archiecm Reviews

Something in the Rain (2018)

Lovers Magic Captured Magnificiently

[10/10 · 21 August 2023]

All the characters in this series are multifaceted and realistically portrayed. Some painfully so like Jin-a's tyrannical mother. And I was very impatient with the sound track because two songs were played over and over and over again: "Stand by Your Man" 35 times, "Save the Last Dance for Me" 25 times. I never want to hear those songs again. In spite of that I LOVED this series. The main characters fell in love gradually . . . And uniquely with exquisite details. Whoever wrote this screenplay made them fun, funny, and human, both were honest, and generous and, sometimes fearful and even at times, dishonest. I especially loved the male character. He was gentle, generous supportive, patient, brave and creatively playful. Jin-A was wonderful too but labored under the iron-fisted, selfish hatred of her mother who saw every relationship in terms of family wealth. That was her only measuring stick so Jin -A's wonderful love discovery was totally overlooked by this termagant.

I can't say enough about the plot development. I was glued to the TV from start to finish. They go from secret love to World War III once the mother finds out. And it brings tragedy that, towards the end, made me cry. But it ends well, thank goodness.

The other characters, like the man's sister, both of their fathers, and some of her co-workers are more ways to be intrigued. When the South Korean's are at their best they really kill it. I also recommend "Crash Landing on You" (same actress as the one who portrayed Jin-A), and "Run On".

Suits (2011–2019)

The Main Premise is flawed, but still a good show.

[9/10 · 18 July 2023]

Mike Ross didn't go to law school and the series states that he is illegal and is breaking the law -- one can't practice law without going to law school. Sorry, that's wrong. You can "read" for the law. Abe LIncoln did it. Many lawyers have done it. What they DID do is pass the bar exam. That's what is necessary to practice law.

You read case law and any other materials that will help you know the law sufficiently to pass the bar. Mike Ross is legal. He's breaking the "Only Harvard" rule by working at Pearson . . . . That's the only thing he is breaking.

I like the dialogue, the plots that keep changing, The theme of caring versus non-caring attorneys, and the humor sprinkled in.

Frozen II (2019)

No "Let it Go" in this one: Did they use different songwriters?

[5/10 · 11 June 2020]

The overall message was OK: family loyalty, love, courage to fight for what's right . . . But it had a roundabout way of delivering it. The plot was too complicated for kids. And the music? There wasn't one hook in the entire film. Not one memorable melody line. Not one. Whoever wrote the songs should give back the money. They were totally boring. They needed a Paul McCartney. They got Joe Boring. It wasn't the fault of the singers. You have to sing what's written. It's the writing. No one had an original melody line. Not only that, they all sounded alike.

Knives Out (2019)

I think I found a flaw.

[7/10 · 3 January 2020]

I enjoyed the movie but was confused at the end. The vial labels are switched by Ransom. Somehow Marta realizes she's given the "wrong med" to Mr. Thrombey. Does she know this because she somehow knows about the label switch? No. She simply didn't look at the vial carefully? No. Nurses always look carefully. And even if she made a once in a lifetime wrong med injection it wouldn't be on the exact same night that Ransom had made his label switch caper. Detective Blanc says she knew because she could tell the slight difference in the viscosity of the liquids to be injected (there were two). That can't be because it turns out she actually did give the harmless med after all and not the morphine. If she knew the labels were wrong due to the viscosity then she would have given the proper dose of morphine regardless of what the label said and therefor not gone into a panic. So what made her think she'd given an overdose of morphine? Am I the only one stuck here? Did I yawn and miss a crucial line?

Entertaining Christmas (2018 TV Movie)

Lie after lie after lie.

