music, songwriting prowess, and personality. 

John Hurt’s musical style is all his own but it has been classified as falling into the country blues and delta blues categories of the blues.  Hurt employs finger-picking in all his songs:  there is a syncopated bass note played by his thumb with alternating treble notes played by his index and middle fingers.  This produces a style not unlike ragtime for guitar:  imagine Scott Joplin’s piano rags arranged for acoustic guitar.  The songs are always rhythmically flawless and are a testament to a totally accomplished guitar musicianship. 

Lyrically the songs are always clever, sometimes humorous.  Take the song “Candy Man Blues” as an example.  Like many blues singers, Hurt uses metaphors alluding to sexuality.  The song begins with:

All you ladies, gather ‘round
The good sweet Candy Man’s in town

Later on the lyrics are even less subtle:

Don’t stand close to the Candy Man
He’ll put a big candy stick in your hand.

Aside from a sly sense of humor, Hurt employs a wide range of emotional colour throughout all his recordings.  What always comes across is his unique personality:  a laid-back, gentle and kind persona that you seldom hear in the blues or any musical genre.

After many hours of listening to Hurt’s 1960’s recordings I decided to further explore his oeuvre by purchasing his 1928 recordings for OKeh records.   These recordings offer an interesting counter-point to the records he made in his old age:  in 1928 he is young and more energetic.  Some of the songs he recorded in 1928 were re-recorded in the 60’s and it is also interesting to see how these songs have evolved and mellowed like a vintage wine.

The history of recorded music is rich in output from artists and musicians that don’t get the exposure that they deserve.  By exploring music history, one can often find music and people that speak to his or her own unique outlook on life and personal experience.  Focusing on only current popular culture trends will blind you to the diverse and highly-personal discoveries you can make by excavating the past.  My own discovery of Mississippi John Hurt is testament to this claim. 

My Journey on the Rocky Mountaineer

The Rocky Mountaineer is a train that takes you through some of the most beautiful and breathtaking landscape in Western Canada.  I had the good fortune of being able to take a round trip on the train from Jasper, Alberta to Vancouver, British Columbia and then back again on a different route from Vancouver to Jasper.  The scenery is unforgettable and the service by the staff of The Rocky Mountaineer is impeccable.  In fact, my experience on the train was nothing short of life-changing.  It opened my eyes to a part of Canada that I had never seen before and I received amazing service along the way.

The main draw for the Rocky Mountaineer is the magnificent scenery.  Beautiful mountain ranges, lush rainforest, waterfalls, a wide range of many species of vegetation, and frequent spotting of various types of wildlife are only a few of the things you will witness on the train.  As you are traveling, a friendly member of the Rocky Mountaineer staff will guide your journey through a narration.  You never have to worry about missing something because you are constantly made aware of sights as you approach them by the staff.  One of my favorite instances of this was when we were traveling through a thickly vegetated section of BC.  A staff member drew the passengers’ attention to a beautiful cascade of water that was only viewable by standing up and peering down a small canyon on the left side of the coach.

As mentioned, the wildlife is one of the interesting things you will see on your journey on the Rocky Mountaineer.  I remember distinctly passing through an open area of land on one of the initial days of my journey and spotting a lone wolf drinking from a body of water a few hundred meters away.  There were also frequent sightings of mountain sheep who always seemed to defy laws of gravity by walking along steep inclines of mountain. 

The Rocky Mountains are another thing that you will see plenty of from angles and elevations that you can’t get from anywhere else in Western Canada.  It was raining on the final day that we spent on the train and when a mountain called Mount Robson came into view, the tallest mountain in the Rockies, the sun was peeking through the clouds and a beautiful rainbow was visible adjacent to the majestic mountain, another perfect photo opportunity.

The quality of service that is received on The Rocky Mountaineer is another thing that makes the experience so memorable.  I had the privilege of being on a Gold Leaf service car.  This differs from Silver Leaf in that there is a dining section below the sightseeing section on each car.  This allows passengers to receive full dining service with their fellow travelers and the quality of service is amazing.  Breakfast and lunch is served in the dining section and the menu is varied enough to please even the pickiest of eaters.  Dinner is not served on the train because the train stops before dinner hour every evening so that passengers can stay in hotels over night.  One day, because of delays, we were on the train for longer than expected.  The service and kitchen staff were kind enough to provide each passenger with an additional meal served at their seats on this day, another example of how the staff goes the extra mile to ensure satisfaction of every passenger.

Up in the sightseeing section of the car, the staff is efficient and always pleasant.  Besides narrating your journey, the staff provides you with unending refreshments and add personal touches to the journey.  Frequently, the staff will provide amusing and interesting stories to the travelers that add colour to the trip.

I feel very fortunate to have been able to experience the Rocky Mountaineer in my life.  It is a great way to see a beautiful part of Canada.  The sights that are seen are unforgettable and the quality of service is exceptional.

The Madness of "River" (A Netflix Original Series)

“Madness can bring its own kind of clarity.” - John River in “River”

John River of the British police procedural, “River” is a character unlike any other.  What sets him apart is his ability to hear and see what he calls “manifests”, dead people from his past who visit him as hallucinations and comment on his thoughts, feelings, and situation.  Obviously, society would deem such a person “insane”, “psychotic” or “mad”, but “River” as a series, has a more open-minded outlook on its characters and does not paint them into any corner.

As the series opens, DS John River (Stellan Skarsgard) is on the trail of suspects in one of his cases.   He is accompanied by his partner, DS Jackie “Stevie” Stevenson (Nicola Walker) as they converse in their car and drive around.  Gradually, however, we learn that the case that River is investigating is the murder of Stevie and that her appearance is a figment of River’s visions.  The viewer witnesses River conversing and reacting to Stevie’s interjections much to the bewilderment of those around him.

Stevie is not the only manifest that River interacts with:  there are other people, now dead, from past and current cases, as well as the 19th century serial killer from a book River is reading.  All these presences appear to be detrimental to his state of mind and makes him appear completely crazy to those around him as he continues on the case.

There have been other items of popular culture that have presented “hearing voices” or hallucinations in a similar manner.  “A Beautiful Mind” comes to mind as one which had a similar depiction of insanity.  What sets “River” apart is the way the lead character's illness is presented to the viewer.
One example of this can be seen in the way the series is shot:  In one shot, River will be physically interacting with the object of his hallucination, in the next shot he is alone.  As mentioned one of his manifests is Thomas Cream, a 19th century serial killer.  Cream frequently belittles and antagonizes River in their conversations.  At one point River grabs Cream and starts to grapple with him and beat him up.  In the initial shot, we see the two characters fighting.  In a second shot, we see the real world’s view of River and how he is by himself and seemingly wrestling with absolutely nothing, a figment of his own imagination.

