You would think with all of the enforced indoor time we've had lately, I'd be getting lots of crafty projects done. Unfortunately I've been singularly unmotivated, only working on sewing/knitting projects when I need to. For example, I sewed this bag for a sister's birthday and put a box of solar powered garden lights in it. That's a bit of a laugh, considering how little sun we've had this summer. Though things are looking up: we've had clear skies all this past week, starting on Monday, except for some thunder & lightening and rain on Thursday night. Even last Sunday wasn't bad- overcast and misty, but at least not raining and flooding. I went to the shore on Sunday evening after leaving my parents' place, and it was certainly a lot calmer than it had been in the preceding days:
Comments
I'm beginning to think that the star system in old Hollywood had a point when it controlled the public behaviour of its big name actors. Back in the day, if the stars of an upcoming movie started sneering at their picture's source material, all smug and arrogant, some Eddie Mannix type would have hustled them off and given them the business. Because here we have the two main actresses in the upcoming Disney Snow White "remake"- a cynical attempt by a creatively bankrupt company to squeeze a few more bucks out of the work of far more talented people - crapping all over the original animated film. The original Disney movie Snow White- yes, from 1937- is the cornerstone of Disney's film empire, being its first full length animated feature. Its success, both critically and financially, allowed Walt Disney to expand and improve upon his animation studio and business. The AFI even has it listed as one of the 100 greatest American films. But of course, these two ladies know better. Moldy old Snow White and its traditional values need an update because, as Rachel Zegler comments contemptuously, "It's no longer 1937." And, as she and Gal Gadot both aver, she don't need no man. Well, this sounds like it's going to be a real charmer. Leave aside all the other nonsense: the fact that the protagonist, named after her 'skin as white as snow,' is not white in this production. Also that the seven dwarves are dwarves no longer, but rather "seven magical creatures of all genders" (whatever that means) who look like a troupe of medieval jongleurs got run over by a clown car. And of course, the film dispenses with Snow White being rescued by her prince and the dwarves- oops, magical creatures- in favour of having her rescue herself. Just like every single Disney production lately. As I said, leaving that aside, why on earth would Disney want the stars of this travesty coming out and trampling all over the original movie which, I can guarantee you, is a thousand times better than this swill is going to be. One would think the tone the studio would want its stars to take would be of respect and homage to the original work which is, at the end of the day, the reason they're drawing a paycheque. That would show class instead of this crass ingratitude. But of course, there's been nothing classy about Disney in a very long time. Coincidentally, it's also been quite some time since they managed to produce a movie worth watching. I wonder if those two facts are related in some way. Related Posts:I recently found this DVD of three films in a thrift shop I had ducked into to peruse the book, LP, and movie sections. The DVD contains three movies as you can see: I really bought it for the third film listed- My Man Godfrey- which I've seen before but never owned. It's a comedy from 1936 which stars Carole Lombard as Irene, a well-meaning but spoiled socialite who, participating in a scavenger hunt with her rich friends, gets a homeless man be her entry of a "forgotten man," one of the items on the list. Later, ashamed of having made a spectacle of his misfortune, she offers him a job as butler for her upper class family which, considering her family, may or may not be a kindness. The man- Godfrey- proves to have hidden depths, however, and Irene finds herself falling for her new butler. The movie Made For Each Other is one I already own as part of a James Stewart collection. From 1939, it also has Carole Lombard in it, who plays Jane, the love interest for Stewart's character John Mason. John is a lawyer in a firm where he is expected to marry the daughter of his boss and become a partner. This plan is derailed when he meets Jane while on a business trip; the two are immediately smitten with each other and impulsively get married. But their married life is not all romance and roses; their honeymoon has to be cancelled due to a court case which, though John wins it, does not get him the partnership. That goes to another lawyer in the firm who's now marrying the daughter of their employer. Then, John's bitter mother who doesn't approve of Jane and is always trying to portray her in a bad light, moves into their little apartment with them. The Depression is on and, instead of getting a promotion and a raise, John is forced to take a pay cut to keep his job. Their first child, a baby boy, is born at this time and, though they love him- and each other- the extra costs and unpaid bills piling up just add to the tensions in their home. Made all the worse by John's poisonous mother who constantly works to cause trouble between them. Things come to a head on New Years' Eve when a the couple, once so full of life and love, contemplate ending their marriage. But then a serious crisis involving the baby