[3/10 · 3 November 2019]

She is nascent photographer but is so scared of being someone different than her Mom she hides that even from herself. Instead, she fakes being just like her Mom and lies about her abilities. As someone who is particularly bothered by liars (hear that Mr Trump?), I cringe when they do it over and over when it's obvious that the truth would set them free. She lies about having skills like her Mom (I guess the magazine lied about that as well). She lies about whether or not she likes the male lead or whether or not they went on a date. I had to stop the tape and come complain about it before I went mad. I suppose she'll finally get the truth out in the last five minutes. It'll be too late for me. I already have no respect for her.

Arsenic and Old Lace (1944)

So Irritated with Mortimer Brewster I wanted him to be committed.

[4/10 · 18 September 2019]

Cary Grant's character, Mortimer Brewster has a number of personality flaws that began to grate on me more and more. The first one was that he forgets he's in love while in the marriage license line. His fiancé has to remind him. Another is that he wants to help his aunts evade punishment for twelve murders they've committed. (Yes, they did it because the victims were lonely. They don't seem to know loneliness isn't always permanent . . . and anyway, wouldn't a better antidote be to offer friendship instead of arsenic?) It's kind of weird that Mortimer's brilliant solution to the problem is to blame all the murders on Teddy Roosevelt Brewster, their brother who, compared to them, is innocent (him not knowing reality from fantasy.) If there's a hearing about Ted, won't his version of being President of the US clash with poisoning lonely old men? The Yellow Fever story doesn't jive with the evidence in the basement. THE most irritating behavior of Mortimer's is that he begins to treat his bride of a few hours like dog poop. He offers her no explanation for his one hundred eighty degree shift in attitude towards their marriage and honeymoon. 'Just get the f... out of my house', he's saying, basically. It's especially galling to me that when she has finally had enough of the mistreatment and tells him good bye, he says, "That's wonderful dear," and goes back to his phone call which is part of his loony bin scheme. Is it really an excuse to treat her like she has the plague just because he's discovered his aunts are batty? Why can't he confide in her anyway? What is their relationship based on? Not trust certainly. At what point did he plan on bringing her into his world where they shared their worries? The next exasperating flaw of Mortimer's is his belief that mental illness is inherited. Even in the forties this wasn't a majority belief. By then we had Freud and other experts that focused the cause of mental illness more on the environment than inheritance. Mortimer is a playwright and author which means he's educated which raises the question: how did he not learn this? Rather than even consider that there's no one to one ratio between insanity and mentally ill offspring, he abruptly says good bye to her . . . . oh, and he doesn't think she even deserves an explanation. As an audience we're supposed to laugh it off: Ha Ha Ha Ha. I also found the cops annoyingly stupid. The most egregious part is how long they tolerate a bound and gagged Mortimer to stay bound and gagged. His eyes state that he isn't part of the joke . . . or play pitch or whatever Officer O'Hara is calling it. And when they do decide to untie him WHY IS THE GAG THE LAST THING TO BE TAKEN OFF???? How is that even believable that cops could be that obtuse? And after at least four different people mention the bodies in the basement you'd think the police captain might just walk down there out of curiosity. They're asking the audience to believe that a borough the size of Brooklyn doesn't have any policemen with brains. That's the worst of it. Want to know what kind of screwball comedy does pass my test of believable? "Hangover." Twice the movie this was.

The Sisters Brothers (2018)

Different kind of Western. Mostly over my head, I'm afraid.

[7/10 · 15 October 2018]

I liked the details. I liked the bar scenes, the chaos. I liked the gun fights. I liked the humor. I liked the relationship between the brothers, especially John C Reilly's character protecting his younger brother. I thought the movie got lost about a half hour before it ended and I looked at my watch and whispered out loud, "Where is this movie going? Is it about mining gold now? I thought it was about two hit men." I did have two other problems with the movie. 1. Did that gold-seeking liquid really work? It seemed to but in the morning, after half of them are poisoned by the stuff did the buckets of gold actually contain gold? The survivors (the brothers) don't seem to care if it did or not. The other detail was about rifles. The opening gun fight and one near the end were outside and I would think two professional assassins would own rifles. You can't hit much with a pistol after fifty feet no matter how long the barrel. Nary a rifle to be found in their travels.

