Category: blog

Mildred Pierce – One Creepy Performance

The HBO mini-series MILDRED PIERCE concluded last night. The original 1945 film, starring Joan Crawford (her Oscar winning performance) as Mildred, and Ann Blyth as the vindictive Veda, is revamped by the talented Indie director Todd Haynes (FAR FROM HEAVEN).

This version stars Kate Winslet in the title role and the director (who co-wrote the teleplay with writer Jon Raymond) stays truer to the original novel. In exploring the Depression-era class issues, Mildred faces the trouble of finding a job after throwing out her philandering husband. She now has to take care of her two young daughters, including the ultra spoiled (why? We really never know. The child is relentless in her annoying, condescending attitude) Veda (played first by 11-year-old Morgan Turner and later Evan Rachel Wood).

Finding work as a waitress, she eventually learns enough to own and run a string of restaurants, making her incredibly successful. But it is the weird, odd, and many ways sick relationship she has with her daughter Veda that is the real story and why I have issues with this story.

Mildred’s reasoning is never full explained. Her face is continually emoting heartbreak and longing, but the audience is never let into her soul. Why does she make the choices she makes? Why is she so sickly attached to her daughter? Too many questions.

Wood does a decent job of playing the teenage Veda – channeling her best Queen Sophie-Ann from TRUE BLOOD. But it’s the younger Morgan Turner, playing the character in her early teens that is…well…creepy. There I said it. Her performance is so downright creepy you can’t wait for her to get off the screen. Her choice in body language is bizarre and her so-called elevated dialogue doesn’t help at all with the creepy factor. It would be better if she were playing the role of Claudia in INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE.

Thank goodness her performance is nowhere to be found in parts four and five – probably the reason why these last installments are the best in the series.

 

Why The King’s Speech Deserves Best Picture

A lot of people are disappointed that The Social Network didin’t win best picture. Instead, the historical bio-like pic The King’s Speech took the prize. The right film won.

If you evaluate the films on story – The King’s Speech is the winner. All the elements of a solid film are present. The plot has conflict and character development. You know the journey the character must take, leading up to a clear catharsis. The chemistry between Geoffrey Rush and Colin Firth is undeniable. And the direction of Tom Hopper (Netflick is under appreciated film Last Chance Harvey with Dustin Hoffman and Emma Thompson – phenomenal) is strong and totally deserving of the accolades he’s received. This isn’t so apparent in The Social Network.

For the three people that read this blog (yes, that includes my mother) my dislike for the David Fincher flick has already been discussed.  The character development in The Social Network really doesn’t have a clear arc unless you count the higher levels of a**h*le that Jesse Eisenberg’s character achieves. But it’s not a real evolution to me. It’s contrived by unrealistic dialogue and depends too much on the trendy, hip subject matter.

This is where The King’s Speech rules supreme. Go see it. You’ll see what I mean.

Two and Half Men CAN Survive Without Charlie Sheen

With all the insane hoopla surrounding Charlie Sheen is anybody really surprised that he chooses to seek help with his addiction by doing rehab at home? Seriously? That’s even an option? That’s like me wanting to go on a diet but only eat freshly baked bread covered in delicious farm fresh butter. Yeah, that would let me lose those pesky last five pounds. Unbelievable!

It’s even more insane that the producers of Two and Half Men – mainly Executive Producer and Creator Chuck Lorre announce there is no show without the talented Charlie Sheen. Really? So the extraordinary contributions of Jon Cryer (best known as Duckie in Pretty in Pink), the phenomenal character actress Conchata Farrell (I LOVED her in the short lived sitcom ER) and the pubescent Angus T. Jones should be ignored as only moving and funny because of the consistently misogynistic and shallow performance of Charlie Sheen? Please. Let’s be honest. Charlie Sheen plays Charlie Sheen on TV and is only able to deliver a great line because of the comic timing and genius of Jon Cryer and the rest of the cast.