makes them reevaluate their lives and what really matters. The third film in the disc is Suddenly, a 1954 movie starring Frank Sinatra as a baddie, unlike in his previous films. In it, his character, John Baron, and two henchmen take a family hostage because their house has a perfect view of the train station where the President is going to be stopping, and they're planning to assassinate him. Baron sets up a sniper rifle in the window while the hostages try to figure out a way to alert the authorities to what's going on without getting themselves killed by the violent criminals. I haven't actually seen this movie- yet- but it sounds good. I did read though that, after JFK's assassination, Sinatra tried to have Suddenly pulled from circulation because there was a rumor that Lee Harvey Oswald had watched it before shooting Kennedy. This seems remarkably silly to me. I mean, David Berkowitz- the Son of Sam killer- claimed that his neighbour's Labrador Retriever was possessed by a demon and was ordering him to kill people but that would be no justification for doing away with black labs, now would it. In any case, the movie wasn't pulled and I intend to watch it when I have some free time. Related Posts: I made a couple posts near the end of June and beginning of July about how much rain we'd been having: virtually non-stop. I haven't said much since because I figured there's no use whingeing about what you can't change. But since then, we've had exactly one full day of sun- back on Saturday July 8, which we took advantage of by going to the beach (of which I posted pictures). Every other day, I've either awoken to the sound of rain or, if it's taking a few hours break, the sound of fog horns on the harbour because of the heavy mist/fog. Usually both. Here we are again yesterday (Saturday): On Friday morning it was merely foggy, so I decided to walk to work... I take every opportunity to get outside right now, because it's so rare these days. But of course, the reprieve was short lived; it began drizzling again mid-morning and I was sitting at my desk early in the afternoon when the rain started pounding on the roof so loudly that it almost drowned out the sound of the rolling thunder. I could have walked home after work- I don't go anywhere without packing a raincoat now- but the violent lightning storm which showed no signs of abating as the afternoon wore on discouraged that notion. I was unenthusiastically contemplating catching a bus home when I got a call from my mum: she and my dad were going over to my sister's place for supper, and they would pick me up at five if I wanted to come, too. I was worried about my parents traveling in this weather- they live about 25 minutes out of town- but Mum said it was barely raining out their way. I told her it was doing a lot more than that in town, but she pish-toshed that and said they were driving in. Which they did. After a fun time at my sister's- another sister and her husband and kids were there, too- the party broke up and we all headed home. The storm had slacked off a little during the evening but just as we walked out the door the the thunder and lightening started up again, as did the heavy rain. I live less than a ten minute drive from my sister, but during that time my dad had to pull off and wait because a sudden torrential downpour made it literally impossible to see out the windshield. After I got in, I checked my phone and realized that the police were recommending no one go on the roads because of the storm. Oops. Fortunately my parents got the rest of the way home without incident- I was worried. The flooding is a real concern- a lot of roads are washed out right now, and last I heard, four people are missing. One of my sisters drove out to the summer camp where a niece is working to pick her up for the weekend and shared a picture of the campfire area, now submerged. The river is through those trees and down a bit of a hill, normally. She also had to drive far out of her way and then double back, due to flooded roads. The problem is, our water levels were already really high due to all the rain we've had in the past month, and then we got between 200-300 mm of rain in the course of one day/night on top of that. Thankfully, none of my family was anything worse than inconvenienced; my power went out twice during a night of truly insane thunder and lightening, but nothing more serious. Someone posted video of the patio from the True North Diner - a 50's style diner in Bedford where we've often eaten - floating down a river which used to be the highway. There are a lot of really crazy videos being posted, though I'll just include a local news report here. Please ignore the appearance of Justin Trudeau and his inane comments in the middle of it. More importantly, please be in prayer for those missing, two of whom are children. As I said at the beginning of this post, it's still raining, but the weather forecast is promising us some sun next week. I truly hope this is right, because we really need a break. A Thunder-Storm The wind begun to rock the grass With threatening tunes and low, -- He flung a menace at the earth, A menace at the sky. The leaves unhooked themselves from trees And started all abroad; The dust did scoop itself like hands And throw away the road. The wagons quickened on the streets, The thunder hurried slow; The lightning showed a yellow beak, And then a livid claw. The birds put up the bars to nests, The cattle fled to barns; There came one drop of giant rain, And