Also, River’s insanity is presented with humanity and understanding.  Though what is known as psychosis is allegedly a debilitating mental illness, the series never panders to River’s disability and arguably presents it as a psychic gift for River despite the problems it can cause.  River sometimes comes to realizations about himself and his cases through his interactions with manifests.  In reality, River’s visions must ultimately come from himself, his own psyche and unconscious.  In learning to deal with and grapple with his unconscious manifests, River is learning to deal with his own emotions, buried traumas, and the dark side of his psyche.  This idea, that there can be some meaning behind and purpose to madness, is what really makes “River” a revelation.  Mental illness or whatever you want to call it, be it bipolar disorder, insanity, madness, psychosis, mania, schizophrenia, or depression may not be just some meaningless malfunction of the brain, but a healing mechanism that is attempting to make the invisible visible, the unconscious conscious, or the
fractured more whole.

In the end, River seems to come to an understanding of himself and comes to terms with his illness and his relationship to DS Stevenson.  Furthermore, the series paints a picture of mental illness not just as a divergence from normality, but as an alternative colour in the palette of humanity’s multitudinous perspectives.

"Gimme Shelter" and the Death of the 60's Utopian Dream

If you haven’t seen the Maysles Brothers’ documentary from 1970, “Gimme Shelter”, do everything you can to see it now.  Even if you aren’t a fan of the Rolling Stones, concert films or rock and roll in general, it is a film of immense significance, invention and power.

First of all, “Gimme Shelter” stands as a cinematic symbol for the death of the ideals and dreams of the hippy generation of the 60‘s. In the 60’s, an entire generation collectively believed that they could change the world for the better and build a utopia.  Michael Wadleigh’s “Woodstock” (1970) as a documentary and event, is the antithesis of “Gimme Shelter” because it showed this idealism.  Woodstock was a concert held in the summer before Altamont, and succeeded as a testament to the peace, revolution and love ideals associated with the hippy movement in the 60‘s.  “Gimme Shelter” on the other hand, took place in early December of 1969.  In its final half hour, the Maysles brothers' documentary, shows the viewer death, confusion, and disillusionment on a grand scale.

At a massive concert held at the Altamont Speedway in San Francisco, top-tier bands of the time are booked, headlined by the Rolling Stones.  The performances are disrupted and disturbed by violence and ultimately murder at the hands of concert-goers and the intended security of the concert, The Hell’s Angels.  No other concert film in history bears witness to the cultural relevance of the proceedings at the end of the film.  This is the ultimate pro-filmic event.  Everything about the concert seems ill-fated: the viewer is witness to stoned hippies freaking out on bad acid, backstage/logistical chaos, and a proposed security system that is questionable from the start.

Another reason for the importance of “Gimme Shelter” is its stylistic inventiveness.  A conventional documentary would have shown the Rolling Stones in concert, performing and their backstage antics.  “Gimme Shelter” goes a step beyond this by showing members of the band watching footage of the unedited film and their North American tour after it has happened in the editing room.  The viewer witnesses the band’s reactions to and commentary on what they have already done and live performances that have already taken place.  No previous documentary had this complex playfulness and added dimension.

Finally, “Gimme Shelter” is a great document of the Rolling Stones at the height of their fame, youthfulness and skill.  The live performances leading up the final concert at Altamont are electrifying and engaging. The energy in the crowd of each concert is tangible and helps to demonstrate what made the Stones one of the most famous and adored rock bands in the world. The film is beautifully restored by the Criterion Collection and the video and sound is phenomenal. 

For anyone thirsting for a concert documentary that is culturally significant, original in its style and form, containing great music and performances, look no further than 1970’s “Gimme Shelter”.  In the end, the film shows just how naive and delusional the ideals of the 60’s generation were.  These events have shaped the trajectory of history and society in many ways.

The Forgotten Oasis Album

Oasis is a rock band that is known to most for their mid-90’s musical output, mainly their debut album, Definitely Maybe (1994) and their mega-successful follow-up, (What’s the Story) Morning Glory? (1995) which contained the hits “Wonderwall” and “Don’t Look Back in Anger”. However, few critics or fans give as much attention to their early 21st century releases.  I would like to demonstrate that their 2005 release Don’t Believe the Truth is the most accomplished, concise, diverse and coherent album of the band’s entire career.

The reasons for the strength and accomplishment of Don’t Believe the Truth is as follows:  it gave the chance for more members of the group besides Noel Gallagher to contribute to the songwriting, making it more diverse and musically-interesting.  Secondly, the newer members of the group added a more technically-refined, musically-coherent, and refreshing sound to the album.  Finally, Noel Gallagher, the traditionally-acknowledged songsmith of all previous Oasis material, demonstrates an unparalleled maturity and growth as a songwriter and lead singer on a handful of songs.

Unlike the first few Oasis albums, on Don’t Believe the Truth, Noel Gallagher is not the sole songwriter.  Liam Gallagher, the brash lead singer of the band, as well as bassist Andy Bell (formerly of the band, Ride) and guitar-player Gem Archer all provide outstanding material.  Bell’s songs “Turn Up The Sun” and “Keep the Dream Alive” embody all of the energy, philosophy, and attitude of Noel Gallagher’s most popular Oasis songs.  Take these lyrics from the album’s opener, “Turn Up The Sun”:

I carry the madness
Everywhere I go
Over the border
and back through the snow.

So if you see me
And I look right through
You shouldn’t take it
As a reflection on you.

These lyrics really get at the essence of Oasis’s swaggering, hyper-confident persona as a band, especially coming from the mouth of lead singer, Liam Gallagher.  Archer’s “A Bell Will Ring” later in the album, adds buoyancy and catchiness with its searing guitar riff to open the song.  Of course, Liam Gallagher demonstrates increased maturity in his song-writing skills with his own offerings:  “Guess God Thinks I’m Abel” and “Meaning of Soul”.

The newer members of Oasis who have gradually replaced the founding members over the years add a stirring musical concoction to the milieu.  Zack Starkey (Ringo Starr’s son) drums on this album and there is something hypnotic about his sense of rhythm.  On the album’s single “Lyla”, for example, Starkey paradoxically sounds like he is free to embellish the rhythm while at the same time maintaining a rock-solid backbeat.  Similarly, the guitar solo that Andy Bell provides for “Keep the Dream Alive” is beautiful in its simplicity:  it maintains a bass note while slightly alternating a higher note in a droning, chiming manner that recalls Bell’s days with his shoe-gazer alumni in Ride back in the 90’s.

