Ready Player One 2018 Film

As with my last movie review I stated that I'd do only one more review for 2018 and here it is. Ready Player One, adapted from the novel that unites MRA and SJW in mutual hate. No I will not review Infinity War, fuck that.

I went to the theater I usually don't go to because it's more expensive and boy do they put their upcharge where their mouth is. I got to sit in a leather recliner with buttons to adjust it and it was lovely.

This movie smoothed over a lot of problems I talked about here. It changes and pair downs the challenges. That's a problem with adapting novels though, they always hat to cut an consolidate and that is why I think movies should stick to adapting short stories and adding to them and leave the novels to mini-series that can flesh out what is dropped in movies. I'd have vastly preferred the Harry Potter series as a BBC or Grenada series, that lasted seven seasons instead of the Hollywood eight films (most inconsistent in stage design, direction and acting choices) that cut so much out and butchered the fourth book badly.

The challenges here are a race, a Shining reenactment and Adventure. The racing challenge was stupid and comes off as 90's/00's nostalgia, cannot remember any 80's racing games, though I could be mistaken. I hate the movie Shining, so I didn't enjoy that, or the elevator of blood because I'm having blood problems as we speak, but I like that we got some development with AECH. I liked that Art3mis solved it when she found the ballroom of zombies dancing to Midnight, The Stars and You (which is in The Shining) which is the closest I had to a nostalgic cry because I was introduced to it outside of Shining's context and was thus not ruined for me like it was for everybody else. I feel that it's the same as people being introduced to Singing In The Rain in Clockwork Orange, Stanley Kubrick sure knows how to ruin good things. As for Adventure it was in the novel as a gate, but used here as the last challenge worked. Unlike the novel, there's no completing gates. Just the challenges to win the keys.

Other nitpicks I have about the movie are The Rebellion (yawn...), everybody being in the same town (movie coincidences) and drones that look like they haven't changed much in thirty years.

I didn't mind the changes in what the character's avatars looked, because more people ought to do crazy stuff with their online personas instead of, me: but skinny, me: but without birthmark, etc. They gave Art3mis the birthmark, but like Wade they didn't make her fat, so win/lose. AECH gets to be a black lesbian played by a black lesbian. They de-aged Sho to eleven years old which is such a Spielberg move, but neither are played by actor's of Japanese descent. Their avatars Wade: Cartoon-like with exaggerated features, white and blue hair, Art3mis: A pink bird humanoid, AECH: A cyborg orc, Daito's a Samurai and Sho's a Ninja. They expanded I-Roc's role to bounty hunter working for IOI. He says some of the funniest lines. At one point he says: "There's three things in the world I hate, Steampunk, Pirates and Tabbouli, like why do they even..." As my brother likes steampunk, my sister likes pirates and my pop likes Tabbouli, I felt like he was calling out my family there and laughed.

They have the club scene in the novel in the movie with changes. Of course they play Blue Monday and Stayin' Alive because you can license those songs easily unlike Cyndi Lauper, or Billy Idol apparently. At one point Wade gets a selfie with a cat-furry who's so cute, but sexed up in wrong way, but she turns out to be a turncoat for IOI. I know it was in the novel, but I fucking hate Travolta mode. I swear if I ever got the power to make a Hollywood film, no Saturday Night Fever references.

One other thing I'd like to mention is the lack of licensed Rush songs.

A Wrinkle In Time 2018

I think this will be the second to the last movie review I'll do this year as summer blockbuster fatigue season moves in.

I read A Wrinkle In Time back in seventh grade for school and it blew my mind, the way it presented a science fantasy setting with Meg and family, Calvin and the Witches fighting against the forces of darkness while trying to find her missing father. A lot of the typical heroes journey, light vs. dark themes show up in this 1964 novel before it became required in all fantasy before Tolkienism set in completely. I have seen the 2003 movie version and I hardly remember it outside of the bad cgi affects. With that in mind here's my observations on how this new adaptation by Ava DuVernay movie holds up:

Meg Murray is a clever child of two genius parents who starts to lose her way when her father leaves for four years. Charles Wallace is her adopted younger brother (not adopted in the novel) and he's a cutie who stands up for his sister when teachers talk shit. Meanwhile their stuck up neighbor who heads a popular clique gives Meg shit for her missing, or dead father, taunts her and basically says they wish she had disappeared too. I didn't have that kind of gossip when I was growing up, but I was always told the line when picking on others is to not give them shit for having dead, jailed, or absent family members. That was a no no in my school district. Otherwise everything else was fair game (everything else), so these kids as portrayed in this movie whether accurate to current real life, or not, just goes to show that they're mean about anything just to be mean, which sounds about right. So Meg's Principal in the movie and her mother pull the whole bullshit that since Meg threw the first hit (smacking a ball in the neighbor's face) she has to apologize even though they started the taunts. This is why I hate parents and school staff. This shit. Whatever I'm over it. Also the Principal lecture's Meg over her grief as if it was some moral defect, which is bullshit.

The movie mostly follows the plot of the book with minor changes and a lot of cuts. Meg and Charles Wallace don't have twin siblings to join them in their journey. Calvin does show up, but most of his development and use of "diplomacy" hardly comes up so he's sort of just their as the platonic, but potential love interest. I dig that he and Charles Wallace have classic male haircuts, none of this crew cut crap, or shaved sides shit men do now that's disgusting. It gives them that sixties vibe that this movie has due to it's source material, though it's updated for today.

There are lines of dialogue in the movie that I swear are lifted from the book, but I can't be sure because I haven't read it in years, but it feels familiar, but their are some updated changes I don't mind. For example different people Mrs, Who quotes, such as Chris Tucker himself. Also at the end when they talk about the heroes that fight on the side of light against the dark, the list is slightly changed to include later people than the book's publication. I don't mind that honestly. It would have been too dry if they stuck exclusively with what L'Engle references.

A lot of this movie's appeal in marketing was the casting of the three witches because the children are unknown. Oprah Winfrey, Mindy Kaling and Reese Witherspoon. Most people complained that Oprah plays Mrs. Which who in the book can't keep her form and is often a bright light, but they reference that in the movie with Which's legs being transparent. I didn't mind the change, you don't cast Oprah to be a disembodied voice in a live action movie. Kaling was disappointing as Mrs. Who, only because no matter who played Who they would have been resigned mostly with quotes than original dialogue. Witherspoon as Mrs. Whatsit could be both annoying and amusing. I didn't mind her change in the movie being this visually stunning leafy serpent/flying carpet thing instead of a centaur pagasi type being. I have an irrational hatred of horses, so other people will be pissed at this change, but I still have nightmares of the earlier movies horrible cgi transformation.

As I've said before I was happy they mostly stayed accurate with ages. They cast fourteen year old’s, or close to, Storm Reid and Levi Miller to play Meg and Calvin instead of aging them up and giving them sexual tension like every other young adult movie ever in the last twenty years. Charles Wallace as played by Deric McCabe was bumped up from five to six years, which isn't a big deal.

Other cast-members are Chris Pine as the dad, Gugu Mbatha-Raw as the mom, Andre Holland as the Principal and Michael Pena as Red. I'm sort of glad the marketing didn't emphasize Pine over the Witches.

One of the casting choices I'm a bit annoyed with is that they cast bearded Zach Galifianakis as The Happy Medium. Now I swear my memory was that this character was genderqueer, or agender, but that might have been only in the older movie adaptation as according to wikipedia she's a woman, so what the fuck happened here? Was one more woman with a speaking role too much to ask for in a movie about female empowerment? If I hadn't known this, it wouldn't bother me. It's one thing to change character's race, whatever background it then informs on the character because white people have almost all the roles so losing some doesn't matter. Changing a character's gender on the other hand is kind of annoying. Disney is guilty of this when is comes to source material female characters turning into guys all the sudden, like Bagheera in every Disney Jungle Book movie adaptation and no changing Kha to a girl in the new adaptation was not a consolation.

Anyway this movie is a visual treat and has a mythology and similar themes that would fit in with Kingdom Hearts which is a shame it won't make it in there when we're stuck with crap like Tron Legacy making it in the last title. I feel like a lot of the journey is cut and, or rushed and no there aren't big blockbuster battles, or cheap, stilted young adult romances. The battle is strictly personal and between family, the light and dark. I didn't expect more. Other people disappointed: Sorry, new movies spoiled you. This movie would have fit in with a lot of 90's family movies, but the visual effects at that time would not have made this possible and they probably wouldn't have done diverse casting like making the main character, her mother, and not one, but two of her mentors as poc. Another good thing about this movie is that it doesn't bait you for a sequel that might not be made. If it does get a sequel, I'd like to see more of the family, the three witches and the It fleshed out more.