then, as if the hands That held the dams had parted hold, The waters wrecked the sky, But overlooked my father’s house, Just quartering a tree. - Emily Dickinson Related Posts: To be clear, I wanted to like this season of Jack Ryan, really I did. So it is with regret that I inform you that it was not good. This is not, I hasten to add, for lack of trying on the part of John Krasinski who continues to bring a likeable everyman vibe to an impossibly talented character... until the final scenes that is. More on that later. The other returning characters- James Greer, Mike November, and Elizabeth Wright- continue to have good chemistry with Jack and each other, though with so many disparate storylines going on, and a shortened season (only six episodes) they don't have a lot of opportunities to demonstrate that chemistry, more's the pity. In fact, Jack often seems rather sidelined in the show which bears his name, which I found odd until I read that the new character introduced this season, Domingo Chavez, is slated to get a spin off series. It seems the writers, in their haste to set up this new show, may have forgotten that they were still tasked with putting together a coherent and entertaining season of Jack Ryan. This is always a mistake- just ask anyone who's watched the ghastly Star Trek TOS episode Assignment: Earth, in which the Trek Triumvirate of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy was ignominiously elbowed aside to showcase these two kooks in an outing so lackluster that their supposed spinoff never saw the light of day. As feared, there was no way to wrap up all the various Jack Ryan plot points in a creditable way in the allotted time frame. For example, the Greer family stuff is pretty much dropped during the second half of the series, except for one monumentally unbelievable scene. In it, Greer bonds with his resentful son by having the teenager drive him to the place where he is leading a SWAT team to take down a terrorist. I mean, I don't expect a great deal of realism in these shows, but come on. Speaking of unbelievable, the scene where Jack is tortured is a bit much. As part of his torture, the baddies take a vat of boiling water and pour it over his back. Then when he is rescued, Chavez wraps a blanket around him- against his skin- and a short time after that, Jack is wearing a shirt and moving around with no difficulty- he even throws himself back first against the side of a car to dodge gunfire without even wincing. Again, I don't expect complete devotion to realism here, but did no one working on this show stop to consider what shape someone's back would actually be in after being doused with boiling water? Also as suspected, Cathy becomes embroiled in Jack's case when it turns out the woman she's been working with on a WHO humanitarian effort is actually the main baddie. Collaborating with the WHO should have been the first red flag, frankly. But at least she appears to have sought Cathy out to gain leverage over Jack, rather than it being a big coincidence, like in the first season. Cathy ends up being held hostage, forcing Jack and his team to come to the rescue. But of course Cathy can't appear to be a damsel in distress saved by big strong men, so the erudite physician wrestles the gun away from the terrorist guarding her and shoots him. Okay. I suppose that I should have given a spoiler warning about the woman terrorist, but it's really not necessary: it's obvious from the get-go who the bad guys are... everything is fairly predictable to anyone who has watched this genre before. Which is a big reason why it feels like the writers weren't really trying. I could go on, but it's not really necessary. Suffice to say that this season was a disappointment and it ends in such an off-putting way. Jack is once again testifying before the senate committee and showboats by waving papers he says proves the head of the committee- who just happens to be from Texas, and voted against Elizabeth's appointment, so you know what that means- was taking payments from the baddies to fund his reelection campaign. This plot point seems to have popped out of nowhere unless I missed something when my mind wandered, something I don't discount as a possibility. But it just seems tacked on the end to teach that bad misogynist (and probable Republican) a lesson, and to give Jack an opportunity to grandstand, which he does. He gives a pompous speech about corruption, etc., and it's just cringe from start to finish. Who wants to see the protagonist wagging his finger like the proverbial church lady and spouting pretentious crap? Ryan seems very far from the "every man" type in this scene. It reminded me of a clip I saw from one of those recent Marvel shows where one of the main characters- Falcon?