Of course, no Oasis album is complete without a number of tracks provided by the band’s chief songwriter, Noel Gallagher.  On Don’t Believe the Truth, the older Gallagher shows that he has grown a lot as a lyricist and songsmith.  He also shows that he is still able to “steal”, pay homage to, and re-appropriate songs from the classic Rock pantheon.  On “Mucky Fingers” he channels The Velvet Underground and on “Part of the Queue” he shows his long-held fascination with the songwriting of Burt Bacharach.  Where in in his earliest songs, Noel would limit his lyrical scope to such themes as partying, living the rock and roll lifestyle, and tributes to Beatles songs, on this album he demonstrates a poignant world-weariness, disillusionment, and unsteady precariousness within his lofty position in the world of rock music stardom.

Overall, Oasis’s second to last studio album is an under-rated gem.  It satisfies in its diversity and scope.  Although it has been virtually forgotten and overshadowed by the bands earlier recordings, it deserves credit and repeated listenings.

Thoughts on Season 1 of "Stranger Things"

One of Netflix's latest series that everyone is talking about and binge-watching is "Stranger Things", a sci-fi, mystery, horror, adventure opus that takes the early 80's suburbia as its setting and does so, through the use of a retro-sounding soundtrack, sets, costuming and art direction, quite effectively.

Aside from some questionable acting performances, the series is enjoyable and often riveting.  Created by, often directed and written by newcomers the Duffer Brothers, the show has an obvious love and nostalgia for the time period of 1981, right around the time when "The Empire Strikes Back" was released and The Clash's "Should I Stay or Should I Go?" was repeatedly played on many a teenager's tape deck. 

From the beginning we are thrust into mystery and fear-invoking atmosphere:  a youngster disappears one night on his bicycle ride home.   There is an ominous research facility on the outskirts of town that may be responsible.  Or maybe its something otherworldly: an extraterrestrial creature existing in an alternate dimension is spotted at times.  The missing kid has a bunch of pals who take it into their own hands to discover their buddy's whereabouts.  Meanwhile, the boy's mother (Winona Rider) is visited by inexplicable occurrences that may or may not be the result of her deteriorating grip on reality. 

There are countless references to period popular culture that film fans and generation X-ers will devour.  "The Goonies", "E.T.", "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", and "Stand By Me" are just a few of the references that may be spotted throughout "Stranger Things".

Perhaps its all a bit hokey and a few loose ends are not tied up in the end.  But the period detail and sense of adventure is phenomenal and fun.  The Duffer Brothers have come up with a gem and viewers should look forward to their future work.

Janis Joplin: Little Girl Blue (2015, dir. Amy Berg)

Few musician documentaries have delved into the personalities of its subjects as succinctly and effortlessly as Amy Berg's "Janis Joplin: Little Girl Blue."  Through the use of narrated personal letters written to family, friends, and lovers as well as interviews, Berg weaves a tapestry of glimpses into the inner workings of Joplin's head and mindset at various stages of her career and life.

I was not ever a huge, die-hard fan of Joplin's music, nor did I exist during her own existence on this planet.  However, this film gave me new insight, understanding and appreciation for this gifted but tortured artist.

Joplin's early years in small-town Texas are enlightening as to the inspirations and seeds that would soon flower into her momentous career in San Francisco and worldwide.   The bittersweet aspects of her relationships and circumstances are truly heart-wrenching at times.

The film does a masterful job of portraying the ravages of addiction in Joplin's years-long taste for heroin and just how profound a change it was that would transform Joplin's personality at times and affect every aspect of her life.

The music throughout the film is powerful and enjoyable enough to convert any uncertain or undecided musical explorer onto Janis's oeuvre.  Her onstage performances were truly earth-shattering and tremendously powerful.  She had a voice so strong and at the same time she would often scream her music out in a way that some would find hard to listen to.  Given a little exposure to it, you really warm up to it and are transfixed by the live performances.

In the end we are left to wonder what could have been.  Had things turned out a little differently and Janis survived, got clean, ventured on perhaps we would have been graced with even more inspiring music and stories.  Like many musicians who died young, these questions will constantly come up for generations to come.  

You can see Janis Joplin's charisma shine through in all the footage of her in interviews, performances, photos, and home movies.  For this reason she will be eternally missed.

Kubo and the Two Strings (2016, dir. Travis Knight)

For those wanting a jolt of visual-electricity to adhere to their summertime thirst for adventure,
beauty, and emotion, look no further than Kubo and the Two Strings.  Its simple yet intricate animated style will appeal to audiences of all ages and its tale of a quest for reunion with what is lost will strike to the heart, bones and soul of anyone.

Some of the intended humor in the dialogue falls a little flat but there is an elegance to the animation in its combination of traditional Japanese art and Disney-style visuals that make up for that slight downside.  The story-line is simple and will appeal to children.  Adults, too will like it for its universal themes of the unbreakable ties of family, redemption, and the transcendental quality of music. 

In a summer where the filmic landscape is particularly desolate, Kubo and the Two Strings is a welcome addition to any person's viewing experience.

David Ayer's Suicide Squad is a Mess

Instantly forgettable, devoid of any depth or surprise, David Ayer's Suicide Squad, based on a DC comic, is a total waste of time.  The plot is stupid, the acting is bad and the characters are one-dimensional.  The worst has to be Margot Robbie, who in the guise of her character, Harley Quinn, never is able to make the viewer invest in her trajectory, frequently espousing vapid one-liners and other cliched dialogue. 

This lack of investment in character is one of the chief flaws of the film:  we do get an initial rundown on the characters in a totally unoriginal, flashback/role-call of each one, but there is not an iota of major character development and backstory which would add intrigue and freshness to the overall picture.

Perhaps I'm not an avid comic-into-film, die-hard.  Maybe those more versed in the world of the Suicide Squad comic and comics in general would mine more pleasure out of this film.  Then again, maybe the opposite is true.  There have been far better films based on graphic novels and comics.  Suicide Squad stands as one of the worst I've seen.

It has been the norm in recent years for this genre to frequently bend the line between good vs. evil.  Suicide Squad's band of quasi-humans does this in a way but never in a manner that makes the viewer question his or her own notions of the theme and the struggle in the hearts of all humanity.  The whole process seems mechanical and wooden:  there is no soul to the story, characters, or film as a unified entity.