I've read rumors that Ava DuVernay is now going to helm the Fourth World/New Gods for Warner Brothers. Here's hoping it's a hit like Wonder Woman and that DuVernay doesn't have too much studio meddling fucking it down.

Black Panther 2018

Saw Black Panther yesterday bringing an end to the last Marvel movie I have anticipated seeing. After seeing this I can safely say that other than a Black Panther sequel with expansive potential it all goes down hill for Marvel's cinematic universe. No hyperbole.

Warning: My review has spoilers and jumps around incoherently.

I honestly would look elsewhere for in depth reviews than here because I am a comic book fan first and comic fans are annoying when judging the  quality of an adaptation. I will say ahead of time that I'm pleased with how this adaptation's changes because they work for the tight narrative. Films are different mediums than long serialized comics. As this is a sound and moving vision medium, you get cool scenes like T'Challa suplexing a rhino and Shuri using driving tech from her lab in Wakanda that pilots a car remotely in Busan, South Korea with her brother riding on top trying to pursue Claue. Other highlights are the ceremonial dancing, the ancestral plane, the waterfall fights, both of them, the one with Killonger was adapted from the comics, the fight between T'Challa and Killmonger on the magnetic trains tracks under the city. This movie unlike every other Marvel movie besides maybe Guardians, Vol 2 actually has eye-popping color. Strange that movies adapted from the four color page have muted, ugly grey and brown tones and washed out reds and blues. What is wrong with Marvel? Also the soundtrack and score was good too, which again most Marvel movies are background noises, or they're Guardians and have a Jukebox song list.

The cast of characters have complex motivations that feel real instead of merely being informed. That sounds like a generic statement, but I mean it. I always get the feeling in a lot of films that many characters have no depth outside of "they killed my dog, I want justice!" Killmonger has complex feelings about Wakanda and how it should conduct itself in international affairs. This movie doesn't shy away from racial problems, which makes stock tropes like Killmonger's dad murdered as a traitor more complex. If this was a white story the traitor betrays because he's greedy filth and that's it. His father did something shitty helping a shifty white guy steal Vibranium from Wakanda. However, he had problems with Wakanda hoarding their metal and tech advancements from the world. So here the traitor's got a point whether he went about it wrong, or not. His being killed for it was one thing, leaving his son behind in America created a bigger problem T'Chaka couldn't forsee. The film questions Wakanda's isolationist policies and rather than acknowledge and move on actually addresses it with T'Challa making decisions to rectify that which opens up for a sequel that explores Wakanda's place in the world.

I'm pleased that they changed Nakia from being a former Dora Milaje turned spurned, traitor femme fatale henchwoman to an Wakandan undercover agent and proper love interest to T'Challa. I mean the options would have been shoehorning Storm who's off limits, or bringing in American Monica Lynne, who they could have reinvented and given Agent Ross's role, I guess. Dating a CIA agent would be weird though and bring a lot of questions. This will probably piss off comic purists as well as Killmonger's origins being changed, W'Kabi being more adversarial, giving T'Chaka a brother and giving T'Challa and Shuri the same mother. Usually that stuff would piss me off, but here it works. It's a film and it has to condense things, draw tighter relationships and dispense with some of the tired sexist tropes that do no favors for black women. A lot of women love interests come out blander, pointless, or replaceable, Nakia wins in adaptation compared to the source material.

I think the only minor flaws are Agent Ross, he could be cut. Was he there to have one heroic white guy? Does that really matter to have the squeeing Sherlock fans money? Also the ending fight with all the tribes as they disagree on siding with Killmonger, or T'Challa. That's formulaic, but expected. Okoye asking W'Kabi to stand down was an interesting way to end it though, and I feel like there's a bigger story there that was cut. Do not sit on this movie if you have any intention of seeing it because it's not the same by the numbers formula other than the big fight at the end that still looks visually impressive. At least T'Challa and Killmonger get a one on one final fight, mercy and refusal scene that works.

Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets, A Film Review

I saw Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets yesterday and I liked it in spite of not liking the two leads. When the production credits segued into the beginning prologue to Bowie's Space Oddity, I got chills and sang.

My brother and I were the only people in the theater which means it's probably a box office bomb and no sequels will be made, but I enjoyed being able to talk and point out details. I've honestly not read the source material, but I've had the translated graphic novel collections (all probably incomplete and edited unfortunately) sitting on my Amazon account for years now, but I've honestly not bought anything on Amazon in over a year because I don't have a steady income so I can't compare it, but I will say that they should have cast leads that didn't feel like twentysomethings playing young adult teenage protagonists. It was jarring.

These are shallow complaints honestly, but Dane DeHaan ladies man status seemed informed than shown. Cara Delevingne came off better than in Suicide Squad, but I still don't like her as an actress and honestly would have preferred Rihanna with an age appropriate male lead. Scarlet Johansson with her Avengers look would have looked accurate to Laureline in the comics, but that's nitpicky and none of us really want to see her keep getting roles anyway after that Ghost In The Shell debacle.

What I liked about the film is that it proves you can do a space opera with tons of nonhuman aliens that isn't Star Wars. A lot of comparisons will be drawn to Star Wars and Fifth Element, which the director lifted a lot of design elements from the original comics. To get it out of the way yes the original Valerian and Laureline comics predate Star Wars so their ship resembling the Millennium Falcon is the source material and changing it to modernize it, or kill comparisons is sort of inauthentic. I like that they kept a lot of the retro feeling that probably is in the source material instead of foregoing it for bland apple sleek futurism, or whatever is in for portraying the future now. The sprawling cities made up in the satellite not only remind me of Fifth element, they remind me of paintings of Trantor from Isaac Asimov's Foundation books. That's a good thing because I fear that if Foundation ever got adapted we're stuck with modern sleek with no definitions. Everything looks lived in Valerian, most set designs for the future, or the past don't. They looked pasted on and sparse.

The plot isn't anything amazing, or world bending, but it's the adventure that I liked and it teaches a moral lesson of foregoing protocol when an injustice is made. When the bad guy of the film says he's a soldier and will take genocide over humiliation, (paraphrasing, I know i have some words off) you wanted him to get it.

Another thing I liked that will bother people is the nineties style writing and dialogue. It was refreshing. I watch a lot of films from my childhood that would now be called out for bad writing because people have earnest emotions and say what they mean and then ridiculous stuff happens that escalates, or fixes a sticky situation and they don't break the fourth wall and turn snarky over it. If Cara Delevingne rolled her eyes less like a poor man's Emma Stone, or Dane DeHaan did more than ape Keanu Reeves's speech patterns it would have felt more classic.

Of course there's probably a lot of things people especially on tumblr would have a discourse over, like Valerian housing a woman's soul. I as a transmale didn't find it offensive, but it's not for me to say how a transwoman would feel about that. Things relating to the body and mind become a tricky (hate that fucking word) or, problematic in sci-fi fantasy when you factor that in. It's why I see Ready Player One failing with it's avatar controversies in an age of social media dictating that you answer for your identity on a constant basis. Rihanna's character will definitely bother people. Herbie Hancock doesn't get enough to do. The relationship between Valerian and Laureline will bother people too among other things I can think of.

Anyway, I don't regret seeing this movie and will probably own it if I see it discounted. I would like for some sequels to happen, but it's not going to happen because we can't have cool things. I wish we could have more space opera's that aren't Star Wars, Star Trek, or Marvel. I think this movie does way better than what a lot of people complained about Jupiter Ascending lacked. It's just a shame it isn't perfect enough to garner another chance and we probably won't see another space opera property outside of the big three for another decade, or more because of diminishing returns and then we're back to lazy post-apocalypse, tired teenage dystopias, boring cyberpunk and isolation, stuck in a spaceship survivor genres.

By the way I saw the preview for A Wrinkle In Time and and I know people are going to hide their racism behind unnecessary creative liberties arguments. Unnecessary creative liberties would be aging up Jonas four years in The Giver so he can have hormonal teenage angst and making it in color because people can't sit through the art direction of Schindler's List and Sin City, so his seeing color loses meaning, or how it had to be scored because people need to be bombarded with sounds constantly instead of daring to see a cinematic experience that could challenge you, or make you feel unsettled.