Phantom Thread (2017)

After 20 minutes I started looking at my watch

[3/10 · 9 February 2018]

I didn't like the main character, Woodcock (for the most part . . . he did have a charming side which he showed stingily). He was a bully at times and as a love partner, took more than he gave knowing that his talent and money would substitute for actual effort. Alma is quite likeable. Her devotion to him is endearing. But she wants more. Here the movie starts to decline. Her solution to the logjam of their personality clash is to poison him. Oddly, it (his illness) makes him fall for her and seek marriage whereas he has known himself to be a bachelor up to now. I'm thinking to myself, "That's just sick." And I ask myself, "Is it love any more when attempted murder becomes part of it? No wonder it takes her so long to answer "yes" to his marriage proposal! It's not surprising that the marriage fails miserably but we're asked to believe that another poisoning is just the remedy and that the whole ritual is some sort of acceptable romantic dance . . . and we're asked to accept that it works. Woodcock figures it out and since it's OK with him it should be OK with us. I endure a lot of pain at times when I have bowel trouble so I have a lot of trouble seeing this as a happy ending. I don't understand why the critics liked it so much.

The Florida Project (2017)

Halley wasn't the worst movie mom by a long shot

[9/10 · 11 November 2017]

Not a review -- a discussion of the film

I really liked this film though it was hyped by "What the Flick" as being great and I found it to be good. I also laughed a lot. The kids stole this film and whoever wrote it knows kids. They also knew how to write about healthy parental love which this film had some of despite the inappropriate profession Moonee's mom was in. Ben Mankiewics of TYT's "What the Flick" panel calls her the worst mom in movie history. Here's how I answered that on You Tube: DISAGREE WITH BEN MANKIEWICS' "WORST MOM" COMMENT (Spoiler warning)

Halley was a great mom in some ways and a so-so mom in others. She swears and breaks rules in front of Moonee-- giving a bad role model but her worst sin is her hooking partly because it's illegal and causes her to be taken away which is devastating to Moonee. When it comes to loving her kid (and by that I mean enjoying being with her, Halley is near the top: games in the rain,, burping contests, taking bikini selfies, taking her with her on her sales endeavors). . . (some of which are fairly harmless). Compare Halley as a mom to the mom in the movie Moonlight. Chirone's mom is a drugged out hooker that doesn't give one s*** about her kid. And Chirone hates her. If he were removed it would be a godsend. Also, I, too, had trouble with the abrupt ending. It was sort of like the Thelma and Louise ending but they didn't get killed (probably just arrested). But it opened up more questions and then just left you there.

Basically, Moonie is a happy kid who likes herself . . . likes living. Life is fun. Maybe we should legalize the world's oldest profession like they did in Nevada.

Take Shelter (2011)

Discussion: The ending went against the rest of the film

[6/10 · 5 November 2017]

I was having a hard time watching the Shannon character slowly destroy his life. I don't know if it was avoidable since he was showing definite signs of schizophrenia. It was hard to watch . . . especially when he betrayed his friend at work completely without warning. But I admired the way he did (finally) take his wife into his confidence. Great scene. And her character begins to really develop at this point. Her loyalty and love for him blew me away. She stuck by him at his picnic outburst. She even stuck by him when they were in the shelter way after the storm passed. I wanted her to open the door and get the f*** out of there but she had this insight that he must learn to ignore his symptoms when they conflicted with her perception of reality. What a scene! I didn't see it coming. My behavior in that situation would have fallen way short: I'd have taken the key, opened the door, and said, "See dummy, there's no storm!" But she was incredibly patient and perceptive about what a step this was. It made the movie for me. But then the movie lost me completely five minutes later when it seemed to be saying (with the impending black cloud storm) "He wasn't crazy at all folks. There really is a terrible storm brewing." It made no sense. We saw him hallucinating throughout the film. I lost most of my good feeling about the film at that point.