Thoughts on Season 4 of "Orange Is the New Black"

The fourth season of Orange Is the New Black now available on Netflix and the series continues to push boundaries of race, sexual orientation, and mental health issues in its latest season.  It also establishes itself as one of the strongest and most diverse series available on the streaming service.  I say diverse because of its mixture of comedy and drama and its exploration of many themes, issues, and characters. 

The first season took Piper Chapman (Taylor Schilling) as its main subject of focus.  In subsequent seasons, including this new one, different characters come in and out of focus.  Most episodes contain flashbacks of various characters’ lives, delving into their personalities, how they got to where they are, and how their current fates were decided.  This aspect of the show is where its real originality was established and its continuance is always welcome and of interest.  

In season four, new characters are added to the show.  Also, previously-established characters are given time to shine and develop further.  One of the most interesting characters in this season is Lolly (Lori Petty).  She is a character who experiences extreme, psychotic paranoia and delusions.  Her mental illness is treated admirably by the show in such a way as to maintain the character’s dignity and humanity.  Her psychosis never becomes her character but is merely a facet of her personality, an extraneous feature that she is forced to deal with.  The show pulverizes stereotypes and stigmas regarding mental illness and Lolly’s trajectory highlights a mixture of tragedy and comedy.  Her flashbacks also add layers of depth to her character and illness.

Race and racism plays a big role in the current season.  Different racial divides are formed.   It is interesting to see how the show depicts the realities of prison life and how the tenuous boundaries between different races are constantly pushed back and forth as characters cross lines and interact in eccentric ways. 

By the season’s end, it may be a [Spoiler] to reveal that all racial and sexual orientation differences are transcended in all out revolt by the prisoners against a corrupt correctional employee group.  This small revolt can be read as a microcosmic examination of the revolt against police brutality and general corruption in society at large.  It is really a riveting season.  The show continues to get stronger and more interesting as we impatiently wait for the next season.

Free State of Jones (2016, dir. Gary Ross)

Few would regard the Civil War era as a time period ripe for cinematic harvesting as countless films have dealt with it in one way or another over the years.  Free State of Jones directed by Gary Ross offers a unique angle on this era with the true story of Confederate army deserter who leads a rebellion against the corrupt Southern government in his home state of Mississippi.

 

One reason the film engaged me was because of the strength of Matthew McConaughey’s performance.  His Newton Knight presents the right amount of intelligence and charisma to make his leadership believable.   McConaughey’s comeback over the last five years is ever apparent, even perhaps if this film isn’t his best or most coherent.

The film deals with the issue of slavery in an interesting light.  It depicts how the emancipation of black slaves at the war’s end did not mean immediate freedom or easy times.  In fact, the film demonstrates how the cessation of war brought on the rise of the Klu Klux Klan and other organizations of hatred that have made life horrendous for black citizens especially in the South. 

The film isn’t all warfare and endless action.  There are long periods of inaction and dialogue-heavy scenes that may be a hindrance to some viewers’ attention spans.  But with patience, the film can be a rewarding experience on many levels even though it is far from perfect.  It is a testament to one man’s courageous vision and presents a character that, contrary to common sense, stood up to and opposed the Southern United States’ ideology.  Free State of Jones demonstrates that you don’t have to be a victim of your own birthplace and heritage but that people can have independence, courage, and compassion regardless of the beliefs of the surrounding culture.

Anomalisa (2015, dir. Duke Johnson, Charlie Kaufman)

The goal of great animated films is to go where you can’t go with reality-based, live action, fictional cinema.  Most animated films thus transport the viewer to fantastical locales or create characters that have qualities that you couldn’t find in your typical actor and character.  This can be found in Disney’s preoccupation with animal characters with human qualities.
 
Anomalisa, as an animated picture, doesn’t take you to unimagined worlds or depict action that is unrepresentable in live action.  In fact, the film’s depiction of its world and characters is fairly conventional and could even be considered realizable if it were a live action movie.  What it does do that only an animated film could have done, however, is delve into psychological depths and personality environments that could only be accomplished through its own medium. 

This is an animated film that is definitely not for kids.  It contains sex and swearing.  Interestingly, only three voice-actors are used, although there are several more characters than that.  The reason for this is that the main protagonist, Michael Stone (voiced by David Thewlis) only has ever heard one voice in everyone he meets or knows (everyone else is voiced by Tom Noonan).  This includes his wife and son.  However, one day he hears a new voice.  Lisa (voiced by Jennifer Jason Leigh) is unique in this way and he thus immediately is attracted to her.  The focus of the film is on their brief relationship and on themes of loneliness and conformity. 

The film is enjoyable and funny at times.  Perhaps the reason that Tom Noonan voices all the other characters is because writer Charlie Kaufman wanted to stress the mind-numbing uniformity of modern day existence and to express the idea that someone unique and right for us can come along when we least expect it.  At the same time, in showing Lisa’s voice at one point slowly starting to change into that of Noonan’s, Kaufman is showing how our initial joy in finding what appears to be love is often dispelled and demystified as we grow acquainted with the object of our desire.

Season 4 of "Luther"

The new season of "Luther" has arrived on Netflix and its only two episodes long.  I'm not sure why.  It doesn't allow for a lot of character development and as much psychological intrigue.  Furthermore, an agreeable character from the first three seasons are shoddily done away with and haphazardly and dismissively written off the fourth season.  I won't spoil for you who that is.  It may be obvious.  Perhaps this is only temporary but I wasn't happy with that characters' sudden absence.

Another things that continues to bother me about this show is the increasingly ludicrous and outlandish nature of the murders and perpetrators.  In this season, the serial killer is a cannibalistic madman who's idiosyncratic ticks make him like an overdrawn cartoon character.  This show should take a lesson from other European cop shows like "The Fall" and "Happy Valley" where serial killers are apparently ordinary citizens with some human qualities that makes the viewer find it difficult to accept and mistake them for their true, malicious identities.

Idris Elba is a charismatic leading man and some of the new characters are OK.  Season four of "Luther" may, however, leave you with a feeling of mental-undernourishment and dissatisfaction. Hopefully, future seasons will be longer, more psychologically-realistic, and a return to its previous strengths.