- is standing in front of a crowd, righteously lecturing some politician about how he needs to "do better". And you know that they're really lecturing the audience. It's tiresome and lazy, and not good entertainment... which, come to think of it, is a pretty accurate summary of this season of Jack Ryan. Related Posts: Having given a rundown of the plot of An Enemy of the People, I'll now discuss my thoughts on this play. I've already talked about Arthur Miller's conviction that this was all an allegory for persecution of communists- heck, what wasn't for him? The dude was a bit of a one-note Johnny. Speaking of communism, in 2018 a touring German theatrical company performed An Enemy Of The People in Beijing, supposed to be its first stop in a run through various Chinese cities. It proved popular with its audience, with people openly siding with Dr. Stockmann and shouting out criticism of the Chinese government. You can probably guess how this ended up; the company was forced by the regime to censor (remove) certain parts of the play. This escalated rather than diffused tensions, with audience members shouting out for "personal freedom!" during the doctored production. The Chinese authorities then told the theater company that, if they wished to continue their tour, they would have to rewrite Ibsen's play along the guidelines supplied to them by the regime. So that was the end of that. It's a pity that Miller isn't still around to appreciate the irony of it all. Though I doubt he would see the humour in it. As for Henrik Ibsen's motivation for writing the original play well, frankly it was probably payback. As mentioned, Ibsen was a progressive for the time period and many of his earlier works- such as Ghost, which dealt with the taboo topic of syphilis inflicted on a family by an unfaithful husband- denounced the often hypocritical social mores of his contemporaries. This caused a lot of criticism and condemnation of his plays, resulting in a disgruntled Ibsen striking back at his critics with the best weapon he had to hand: his pen. Most read The Enemy Of The People as Ibsen perhaps (over)dramatizing these artistic conflicts, portraying himself as Dr. Stockmann versus the baying mob. I mean, sure he got a lot of flack, no doubt- and stupidly, Norwegian authorities wouldn't allow Ghost to be performed in their country for two decades. But he was also very successful as a playwright, his plays reaching a wide audience even during his lifetime. As for Enemy defending communism specifically, I don't see it though I suppose it's possible; Ibsen personally expressed anarchist/communist sympathies on occasion, though I've never seen any record of him giving up his own private property or money to live like a dirty hippie... typical leftist artist. See also: John Lennon. In Enemy Of The People, however, Ibsen doesn't really take a political stance- I think he felt attacked from all sides- which allows people from all over the spectrum to assume that the play is talking about them and their pet issue... case in point: Arthur Miller and McCarthyism. Also, since the issue in Enemy is springs at a spa which have been contaminated by runoff from a factory, the ecowarrior types are convinced that the play is about man destroying the earth and attacking anyone who tries to stop him from doing so. But of course, this isn't what the play is about at all; the polluted water is merely a driver of the plot, a catalyst for issues that Enemy is actually addressing. And these issues include corruption of the press, doing what is politically expedient vs what is right, the limits of democracy, the value of standing up for what is true even when it's personally costly, and if there is such a thing as universal truth, or if truth is relative and has a shelf life. I'll examine each of these questions in Part VI of my review of The Enemy Of The People. Related Posts: Well, I've started watching the new series of Jack Ryan on Amazon Prime. As you may remember, this show has been very up and down for me; I quite liked season one, thought season two was a washout, and then rather enjoyed series three again. So I was interested to see what season four would bring to the table. I'm currently three episodes in and regret to inform you that so far, I'm not impressed. The set up in the first three episodes has been very... slow. And yes, the irony is not lost on me that I have previously complained about Jack Ryan often being constant action without showing the brain work backing it up. Can we see the analyst doing some analyzing, please? But the problem- so far- isn't a lack of action, there has already been quite a bit; rather, there's just too much going on. For example, in the first episode parts of the various plots are going on in four separate countries, with any number of characters involved in each place. It's needlessly convoluted, and not enough time can be spent on any one place or set of players, so you can't really feel invested in them. On top of having too many plotlines going on, dealing with the drug and human trafficking being perpetrated, there are various personal dramas being portrayed which nearly bring the show to a screeching halt. We're watching one of the baddies' homelife with his wife and child, as well as Greer trying to reconnect with his estranged wife and kids. Also, Cathy (Jack's girlfriend) is back, after inexplicably being MIA for the past two series. So far the scenes with her, whether with Jack or following her own separate plotline have been, well... boring. The writers don't seem to know what to do with her character and I don't believe Cathy and Jack as a couple. The dialogue written for them is awkward, almost stilted. Real couples don't talk like that to each other. I also have a uneasy feeling that they're once again going to make the job she's working on tie in to Jack's case, which was a bit much when it happened in the first series; a second time is ridiculously improbable. For heaven's sake, the woman is a successful doctor, isn't that enough? Why does she- a civilian- have to become involved in CIA missions, too? And though I like Greer's character, watching him have tense dinners with his family and butt heads with his sulky teenage son, several times in the first