Meg was cast to look thirteen as the books. That's promising. So all the complaints about how Oprah shouldn't materialize and be a shining light with a disembodied voice is a nitpick. That's a necessary change because I've long learned that masking named actors backfires. That's why all superheroes barely wear their masks if they have them at all. It was wasteful of Star Wars to waste Lupita Nyong'o as a voice under motion capture, at that point anyone can do the role. Valerian at least showed us Bubble's two forms, Rihanna and blue squishy alien. I think about the fact that Julia Roberts in Hook had to have a lot of closeups to justify her being Tinker Bell because she'd otherwise be a glowing silent light.

Wonder Woman 2017

Saw Wonder Woman movie last night. From the beginning I couldn't believe what I was seeing because most of my life everybody acted like Wonder Woman's the one character you can't adapt in modern times. It's too big of leap of faith and somehow Green Lantern isn't? That they portrayed Paradise Island and set it in a non-contemporary time in World War I. It was too much for me to hope for World War II because of Marvel's stake on it and there can never be no Justice Society ever, but how often do we see any movie that's during this time that wasn't made during the silent era , or early talkies before World War II drowned it out?

They reaffirmed my faith in Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. I'll never forgive the self-misogynist women and the typical men over that outcry. I bet those same women are the same ones who freaked over the possibility over Adam Driver as Nightwing, but are now over the moon over his portrayal of Kylo Ren, the abuser. You all are obvious in your shallowness.

They made me like Chris Pine in a role. Not Steve Trevor, I already liked the character. Chris Pine has never done it for me as Captain Kirk. I'm so glad to not see him play some cocky blonde guy asshole. He played Trevor just right. He had guilt and the occasional misplaced protectiveness, but wouldn't you if you worried for someone whether they were capable, or not? Here's hoping they don't do some nasty great-great grandson as love interest Sharon Carter bullshit for the sequel. They better not recast him as Hal Jordan either unless they're really serious about that Tom Cruise rumor, in which case, fine cast Pine.

Seeing Remus Lupin as Ares, while an interesting twist instead of William Stryker wasn't as bad as people made it, but I am sick of this idea that Ares has to be portrayed by a British guy. No offense, but the British actors they pick are never scary and imposing and what was with the Burt Reynolds porn mustache in the flashback where he was in chains?

My only real criticisms with the film is the Zeus twist that you could see coming from a mile away, but I give them props that they left the whole conceived, or breathed life into distinction alone. Nothing she knows is necessarily wrong, just that she's the Godkiller, not the sword. For all we know she was still made of clay and had life struck into her as she said previously, like the animated film, but I also know they love Wonder Woman to deal with big lies and maybe I'm just clinging in denial because I want to like this movie. It's odd too me that even with Wonder Woman reclaiming her appeal with women they have to drop the goddess patrons always in favor of Zeus. It's sort of gross and the basic derivative origin to all and every Greek myth hero.

One thing that's telling though is that this film didn't want to piss off the two different factions that are fans of a character named Wonder Woman. I still say Azz's is WWINO and you can fight me. However, I notice that they kept the Marston/Perez Mars/Ares as her archenemy. They left her as the only child on Paradise Island to ease any question of of amazon sex pirates, however making her the only child reinforces that stupid Zeus twist, so… At least we didn't have to see broody origins of the other children bullying her as a freak of nature, so win.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2

Saw Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 yesterday and all though it's more popcorn fair and changes a lot of the source material, I'd call it a solid flick and one of the few properites I still look forward to at Marvel besides Black Panther.

The choice of music isn't as good as the first movie, but I dug the Come A Little Bit Closer scene, Father And Son and The Chain. Even My Sweet Lord was used well even if it's not a favorite. I liked the score too and wouldn't mind a soundtrack of that for writing music.

I know I'm going to get heat for this, but I liked the father/son theme more than I thought I would because even if I saw it coming, I still liked that it subverted the common Star Wars redemption arc that never challenges viewers anymore. It's always a forgone conclusion in Star Wars that love of shared blood equals redemption (hopefully it's subverted with Kylo Ren), which is why they'll never have the balls to just make Palpatine Anakin's blood father. That would have made the saga better. Luke redeeming his father from the abuse of his grandfather.