Thoughts on Season 2 of "Bloodline" (A Netflix Original Series)

In my previous analysis of season one of the Netflix series, "Bloodline", I argued that the show could be seen as an example of neo-noir.  With its delving into the depths of the dark side of human nature, its dealing with emotional turbulence, often dimly-lit exterior and interiors, and general feeling of despair and conflict, the series, in its new season, continues to exemplify its strong noirish tendencies.


The death of Danny Rayburn (Ben Mendelsohn) near the end of the first season signaled a profound shift in the trajectory of the show's characters, mainly his surviving family members.  Brother John Rayburn (Kyle Chandler), sister Meg (Linda Cardellini), and brother Kevin (Norbert Leo Butz) find themselves in increasingly deeper trouble and conflict.  The arrival of Danny's estranged son Nolan (Owen Teague) throws a monkey-wrench into the situation as those dealing with Danny's death have to accept him into the fold.  With Nolan comes his mother Evangeline (Andrea Riseborough) and other associates of Danny including new character Ozzy (John Leguizamo).

The Florida heat is palpable as the sweat drips off the characters' brows and there is an impending sense of doom that is telegraphed from the first moments.  John is running for Sheriff and his and his siblings' responsibility in Danny's death comes to the fore and is constantly threatening to undermine their chances at peace, life and family well-being. 

The second season is gripping and suspenseful at times.  It surpasses the first season in quality and interest and is one of Netlix's finest dramas.  Danny's influence continues to pervade the family and seeps into the consciousness of each individual.  Danny was a festering cancer who's treachery is felt long after his death, but the second season does his character justice by developing his charisma and emotional identification through a series of flashbacks that allude to his previous life before the events of season one.  He is not totally evil, as any human being alive isn't completely, but possesses admirable qualities such as his ambition to become a successful restaurateur and chef.

The amount of trouble that the Rayburn siblings find themselves in seems insurmountable and impossible.  They constantly are digging themselves into deeper holes and problems.  The show is clever in how some of these crises are evaded or suppressed temporarily, while others are required to be faced head on.  By the end of season two, new problems present themselves, others are slightly answered perhaps, but the sense of doom prevails always.  This is noir after all, where answers to the pro-filmic world and its character's problems are never clear-cut, easily-digested or pleasant.

The Originality of "Run"

The concept of "Run", a British series you can find on Netflix is original.  It is a four episode series and each episode focuses on one specific character.  In that episode there will be a secondary character, not very prominent, who will take the focus of the following episode.  In the end, the series comes full circle and connections between all the characters are made more clear. 

The show takes place in London - the gritty, seamy underbelly of that city.  The lower class, immigrants and drug addicts are signifiers that may be used to describe of the central character of an episode.

I was drawn to the show on the strength of Olivia Colman's performance in "Broadchurch", another British television series on Netflix.  She stars in "Run" as a hard-drinking mother of two violent young men and is the character of focus in the first episode. 

The second episode portrays the life of a Chinese immigrant woman who sells things on the Black Market.  Her debts are a source of mental and physical slavery.

In the third episode, a heroin addict tries to get his life together and win the respect of his estranged daughter.

Finally, the fourth episode focuses on a Polish immigrant who's husband has been recently murdered.

All these characters are drawn together in intricate ways and the way they interconnect throughout the series is interesting to watch.  Thus, the writing of the show is worthy of acclaim.  Though I liked the writing, the originality of the concept and some of the intense moments, I wasn't won over by "Run" as I have been by other Netflix British shows I have already seen, such as "Broadchurch" and "Happy Valley."  It's 42 minute running time seems to drag a bit and you may not feel totally invested in the characters.  Overall, it is a good series but it may not blow you away like some of its contemporaries.

Great New Film Studies Book - "Filmish: A Graphic Journey Through Film" by Edward Ross

I want to draw your attention to a fantastic new film studies book told in graphic novel style.  It is called "Filmish: A Graphic Journey Through Film" and is written and illustrated by Edward Ross.  It was published last year (2015) and will be a worthy addition to any cinephile, film studies student, or general movie lover's library.

The novel is divided into seven chapters and they are as follows:  The Eye, The Body, Sets and Architecture, Time, Voice and Language, Power and Ideology, and Technology and Technophobia.  Each chapter is painstakingly drawn, recreating scenes from various films throughout history, always illustrating the theme of the chapter in unique ways.  The text of each page reflects the drawings and subject of the chapter and offers interesting, original, and enlightening insights into the nature of the medium.  Even seasoned film buffs will find untapped nuggets of information in this revealing graphic text.  Where information was not new to me, I found that it was told in such a way as to seem fresh and added depth to my previous knowledge.

The text of the book provides detailed information and quotes from various theorists, past and present always giving citations for further study.  The drawings are simple but beautiful - the recreations of film scenes are done in such a way as to recall the original film but at the same time add an effervescent, cartoon-style perspective on the scenes.

This book will add depth to your study of the filmic medium as great film studies books should.  It is an original and engrossing work of painstaking detail by author Edward Ross.

Thoughts on Season 1 of "Making a Murderer" (A Netflix Original Series)

[Spoiler Warning]

Many may argue that Netflix's new series "Making a Murderer" isn't a balanced and fair assessment of the trials of Manitowoc County, Wisconsin's Steven Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey.  They will say that the series is biased towards the idea that Avery and Dassey were wrongfully imprisoned and didn't receive a fair trial.  There is some validity to this claim.  But at the same time, the series needs to be slanted and biased.  Why?  Because to propagate the views and sides of the District
Attorney and the Manitowoc police would be to bolster an argument and opinion that has already been well-established.  The result was the convictions.  To take an opposing point of view, as this documentary series does, is the duty of the makers and is sorely needed in the name of truth and justice.

Feelings of frustration, anger, and disbelief may arise in the viewer over the course of the ten episodes of season 1 of "Making a Murderer." The miscarriage of justice is totally palpable, and the argument that writers/directors Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos put across about the wrongful convictions seems like the truth.  Yes, they may have made the prosecuting attorneys and the police look like lying, deceiving, and repugnant characters.  But, this was necessary to get their point across succinctly.

The way that the series is edited and filmed is totally riveting, making use of voice over dialogue, interrogation video clips, news report footage, and trial highlights.  There is a sense of elation each time the Defense team makes a revelation about police cover-up, corruption and the planting of evidence.  But at the same time, there is an impending sense of doom as the trial progresses - a feeling that justice will not prevail.