three episodes, seems a bit repetitive and also predictable: you know from the minute he arrives at his son's football game that he's going to get called away, disappointing and angering the teen once more. And it just takes up more time in an already bloated plot- time which could be better spent elsewhere. In these first episodes, they also manage to squeeze in Jack's boss Elizabeth's ongoing bid to become head of the CIA, complete with both her and Jack testifying on several occasions before committees in Washington. Boy oh boy, nothing screams excitement like watching committee meetings. These might not even be so bad if, again, the actors weren't let down by their dialogue. But the speeches given by Elizabeth and Jack are just eye-rollingly cliched, meant to show how tough, noble, and righteous they are. Anyway, those are my thoughts at the halfway mark of the show; there are only six episodes this season. And so much time has been spent setting up so many disparate plotlines that there's no way they're going to be able to tie them all up without rushing and overstuffing the remaining episodes. I'm going to stick it out and finish the show- hopefully it'll improve- but so far it's been pretty disappointing. Related Posts:After Sunday dinner at my parents' place, a couple of my young nieces brought some selections from my mum's large supply of children's books and asked me to read to them. Read aloud? Talk about threatening me with a good time. Unfortunately, a few of the books they brought were some Lego Superhero ones- not exactly classic literature at the best of times. Goodness knows where they came from; guaranteed my mum didn't buy them... I'm pretty sure she doesn't know that there is a Lego Batman. In any case, I consoled myself that at least they would be short reads and over quickly. Not quickly enough, as it turns out. Look at this trash: In the first book I picked up, Batman and Superman are supposed to be fighting the bad guys but instead get in a fight with each other over who is better. But then... Wonder Woman and Batgirl arrive and try to separate the two immature babies. They can't get them to stop fighting, but not to worry: the ladies will show Batman and Superman how crime fighting is actually done. Wonder Woman and Batgirl handily defeat the villains; Superman and Batman are still arguing and pouting so much that they don't even notice. WW and BG share a laugh at the two silly, incompetent men and walk away. The end. While I was staring with distaste at this nonsense, the three year old handed me the next Lego book. It was no better. Batman and Superman are once again teamed up to fight bad guys but are quickly overpowered and taken prisoner. Of course they are. Not to worry though: Wonder Woman and Batgirl arrive and handily- without any effort at all- punch out the bad guys who Superman and Batman together couldn't handle. As the two incapacitated male superheroes look on, hapless and helpless, the two women mop up the criminals with ease and Batman- Batman- is reduced to fanboying about them. The end. That really was the end, because I flat out refused to rot the nieces' brains with any more of this swill and made them go pick other, better books. Leaving aside for a moment just how badly written these are, the agenda being pushed in them is obvious. The male superheroes are dumb, childish, and incompetent, while the female ones are smart, strong, and able to outfight and overpower all the men, good or bad. I have a few thoughts on this, the first being that this is condescending clap trap. The idea that all women in all modern fiction- it has to be fiction, because it certainly isn't reality- have to be the best and strongest at everything, whether it be physical, mental, or emotional strength, is ridiculous. Do you think we don't know what's going on here? And the idea that women will bond together and support each other to get things done while men will only bicker and tear each other down... well. I'll simply say that I've worked with- and for- both men and women, and the one time someone tried to sabotage me at work, it wasn't one of the men. A lot of women are very handy at tearing each other down, just sayin'. Speaking of tearing people down, it's become a nasty habit for purveyors of fiction, whether written, or made for TV or movies, to put men down in the hope of elevating women. I don't know what cabal got together and decided that boys must be derided and demoralized in order to make girls feel good about themselves, but it needs to stop. Also, this is yet another example of companies inexplicably pandering to a small minority while ignoring- and insulting- a much larger section of their potential customers. These crappy little books are put out to make kids want to buy more Lego; you're not exactly inspiring little boys when you make the male hero figures weak and useless, fit only to cheerlead for the true heroes, the women, from the sidelines. t's not just the guys being turned off, either. Because most women don't want men to be weak and incompetent either... just the crazy and insecure ones. Maybe you think that this is a lot to read into a child's book or two, but this is pervasive through just about all entertainment and media now, and it's unhealthy and frankly, boring. Time to stop this pandering nonsense.
|
About MeI'm a lover of good books, classic movies, and well-written shows (as well as some pretty cheesy ones, to be completely honest). Categories
All
Archives
March 2024
Fun SitesOdds & Ends |