To state there is no show without Charlie Sheen totally discounts the brilliant performances of the hard working and dedicated cast members that make Mr. Sheen look good week after week. It also discounts the talent of the writers of the show that somehow miraculously weave the chauvinistic tendencies of their lead character into new and entertaining stories. So why not create new and exciting stories surrounding Jon Cryer? Maybe because it’s too hard? Maybe because he’s not as vapid and insincere as Charlie Sheen? Maybe because he’s just too talented? Come on guys, there’s got to be reason that you feel the show can’t possible survive without the tepid talent of Charlie Sheen. Be brave and move forward with the tremendous acting talents of your other cast members. No one actor, particularly one that phones in his performance in between late night bouts of violent intentions while under the influence of drugs and alcohol, should be revered as irreplaceable.

The show can survive without him. You just have to acknowledge all the players on the team and stop underestimating the talent of your writers and the expectations of your audience.

Public Domain Allows the Removal of the N-Word from Huck Finn

It was recently announced that the publisher of Mark Twain’s Huck Finn is reissuing the book with some minor tweaks – it will remove the 200 hundred or so mentions of the n-word and replace it with the word slave. The reasoning behind changing the work lies in the fact that the n-word is so controversial that the book cannot be included in high school reading lists. Removing the word will reinstate the book – and the publisher makes some money on the very notorious tome with its now fixed non-PC language.

The n-word elicits too many questions. Too much conversation. Too much…thinking. Children of age 15, or so, simply can’t comprehend the context in which the hideous word is used. What a crock! Let’s dumb down America’s youth even more. Let them continue to teach themselves how to communicate on multiple social media platforms but fail to teach them how to participate in a conversation that requires critical thinking.  No wonder the U.S. is ranked 30 something in the world in education.

It’s too bad Mark Twain doesn’t have a say in all this. His book is now in the public domain therefore, eligible to be “tweaked”. So does this mean anything in public domain is subject to change? A hateful, but often used, word  can be erased from history? A time in history told by one of America’s most prized citizens can be altered in order to avoid uncomfortable questions? Sheesh. Thank god there are still documents that can be read in its entirety – like The Constitution.

Oops. Bad example.

 

Celebrity Rehab – An Education

I’ve been on the fence about Celebrity Rehab on VH1. Is it really worth it for addicted celebrities or pseudo-celebrities to air their dirty laundry on a reality show for the sake of becoming sober? Does it really work? I have no answer.

What I can comment on, is that the man in charge, Dr. Drew Pinsky, cares for and talks to his patients with great deal of compassion and genuine concern. The humanity that he extends  makes everyone wish they have  such an advocate in their life – a powerful believer that pushes you to listen and believe that anything you set your mind to, you can and will accomplish.

Even with the most challenging participants, often detoxing from the most horrid of drugs for the first time in years, Dr. Pinsky and the dedicated staff at Pasadena Recovery Center, really seem to want the best from the rehabbers. The crap that Shelley, the resident tech, has to deal with (and clean up. Ick!) only convinces you that she’s in it for the long haul. That she believes her own recovery is dependent upon the success of others she cares for – that goes for all of them. She and her colleagues are truly invested.

But it’s the latest episode that makes me bring up this unusual show. In a private session, Dr. Drew counsels the alcohol and drug abuser Frankie Lons (mostly known for being the mom of singer Keshia Cole). In a most immature tantrum-like way, Frankie complains that everybody wants her to act her age – 50.  In a gentle, yet firm, manner, Drew conveys to Frankie that because of her years of abuse, her brain is stuck at the age of 20, when she began her bad habits. It is a fast, yet incredibly poignant moment, when the audience fully captures Frankie’s story. She is a female Peter Pan. She can’t grow up. She hasn’t learned how. Her actions are like an adolescent, because that’s all she knows. It is a piece of storytelling that cracks open the world of an addict and exposes a small glimpse to us non-abusers.  At the end, Drew (ever the advocate) encourages Frankie that her brain will learn to catch up.  The more she enters her sobriety, the more her brain will learn to be its true age. There is hope. There is progress. If she wants it.

Like I said, I don’t know if it’s a good idea for addicts to try to become sober in front of cameras. But I am moved by Frankie’s story. I am educated. And that should count for something.

Can I get an amen?