The series speaks volumes to the disadvantages of the disenfranchised when it comes to legal matters.  The less money you have, the less chance you have of assembling a worthy defense team and case for you.  The allegations against Avery and Dassey are horrifying as is the nature of Teresa Halbach's murder.  In the murder trial, it doesn't seem like the guilt of Avery is established beyond a reasonable doubt.  Still, the jury is apparently biased from the beginning and Avery's guilt is assured in the end.

Dassey's situation is equally dire and unforgivable.  The way the interrogator bait and goad the youngster, who is intellectually-disadvantaged to begin with, is appalling.  It is a mystery how a jury could not notice the obviousness of how interrogators used the power of suggestion and manipulation to lead the impressionable Dassey to confess to something that apparently never happened.

This is a fantastic Netflix original.  It will be interesting to see if the second season continues to explore the mishandling of the cases and whether the justice system can redeem itself.  All in all, "Making a Murderer" is nothing more than a microcosm of the United States Justice system and how corrupt and wayward it can be now and throughout history.

Emotional Growth and Other Joys of Abbas Kiarostami's Like Someone in Love

Abbas Kiarostami continues to amaze me.  He has a way of enlightening the viewer with his character's interactions and nuances.  An issue of Cineaction a few years ago alluded to this:  the idea of "emotional priming" in his films, where you as a viewer become more whole, self- and world-aware as a result of watching them.   His films prime us through his characters' ways of conversing and interacting with the world around them and the emotions they convey.

This obviously is achieved through the selection of the right actors, the right amount of rehearsal, and a strong screenplay.  But, there is also an element of improvisation in this and other Kiarostami films.  This improvisation is found not only in the nature of the acting and character interaction, but in the "jazz-like feel" of the entire film.  There are little quirky flourishes and accents placed at various places throughout the film that give it extra character and nuance.  This might be a scene that seems to have no motivation, a focus on some element that seems ambiguous or odd, or an eccentric action or plot feature.

Kiarostami has a lot of love for his characters.  He treats them with dignity and respect, allowing them to grow as the film progresses and take on a certain humanity.  He demonstrates with Like Someone in Love a refusal to resort to ethnocentric biases: focusing on a country outside of Iran where he is from, he shows a world-centric outlook that pushes him into the realm of a truly global director.

This film doesn't offer easy answers or traditional, Hollywood-style, conventional endings.  This is what makes Abbas Kiarostami one of the most interesting and emotionally-resonant directors of our time.

Son of Saul (2015, dir. Laszlo Nemes)

I recently revisited Viktor Frankl's book, "Man's Search for Meaning".  Frankl was a psychiatrist who survived a Nazi Concentration Camp during the Holocaust.  His main point was that a person who was able to survive the brutal, dehumanizing ordeal in the camps were the ones who had some kind of ultimate purpose or meaning in their lives that allowed them to see through another day.  As in the Concentration Camps, so in life.

Saul in Laszlo Neme's Son of Saul is able to find a purpose behind the nightmare, however horrible that meaning is.  Saul is a Sonderkommando in Auschwitz, meaning he is a Jew who is assigned the cleaning up of the Gas Chambers after Jews are gassed.  One day, he discovers a young boy who has somehow survived the Chamber.  The boy is quickly killed by Nazi doctors, but Saul finds in this boy's initial survival some kind of a connection and sees him as his "son".  It becomes Saul's life mission to provide a proper Jewish burial for the boy with a Rabbi, if he can find one.

This is a film that draws you in at the same time it repels you.  No film, not even Schindler's List has been able to present the reality of the Gas Chambers and Camps the way Son of Saul does.  The acting is powerful and amazing.  Geza Rohrig as Saul has a haunted look in his eyes:  he almost seems desensitized to the brutality around him, yet in his adoption of the young, dead boy and the risks he takes, he demonstrates his lingering humanity and hope.

The camera remains close to Saul as he wanders about his daily jobs, duties, and excursions.  This closeness of the camera keeps us confined to Saul's predicament and somehow lessens the nature of the nightmare going on around him.  It is a wonder of Steadicam usage and an efficient way to keep us invested in Saul's trajectory.

The film won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film and deservedly.  It is a harrowing, enlightening, and somehow beautiful account of an awful time in our collective history.

Thoughts on Season 1 of "Narcos" (A Netflix Original Series)

"Narcos" is an original Netflix series that tells the story of the rise of Pablo Escobar (played by Wagner Moura), a cocaine-trafficking kingpin from Colombia in the 1980's and the efforts and attempts of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency to bring him down.  It is told with a voice-over narration by one of the DEA officers, Steve Murphy (Boyd Holbrook) in a style that reminds the viewer of Goodfellas and Blow, two other drug-centered movies that makes use of a loose, no-nonsense style of narration by their chief protagonists.

What sets this series apart from other docu-dramas and true-to-life television series, is its mixture of real newsreel footage of the period with the fictionalized drama.  This may sound inappropriate - that it would be jarring and disorienting because of the striking difference between the real, documentary footage and the dramatized reenactments.  However, it really flows together seamlessly, with a verisimilitude that engages the viewer on an even deeper level.  For example, a shot of the real-life Escobar will often be juxtaposed with a scene of Pablo in the fictionalized universe of the series.  This blending is highly original and adds character and depth to the show.

The sense of loyalty that Escobar's henchman adhere to is unparalleled and intense.  Never once do his right-hand men give in to the pressure of the constant push to betray Escobar and his illegal activities.  There is one moment when loyalties are thrown into question, and the ramifications of the ordeal prove to be horrible:  even though the betrayal is never proven or shown, the consequences can be deadly.

The way that Pablo Escobar is able to bend the law in his favor and his manipulations of the Colombian government are astounding.  When he is forced into imprisonment, he is able to sway the government to permit him to build his own luxurious prison ("The Cathedral") where he is allowed to serve his time on his own terms.

The show's style is flashy and the editing can be rapid-fire at times.  There are moments of anxious suspense and disoriented confusion.  It has elements of Scorsese's best gangster films infused throughout and it will highlight for the viewer a time in our history when corruption and evil at the highest levels of government were a reality.  "Narcos" serves as an incendiary commentary on our present-day situation that the events depicted have given birth to.

The Jungle Book (2016, dir. Jon Favreau)

I saw Jon Favreau’s The Jungle Book today.  As you may know, its based on classic books by Rudyard Kipling and comes to us from the folks at Disney.  I don’t remember ever seeing the original 1967 Disney animated film of the story but I know of some of that original’s songs which are needlessly used a couple times in this updated, live-action version. 