Anyway, this movie does what comics do well, but movies don't touch on often, bring home the point of your family is your bond and not just because of heredity. I liked that they fleshed out the complex relationships between Peter and Yondu as father and son and Gamorra and Nebula as sisters, both adopted forms of family. Both Peter and Nebula have awful biological fathers compared and contrasted with Peter's tenuous relationship with his adopted father and Gamorra's complex issues with her own adopted family, her adopted father a tyrant and her sibling relationship damaged by that as a result. Love it.

Finally Watched Trumbo

If this is the role Bryan Cranston got instead of Lex Luthor in Batman Vs. Superman: Dawn Of Justice than that's okay with me. I love period piece movies based in old time Hollywood, but as with all biopics and most blacklisting subjects I have to watch it with a grain of salt.

The moment I saw Edward G. Robinson (Michael Stuhlbarg) I let out a groan, because someone always has to be the traitor to the cause in dramatizations. What makes it worse is how they frame it in a deceptive way. Of the four times Edward G. Robinson was called to testify in front of HUAC, it was his fourth time by 1952 that he gave in and named the ten who were already blacklisted so he could clear the air of being a Communist himself. Trumbo had already done his eleven month sentence in 1950. He was only confirming what was already known, not giving new information to light. He wasn't a Communist just because he fundraised with people who were against Fascism. Just as with Humphrey Bogart and John Garfield, Robinson had to clear the air and prove he wasn't in league with anti-American organizations. It's up to you to decide how dirty was Robinson here.

As for the movie itself, forget the complexities. Shit they'll show you how feeble it is if you refuse to martyr and snitch instead. This leads me to the point of how much was Eddy G. a snitch? The transcripts that were reenacted verbatim in the movie are sure framed in a way to set him up as one to the audiences eyes and any made up personal conversation written between him and Dalton Trumbo (Bryan Cranston) there after has to be framed to make you root for Trumbo and pity or have contempt for Robinson. A shameful, missed opportunity there. All so Trumbo can be the bigger man in the end when he makes his last speech in front of The Writer's Guild, while Robinson is oddly enough in the audience. Does that imply the two made up in the end. Why else would Eddy be there than for dramatic license?

It does look bad on Edward G. that he just confirmed names already known and then denounced his former ties to organizations that supposedly supported a totalitarian regime. The true definition of a snitch is someone whose implicit in crimes and dealings with whoever they rat out vs. what John Wayne does and that's target employers and colleagues he wouldn't have hung out with or do fundraising with anyway. When you're Eddy G. and you see the reality of all your colleagues going to jail, jobs drying up, dying, families disintegrating, other friends turning on them, demonized, hounded, and some that comes your way, you might just decide you don't have it in you to be Trumbo and martyr or take the high horse. Not to save your ass or your collections of paintings, but perhaps to protect your family and ability to work, which is more important than your job or public persona in the end. Nope that can't be it can it? Be sure you got a loyal family to risk it all like Trumbo.

I suppose it could be worse, you could be director Buddy Ross (Roger Bart) who disavows Trumbo then comes crawling back to him to fix his screenplay anonymously because his last pictures were crap.

In contrast, John Wayne (David James Elliott) doesn't seem so bad for wanting lenience with denouncers of Communism, while the villainous Hedda Hopper (Helen Mirren) is hellbent on destroying lives with her power of the press whether the the target's remorseful or not. Then of course you got your Otto Preminger's (Christian Berkel) and Kirk Douglas's (Dean O'Gorman) who risk there career for the greater good of giving Trumbo his due.

There's of course some dissent among the family, but they stick it out and from Trumbo's friend and fellow blacklisted screenwriter Arlen Hird (Louis C.K.) a composite character who wants to sue the House of American Activities and dies for his bad habits, while Trumbo would rather win through perseverance and prove to them that they need his services when they vilify them.