The Mountain Between Us (2017)

Liked it a lot, starting with the dog.

[9/10 · 8 October 2017]

Here's my reaction to "What the Flick" wherein Christie and Alonso and Matt gave this film Luke warm reviews dissing the dog, doubting the veracity of the cabin, and totally dissing the ending as being too hoaky?

I couldn't disagree more with about half of the comments, especially from Alonso. First of all I had no trouble with all the dog shots. I could have used more since I love dogs. I happen to like Hallmark Christmas movies and I love being witness to people finding love. Something tells me that people who are ashamed to admit such things or incapable of feeling them become movie critics. What a shame. I can think of no exceptions except maybe Roger Ebert. The cabin being there was totally believable. Cabins are SUPPOSED to be in the wilderness. And the ending was perfect. It's hard to take a risk. Each was prepared to do it but at different times so their pride blocked them from cementing their willingness to be together but in walking away their hearts won out. I loved that ending and thanked the world that I wasn't a cold-hearted movie critic and thereby frozen from the joy of that moment. I only regret that they cut away from the hug too quickly. It could have lasted a good minute or two.

Another word about the cabin. There was no road to or from it but people have been building cabins long before we had vehicles. If you had a mule you could carry up tools and find your own rocks and lumber. In that case there would probably have been at least a trail. But that would be difficult to locate under the snow . . . maybe.

Jackie (V) (2016)

I was very moved by revisiting this tragic event but I wish they hadn't left out the drums.

[8/10 · 7 February 2017]

I DO remember where I was when I heard of JFK's assassination: sleeping in my dorm bed at University of California, my freshman year at Riverside, CA. Someone woke me up with the news. Seeing the events again brought back sadness. Seeing it from Jackie's perspective gave me a new respect for her.

I have a vivid recollection of the march and the coffin. The drum unit followed with this incredible beat that I never forgot: thump - thump - thump - rolllllllllllllllllllll - thump - thump - thump - rollllllllllllllllllllll - thump - thump - thump - rolllllllllllllllllllll - thump - thump - thump/thump. I am a musician and that beat pattern has stayed with me for fifty-three years. So when they left the drumming out of the funeral march I was very disappointed. I wanted to yell out in the theater, "They left out the drums!" Something told me that would have ruined the experience for most of the audience so I restrained that impulse. I wish Lee Oswald had shown a similar amount of control. (If he is the one -- I think I'll research that by reading, "Ultimate Sacrifice" by Lamar Waldron and T Hartmann.)

Silence (I) (2016)

Minority (Atheist) Report: A Fool's Errand

[10/10 · 23 January 2017]

This reaction to "Silence" is from the perspective of an atheist. And my attitude throughout the film was influenced by my knowledge of the novel Shogun. In that book the Japanese were distrustful of European influence and infiltration. They knew or suspected that the first step towards outside dominance starts with the innocent-seeming proselytizers of "the Word." By today's view "historians now describe missionaries as arrogant and rapacious imperialists. Christianity became not a saving grace but a monolithic and aggressive force that missionaries imposed upon defiant natives. Indeed, missionaries were now understood as important agents in the ever-expanding nation-state, or "ideological shock troops for colonial invasion whose zealotry blinded them." (Quoted from Google) The church gets mistreated or brutalized and the foreign country sends in the army. Some examples of this are South America: they all speak Spanish (or Portuguese) and are ruled by European descendants; Parts of Africa have the same history. There's India where it partly happened, and Australia. Perhaps Japan knew or suspected such an outcome as well.