It is the story of Mowgli (Neel Sethi) a boy who has been raised from babyhood by the animal inhabitants of an unnamed jungle, mainly a pack of wolves and his mentor, a panther named Bagheera (voiced by Ben Kingsley).  One day, as a result of an intense, dry season, the animals congregate at a much receded riverbed in an instance where all the animals declare a truce and promise not to devour each other.  It is at this time that Shere Khan (voiced by Idris Elba), a mean tiger arrives and declares his intention to see the end of young Mowgli, if its the last thing he does. This prompts the youngster to vacate his home and venture through the jungle to try to locate a human-inhabited village where he is told he belongs.  He has adventures along the way obviously, meets a giant bear named Baloo (voiced by Bill Murray), is constantly pursued by the murderous Shere Khan and... I won’t give away the end but you might be able to guess it.

Overall, the film is underwhelming.  A lot seems to go on without anything profound ever really happening.  The voice acting is good, the animated CGI is impressive, but that doesn’t add up to a worthwhile adventure.  Perhaps it’s the child actor Sethi who fails to deliver:  he’s an OK actor, but you don’t get invested in his character totally and he doesn’t provide the emotional depth required for the role.  Furthermore, as I mentioned, there are songs used in this film from the original cartoon that seem to stand out like a sore thumb, never really cohesively gelling into the film’s structure.

I was never swept away, at any moment, by this updated version of the Kipling classic.   It is never exciting enough, never seems to kick into high gear, and as a result, fails pack the adrenaline-powered, adventurous punch that it could have been.

Season 1 & 2 of "The Fall" starring Gillian Anderson (Available on Netflix)

Delving deep into the psychological depths of cat and mouse alike, this police-mystery-thriller, "The Fall" ultimately fails to live up to the path paved by its Netflix co-inhabitant, police procedural dramas.  It has many admirable qualities but the episodes seem to meander a bit too long past their welcome.

Taking place in Belfast, Ireland, the show follows new arrival to the force Stella Gibson (Gillian Anderson) who finds herself caught up in a serial murder mystery.  Before Gibson and her fellow officers discover the identity of the killer, the viewer is made aware from the get-go of his identity: Paul Spector (Jamie Dornan), a local psychologist who you are never quite convinced could be such a cold-blooded monster.

What sets "The Fall" apart from other cop-killer dramas is the degree of psychology involved.  You get a deep-seated psycho-analysis of the characters and their motivations, desires, and dark-sides.

The show, however, seems to go overboard in its detail of the murders and its constant cross-cutting between pursuer and pursued become tiresome.  The overall effect is a feeling of excess and weariness.

This is a good thriller but it is definitely not the best series that Netflix or television has to offer.

"Knock the Cover Off The Ball": Cinematic Baseball

The new baseball season is about a month young and with its advent comes my current reflection on the history (my personal one) of baseball in the movies.  I haven't seen every baseball film. 
The Lou Gehrig Story starring Gary Cooper is one I haven't seen, but I've seen quite a few.  Some are amazing, some better than others and some hit below average.

Barry Levinson's The Natural is one of my personal favorite movies taking baseball as its main subject.  Its mythic quality, the way it brilliantly divides the line between good and evil, using grand imagery and allegorical motifs to express the soul of the game in a transcendent way that few films, sports-themed or otherwise, have been able to parallel, makes it totally rewarding.   The story of Roy Hobbes' rise, fall, and then rise again, speaks to anyone, anywhere who has ever desired to be given a second chance or lifeline.  The music soundtrack, composed by Randy Newman, is one of the most moving, majestic, and appropriate scores to ever accompany a motion picture.   The motif of light vs. darkness is present throughout the entire film and provides a clear guidepost to its viewing.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, 1989's baseball comedy, Major League marked a formative experience in my early life when I saw it in a theater.   It is in the choreography of the baseball action, its on-field realism, that makes it extremely engaging.  Director David S. Ward did a masterful job of composing the action in the games in this film.  Another highlight is the screenplay: many memorable and hilarious lines and characters I can recall from this film.  When Willy Mays Hayes arrives to Spring training and promises that he "plans to put on a hitting display", you know you are in for something entertaining.

Another cinematic baseball gem that was released the same year is Phil Alden Robinson's Field of Dreams.  A farmer played by Kevin Costner starts to hear voices in his cornfield, compelling him to build a baseball field:  "If you build it, he will come."  Just who "he" is is a mystery: Shoeless Joe? God? His dad? The film and its makers had an obvious, mystical awe and love of the game of baseball and it shows in the meticulous rendering of the glory of the sport and the sport's legendary players from history.

Baseball and the movies have had a long relationship.  The rise in popularity of baseball in the early 20th century coincided with the dawn and development of the art of movies.  There is something about the sport of baseball that makes it particularly attuned to being portrayed on the silver screen:  its tempo, its grandiosity, its magic, and its history.  Great films have been made about baseball and you can bet that there will be more in the future.

8mm Celluloid

"Kodachrome
They give us those nice bright colors
They give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day"

Paul Simon, "Kodachrome"


If you were born/raised sometime before the late 1980's, perhaps some of your childhood existence is preserved on 8mm or Super 8mm film.  My family owned a Kodak Super 8 Camera during my childhood and my father would record many of the important moments of my own and three younger brothers' lives:  Christmas mornings, birthdays, baby learning to walk, crawling, etc.  I am grateful for these preserved memories even if the medium on which is recorded has since been replaced my camcorders and digital video recording devices. 

There is something about the warmth and vivid colours of Super 8mm film that is irreplaceable by anything that has come afterwards.  The scratchy, highly-flammable brilliance of 8mm celluloid projected onto a screen has an allure that is impossible to reproduce and describe unless you have witnessed it.

All of my own 8mm memories are stored somewhere in my parents' basement.  I sometimes worry about them being preserved and think about transferring them to DVD somehow.  They are after all, evidence of a pristine, idyllic time in my life.

When I was a pre-teen, I made a primitive attempt at linear editing by stitching together a number of these old films in somewhat chronological order so that there would be a longer, continuous viewing of some of the films.  I would imagine that the Scotch tape I used to splice them together is not the ideal means of preservation but last time I viewed one of them, they seemed to hold up OK.

Along with my own childhood memories on celluloid, there is also a vast collection of 8mm films from my father's childhood that my grandfather recorded.  It is truly amazing to witness homemade movies from the 1950's and 60's of a person who I only have ever known as an adult.

The silence of these 8mm films add an element of mystery and wonder to their viewing.  I often wish I could hear how certain people sounded way back then, but I have to leave it to my imagination.