Ultimately Frank King (John Goodman) proves to be the neutral party in all this as the foul mouth boss of King Brothers Productions who hires Trumbo and Hird for doctoring and writing screenplays for gaudy B movies. It's pretty cool that he sticks to his convictions of being in it for the money and pussy and refuses to be pushed around by investigators. Louis B. Mayer (Richard Portnow) surprisingly isn't thrown under the bus as much as I thought he would be, casting couch assertions or no, they're said from a power hungry gossip columnist who calls him an antisemitic slur. Here is the closest we get to complexity even though you end up hating Hopper for her blatant racism than you do Mayer for his alleged sleaziness against women.

All in all a decent film, but I'm not happy with how they handled Edward G. Robinson. I guess he had to be the much needed traitor to liberals because Elia Kazan doesn't work thematically and has been played out. Eddy's story is much more complex than Trumbo's assertions that he just wanted to continue to be Beverly Hills bourgeois collecting painting from dead guys or Robinson's point about him being a public face while Trumbo can hide under screen writing. Disappointing and simplistic when you consider the actors who got hounded to death like John Garfield or were never allowed to work again like Lee Grant. The film does try to address that point at the end, but it really doesn't get into the meat of the whole controversy than vague allusions and speeches.

As much as I'm on Trumbo's side for free speech and freedom of affiliation and I hate snitches, as I've said, I don't care for how they frame Robinson as a turncoat who lost his way doing things he wouldn't normally do. It's not really snitching if the crime is on public record and had been dealt with. Political ideals only get you so far until your personal and working life is fucked beyond repair than to play the friendly witness. How many readers out there have to eat shit everyday from a boss who abuses power, but talks a big game of worker's rights? I'm not saying that Robinson is theoretically in the right, nor do I condemn him.*

Notes:

* Maybe I'm biased because I own more Robinson films than any other actor besides James Cagney and Fred Astaire, but John Garfield's my number three favorite actor after James Cagney and George Raft so you know I take the HUAC blacklisting personally as an great injustice. On another note: I also have to point out that while I can't stand John Wayne and Ronald Reagan anyway, that doesn't stop me from enjoying a Walt Disney production or a Robert Taylor movie who are also in league with HUAC or named names because they believed in what they thought was the patriotic thing to do.

This movie was a must for my dad who loved (maybe that's the wrong word, impressed?) by Bryan Cranston's turn on Breaking Bad.

Dalton Trumbo writes in the bath as do I. He had a better system, a board propped on both sides of the tub to place his typewriter on. I used to prop my mini laptop on a food tray on my dry belly, didn't want to press my luck so I've taken to typing on my notes feature on my 1st gen. Kindle. Much like a typewriter, it's not good for going back and fixing mistakes. I'd say they need to make a handheld word processor, but that's what stupid touch screen smart phones and tablets are for and I say bah.

The movie Dalton Trumbo gets his first credit on since the blacklist is Otto Preminger's Exodus. My mother saw it when she was young and talked about a lot and she finally begged my brother to buy it for her for Christmas last year and he did. It's one of the last films she got to see before passing away this year.

Thoughts On Hail, Caesar! And My Similar Lost Project

Many years ago before Hollywood Video closed, my brother and I loaned my mom some rented movies with the instructions to return them to the one closer to our side of town. Instead she returned them to the one closer to hers and it took over a month for them to transfer over. We ended up with $46 of fees. We paid them off and then half a year later they had a closing down sale and excused all fees. Sigh... Such is life.

Rewinding backwards on the way to paying the fee, my brother said "It's time to pay my debt to Hollywood."

That line got me brainstorming. We envisioned a web comic about a Golden Age Hollywood that mashed up eras. It had a studio system, but it made room and allowances for actor and genre types existing simultaneously while also exploring poverty row, indies and self directed vanity projects. Basically the gist as I envisioned it was a director who is owed another movie on his contract before he can freelance or retire. My brother didn't like that and insisted the main character be an everyman actor of Jimmy Stewart or Henry Fonda variety. We then discussed other characters. We had a Clark Gable meets George Clooney King of Hollywood type marrying a Julia Roberts girl next door type who claws her way to the top while making power plays sort of like what people think of Joan Crawford. We moved onto the main characters best-friend, the guy who always plays dad's, but is in the closet, sort of Robert Reed of The Brady Bunch and less like Paul Lynde. We then discussed a Clint Eastwood meets Humphrey Bogart type who goes from doing low budget crime movies to directing his own vehicle. There was to be a Jean Harlow/Marilyn Monroe type who while sweet has mob ties. We'd have had a Benny Siegel gangster type as part of her backstory. We also discussed an obnoxious, method actor Marlon Brando/Robert De Niro type who alienates his co-workers with his extreme idiosyncratic methods. We even spitefully thought of doing a Tom Cruise/Keanu Reeves action hero leading man whose box office appeal gets him cast in inappropriate period dramas. We even thought of a directors nephew Nicholas Cage type whose bizarre, over the top acting produces controversial results. Those last two were cynical on our part. We discussed other actors and directors, but this part of the post is getting too long and is unimportant.