So I wasn't all that sympathetic to the two missionaries of this story. Plus their whole point of view was that they had the "Truth". There are thousands of religions that all claim the same thing. What makes the Western Christian version the REAL Truth? Nothing. It depends on where you were raised. That they all think they have the answer convinces me that none do. But it also convinces me that Man must invent some story, some explanation of why he's here, how he got here, and how he's supposed to act. I guess we'd be lost without such a backdrop. The other apes (chimpanzees, gorillas and such) don't seem to need that. Their "God" is the alpha male of their band. For homo sapiens that would be a king but we seem to need more than that. So we have one who resides above the clouds. But the clouds are below us as well since the world is round so exactly where would we point to locate this Super King? You can't point everywhere so that's another reason why I'm convinced there is no Super King. All this makes the journey of Fathers Rodrigues and Garupe somewhat pathetic and somewhat tiresome. Missionaries remind me of Jehovah's Witnesses who go around (KNOCK, KNOCK, KNOCK) waking up nurses and other folks who work nights wanting to know, "Can we come inside and pray with you?" ("Cuz we have the answer, the one and only answer.") I suppose this message was an improvement on cultures where there was out and out cannibalism but beyond that it was and is an intrusion. Still, the torture and murder was extreme and hard to watch. But one reviewer pointed out that Scorsese neglected to show that in Spain and Portugal at that very time there was an Inquisition going on with equal cruelty and murder towards Jews and Protestants. I therefore celebrated the entrance of the former Father Ferreira (Liam Neeson). He took righteousness out of the equation and just tried to fulfill a need he saw. And he seemed to come by that wisdom the hard way – discovering that nothing else worked or made any sense. So I liked the outcome reached by Father Rodrigues. Just as an afterthought, did anyone besides me notice that all that praying brought about no results, except internally (and then only in certain cases)? Did anyone else get the idea that no one is listening? Anyway, I loved the ocean post card scenery. And I liked being plopped down in an earlier time in history. I liked the film somehow.

Fences (2016)

Wanted to Leave

[6/10 · 3 January 2017]

I didn't like watching a selfish sadist hog the show. Troy was a narcissist and his son pegged him as such -- they don't want their sons to out-shine them so they give little to no encouragement or advice. His "I don't have to like you" speech to his son sounds like he's covering all the bases if you measure bases by food and shelter. But he leaves out love which is even more important. A boy raised with love out in the rain with little food would have been far more equipped to deal with life than Cory is. Troy hates himself and he's going to make sure no one else has any fun either.

I am guessing August Wilson came from such a home. Perhaps Cory, the son, is a fictional version of Mr. Wilson. I don't think anyone could make up such a life of bitterness and rage out of whole cloth. But why do we have to see it? How does it benefit me to know such a vile selfish person lived and crapped all over those he was in contact with? It was probably therapeutic to write it all down. But since I had to listen to it I'd like to see a little of the therapy money. That's how hard it was for me to watch how he treated Cory, Rose and even Lyons, his older son (though Lyons wasn't trapped and could stop dropping by at any time). This isn't a movie review, obviously. It's my reaction to a story that was very difficult to watch. It wasn't much different than watching a Mamet play or something from Eugene O'Neil (or Edward Albee, or Arthur Miller). The characters all need help, lots of it.

Rules Don't Apply (2016)

I found it to be a really really good movie. So either the critics and most of the audiences are wrong . . . or I'm really stupid.

[10/10 · 4 December 2016]

Or . . . maybe the truth is somewhere in between. The movie worked for me. It felt like ONE movie, not two as reviewer Alonso Duralde claimed. . . . it told stories of several characters all connected more or less. That doesn't make it two movies. The song of the same name is killer -- killer enough to bring the two main characters into a love embrace that crashes them to the floor still locked together. And they're throwing away their "careers" by kissing like that. How can people not love this??? But then things go awry for them almost by accident and partly by puritanical religious beliefs. (She thinks he's married because he once had sex). Anyway, I have to insert here: The Mathew Broderick character gets the Baptist joke mostly wrong. The opening goes, "Why do Babtists forbid you to have sex standing up?" The answer is: Because it might lead to dancing. Broderick says, "Do you know why Baptists think sex is bad?" IT IS WAY LESS FUNNY THAT WAY MATHEW. So I'm going to read more of the negative reviews and perhaps come back and counter any stupid arguments I find for why this movie isn't a great piece of movie-making. I cried in the end. I didn't think they would get another chance. Hooray! By the way, the rather sad classical musical theme throughout is my favorite: Gustav Mahler's 5th Symphony, Adagio movement It's on YouTube.(So is the new song: "Rules Don't Apply").