If you have memories preserved on 8mm film like I do, don't take them for granted.  They are a treasure-trove of picturesque, beautiful remembrances of things past and, in this age of digital, should not be forgotten.

Formative Film-Going Experiences

As a lover of cinema, I often think back to my first experiences of going to the theater to watch movies, remembering my initial awe, fear, and enjoyment.

I recall going to see Return of the Jedi in 1983 with my father.  I was four or five years old at the time.  Perhaps there had been movie-going experiences before this, but this one stands out.  I distinctly remember being frightened and clutching to my father during the first half hour that takes place in Jabba the Hut's Palace.  The creatures were so bizarre and creepily-alive.  I don't think there would have been the same reaction had we been in the age of CGI special effects that George Lucas resorted to in Episodes 1-3.  The aliveness of the beings were punctuated by their actual presence in the pro-filmic world.  I don't remember much more about that initial experience of Return of the Jedi, but the memories of being in a state of fear in that first half hour later relaxed into an overall enjoyment and wonder during the remainder.

Although several years older at the time, another formative experience for me was seeing Major League in the theater in 1988.  As a ten year old, my main passion at the time was baseball - playing, watching, collecting cards, and dreaming about the sport.  Major League did a masterful job of capturing the reality of the game as few baseball films have done before or since.  The excitement of the games, the idiosyncratic characters, and the choreography of the on-field action combined to create a life-long fondness for my first experience of this movie.  I remember walking out of the theater with a feeling of glee having witnessed Ricky Vaughn (Charlie Sheen) strut onto the field to the sound of "Wild Thing" and pumping in strikes that exceeded 100 mph.

These formative experiences with movies are just two examples of how I came to appreciate and love cinema - wanted to study it in all its aspects.  These films aren't even considered all that great critically but to a young, impressionable mind, they seemed like masterpieces.  We all have memories of going to the cinema and being changed, for better or worse, in our youth.  The memories I have provided are two in an ever-developing accumulation of films that shape and determine our destinies.

Midnight Special (2016, dir. Jeff Nichols)

Midnight Special often defies understanding and explanation.  It doesn't pander to you, constantly dictate its meaning, nor assume its audience can't labor over what they see.  This is what makes it so intriguing, engaging, and rewarding.

It is surprising and mysterious.  It is a sci-fi movie with a child named Alton (Jaeden Lieberher) as its central protagonist.  He is a child who possesses other-worldly powers and it isn't until the end that the extent and nature of these powers reveal themselves, though even then, not completely.  There is a cult-like church group built up around the child's abilities and at the film's beginning, the biological father (Michael Shannon) has kidnapped him.  What unfolds over the next hour and a half are often unexpected, always riveting.

Midnight Special is a film that demonstrates imagination and intelligence.  The special effects are nice to look at, as is the cinematography.  The acting is strong and the direction by Jeff Nichols is fine too.  Nichols last directorial effort was Mud starring Matthew McCaunaghey and that was a fantastic film.  This film is great too and shows that the director/writer has wide-ranging vision and an eye for intriguing stories and compelling characters.

Thoughts on "Happy Valley" (A Netflix Original Series)

After watching a variety of British police dramas in recent months, I was excited to start watching another.  "Happy Valley" turns out to be the cream of the crop.  It outshines "Broadchurch", "Luther" and "River", all of which are brilliant in their own ways.  What sets "Happy Valley" apart is the psychological depth and complex intelligence of its characters and the way it blurs the line between good and evil.

Sarah Lancashire's performance as the lead character, Sgt. Catherine Cawood is absolutely riveting.  She brings the character to life in a way that makes her sympathetic.  At the same time, you may find discomfort in liking her sometimes:  she does things that are morally questionable and that add extra dimensions to her performance and character.   She has been through so much hell.  The fact that she maintains dignity and strength adds tension and suspense to her character's trajectory.

The line between good and evil is tenuous in this series.  One of the criminals in the show, Tommy Lee Royce (James Norton) is reprehensible and cruel in many of his actions.  However, the show does clever things to make the viewer identify and sympathize with him.  All the characters in the first two seasons seem to be connected in some way.  The connections and convoluted relationships add interest and surprise.  Some are related by blood, others by action but all combine to draw the viewer in and keep him or her in a constant state of agitation and anxiety.

The film takes place in Yorkshire, England and the title of the series is ironic.  As Jake Bugg's theme song "Trouble Town" iterates this is a broken, dismal place to live at times.  The cinematography efficiently captures the run-down, gritty feel of many of the city's locations.

This is the best British Police Drama on television.  It is riveting and real, bold and beautiful.  The first two seasons are available on Netflix.

Dark Victory (1939, dir. Edmund Goulding)

Watching a film like "Dark Victory" from the eyes of a 1939 viewer is difficult for someone born much later.  A lot has changed and developed in film aesthetics, narration and style since its release.  From the perspective of a viewer in the 21st century it seems quite unspectacular.  Bette Davis's performance is amiable and draws you in.

The film tells the story of a female equestrian champion who's headaches and lapses in perception frequently disable her.  This leads to the diagnosis of a life-threatening disease.  The film deals with the final months of her life.  She develops a relationship with her doctor and how she deals with her time-limited predicament is explored.

The film was nominated for Best Picture, Actress and Original Score but didn't win.  Though considered a classic of Hollywood cinema, young viewers of today who want to explore old films will probably not be won-over or thoroughly entertained.

Season 2 of "Broadchurch"

Season two of the British crime-drama, "Broadchurch" picks up where season one left off and follows the trial of the accused child murderer from the first season, Joe Miller (Matthew Gravelle). 

What makes the show so compelling and unique is the way the show delves into the private lives of its characters and meanders and diverges in directions that force us to witness the raw, emotionally-charged universes of each character's private world.  The show's characters have a lived-in, realistic quality to their portrayals.  Olivia Colman's performance as Ellie Miller is the most riveting aspect of the show.  We witness the toll the indictment of her husband has had on her, but her character weathers the turmoil in a dignified, resilient way that draws the viewer into her soul.

To make things interesting, the show introduces a new side-story to the over-riding plot.  Another investigation by Alec Hardy (David Tennant) into the murder and disappearance of two children from a few years back.  Tennant's portrayal of Hardy is as an obsessive, unwavering man who refuses to give up.

There are number of surprising twists and turns in the second season of "Broadchurch" and it adds depth and interest to the overall series.  The show proves that some of the best drama on television is happening on the other side of the Atlantic.