This brings me to Hail, Caesar! It does what I could have done, better than I could imagine. Sure a web comic has room to flesh out soap opera plots and job commentary better than a 100 minute movie could, but it'd be pure wank compared to the what the Cohen Brothers pulled off. I like them. Not all of there movies are winners, some are forgettable, but like that other maligned, but overrated director Wes Anderson, they make movies that aren't structured like blockbuster formulas. They put there own stamp on topics no other filmmaker would touch without turning it into some by the numbers drivel.

I watched Gail, Caesar! in a nearly empty theater with my remaining family. It was an overwhelming sight to behold. I liked it. I don’t understand other people’s bitching that it wasn’t some big blockbuster team up of disparate actors, Avengers style. It’s better than the wasted spectacles of crap like Gangster Squad or The Great Gatsby as far as period piece cinema goes. It’s the day in the life of the going on of a fictional studio, the aptly named Capitol. You see the last night, the day and the next day. Nice structuring to accommodate the comings and goings of characters tied by Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin). You get to see Clooney as a leading man sword and sandal type getting kidnapped by a Communist conspiracy where he acts like a tool. You get to see Scarlett Johansson as an Esther Williams type career-wise, but with a Loretta Young-type subplot. Ralph Fiennes as a director having line reading troubles with an actor. Channing Tatum doing something I actually found worthwhile. Though too tall and of broad built, he pulls off doing a homoerotic Gene Kelly sailor musical number while being a mastermind and blackmailer Communist. This is my first Alden Ehrenreich movie. I’ve never watched anything with him before, but he made me give a damn about a cowboy actor and that’s tough. I had a hard time doing that for my own Debt To Hollywood concept. I'd like this actor go places, because his previous discography of Coppola, Woody Allen and Beautiful Creatures don't interest me. He's also my type, Eastern European Jewish descent with lots of hair on his head. He sort of reminded me of Sal Mineo too.

While my brother called the Deanna (Scarlett) and Joseph Silverman (Jonah Hill) dating. I was the only one to call the Communist plot, the moment the screenwriters mentioned economics and sociology. It's nice that a Communist Conspiracy in Hollywood can finally be used as a credible plot device now with tongue and cheek, but still played straight of course. No need to mock or satirize a sensitive issue that destroyed lives. I will still check out the Dalton Trumbo movie and I'm still mad at what was done to John Garfield, and the unrelated postmortem lies regurgitated in a Robert Redford movie, but it's time we can actually explore this, what ifs or not. Back in the planning stages of Debt, I had to agree with my brother after much deliberation to drop a nice potential for a thriller plot in Communists. Nothing I would have come up with would have the nuanced comedy going on this movie anyway.

There are three distinct laugh out load moments in the movie:

When Laurence Laurentz (Ralph Fiennes) as a director has trouble with the Hobie the cowboy actor trying to play a party scene and the payoff later when Mannix and the film editor review the footage and what Hobie finally says.

The board meeting with the Priests and Rabbi. I loved that when Mannix asks them what they think of Jesus's portrayal, the Orthodox Preist quibbles about the chariot scene instead, and that the Rabbi is (in my view only) the only reasonable one while the other Priests confuse Mannix on their interpretations of Jesus.

The part where Burt Gurney (Channing Tatum) goes to leave the screenwriters and his dog on a boat on a Russian submarine. They throw him the ransom money for Russia. When Burt opens his arms for it, the dog jumps into them causing the brief case to fall into the water and drown. Should've left the dog at home, Burt.

All in all 2016 looks to be a better movie year than 2015.