Captain Fantastic (2016)

Worth watching even with its flaws

[7/10 · 7 August 2016]

This is not a review per se, but a discussion of certain aspects of the film. As a teacher I was curious to see if Ben had discovered new ways to excite his kids about life and themselves. The jury was still out when Ben takes them into civilization and teaches them to steal food from a supermarket. What great life lesson was gleaned from that act I wonder? It didn't fit into any other principle or idea they were learning. It's OK to take things from others if you need them without paying. I didn't look at the movie the same after that. And then he sends his daughter on a Ninja mission that almost cripples her . . . . one that was bound to fail anyway since her goal of capturing her brother was unrealistic since he didn't want to be captured. After that the kids come to realize how valuable their father is to them and they sneak away with him. OK, I'll buy that. Question: Won't the grandfather come after them? So are they hiding out? Using aliases? "What the Flick's" Matt and Alonso praise the movie for not painting either "side" as having all the right answers . . . . for being brave. I can see that point of view but I was hoping for one side to be the clear winner. That just didn't happen. Enjoyed the ride anyway.

The Shallows (2016)

There were flaws and inconsistencies that got in the way

[5/10 · 4 July 2016]

(Nothing but spoilers here)

1. Why would a shark be so interested in eating the humans swimming around when it already had enough to eat for weeks in the dead whale?

2. Why did the camera-helmet wash ashore when the surf board stayed off shore for a full day? And while we're at it why didn't the dead whale wash ashore?

3. If you stipulate that the shark actually prefers human meat to whale why wouldn't the two surfers satiate his appetite for at least a couple of days or even more? After eating two surfers it still wanted Nancy. There would be no room in his stomach, literally for at least a week.

4. And with the dead whale sitting around and two surfers in his stomach would the shark still be willing to bite into steel three or four separate times losing teeth in the process?

5. And what happened with the retracting buoy chain? It pulled her to the bottom, with her intentionally letting that happen. What made that happen and how did she know it would? And if the shark didn't stab itself what was going to be her next move down there at the bottom? Totally in the shark's element?

So I couldn't accept what was happening. The shark was a very human invention.

The Catch (2016–2017)

When she became a fake shrink I bailed. NOT believable!

[3/10 · 16 May 2016]

I liked this show for about six or seven episodes. When Mireille Enos's character began to fall again for Krause's character after he had made such a fool of her I tried to hang in there. (Maybe he was going to listen to his heart and change sides). But he seemed to want to keep on with the bad guys. Then, when The female villain, Sonya Walger, masquerades as Mureille's therapist that did it. How could she wind up as a fake therapist when she was busy conning and robbing people every moment of her life? It was too far-fetched. (How would she even know Mureille was going to need a therapist???) To have to listen to Mireille's character tell Sonya's character all about her love of the very man Sonya loved . . . . I couldn't even try to sit through it.

Unleashing Mr. Darcy (2016 TV Movie)

Elizabeth disappointed me so I quit the movie

[2/10 · 4 February 2016]

Elizabeth's heart must not have been in teaching but they had a roundabout way of saying that. She gets fired for not letting a student buy a passing grade from her. The students parents lie to the board and the board mysteriously doesn't even give her a chance to state her side. That's almost unbelievable. But her attitude after an hour of regret is to completely forget about teaching and focus on handling her dog in dog shows. That's where she is going to eventually succumb to Darcy's charms and visa versa. Stupid me. I was outraged by the way they treated her at the University and that the "bad guys" got away with murder. She had a law suit ready made and also a duty to warn the public what was going on at that school. But Elizabeth didn't give it another thought. That being so I didn't like her any more and I stopped caring if she ever landed Mr. Darcy or any other dog judge. Forget about Darcy, she deserved Mr.Farcy.

Christmas at Cartwright's (2014 TV Movie)

How Did She Get Paid???

[7/10 · 8 January 2016]

I really did enjoy this movie but I yelled at it for the first half of it. She needed rent money so she took this job (a man's job) wearing a Santa suit disguise. She doesn't know she's in the hands of an angel (Wallace Shawn) and thinks she's fooling him and the kids and the Department store staff. Fine. But how's she going to get paid? The check can't be made out to a woman for a man's position can it? Later, I realized her name is Nicki so I suppose she can get a check in her real name since that is a boys and girls name. (There's Nicholas and there's Nicole). If I'd remembered her name I wouldn't have needed to yell, "How did she get paid?" a dozen times. The point is she was good with kids and the angel thought she needed a break. So he helps her read the minds of the kids and she's a smash success. I enjoyed that part. Her lying to the male love interest was irritating. Lies get discovered. Also, why not just be who you are? If he has a problem with her being a good Santa and with her needing to pay the bills then he's the wrong guy for her. I had to stop the DVD when she failed the honesty test on their first date. Again I screamed. My dog hates screaming and bounds off the bed and scrambles underneath whenever he hears me yell and that seems to happen two or three times a night. Sorry Biscuit but she really really disappointed me. She got the guy back in the end but I'm not sure she deserved him. Guess that's it.

The Affair (2014–2019)

Got through two DVD's before I threw in the towel

[5/10 · 29 December 2015]

I'm sorry but I've had it. After two DVD's I'm watching the beginning of the third and Noah and Alison have met in the city and are looking for a place to have sex. Nothing available for under $1200 so they stand outside Noah's actual home. He wants to take her in "for a cup of coffee". She asks where is his wife. He says, "Her and her friend took the kids up North skiing. They'll be back tonight." Any English teacher or writing teacher or whatever he is . . . . anyone who has published a novel would not talk like that. You don't say "her" when referring to someone in the nominative case -- someone doing the action. You say "she". "She and her friend did such and such." People create a false trap by thinking the word "and" means you can change the pronoun: "Me and my wife do such and such." WRONG. How can a writer not know this? My wife and I do such and such. Or if you have to have yourself be mentioned first you'd say, a bit awkwardly, I and my wife do such and such. NOT "ME"! I refuse to believe this dialogue was written by anyone who ever took an English class (or at least stayed awake while it was going on.) So I sealed up the DVD and sent it back.

I watched twenty minutes of the new stuff that isn't out on DVD yet. They've both left their spouses and yet aren't living together. Noah wants to but Alison isn't sure. Then Alison's ex-brother in law tries to rape her and when she pushes him away a car hits him. Self-defense if there ever was a case for it yet she acts like she's committed a crime and doesn't report it. Is that the murder they were all talking about in the first two DVDs? Anyway, I was disappointed in both of them. Noah wants to get laid more than he wants to be a good Dad, hence letting his daughter stay on vacation with them after she's been caught bullying a girlfriend. (. . . because if they stay in Montauk he can keep getting laid by Alison). I kept watching perhaps hoping he'd see the light. Be a good man with better priorities. I liked how they both were reluctant to cheat on their spouses in the beginning. And I guess I felt that if they really fell in love they'd leave their spouses rather than continue to live a lie staying married. But seeing them single just felt weird. Their love wasn't significant enough to warrant divorce. They were both just confused adults . . . quite lost.

Ray Donovan (2013–2020)

Was the Sully Incident Illegal?

[10/10 · 17 November 2015]

Overall premise of Season 2 seems to be flawed.

Everyone is acting like the killing of Sully on the docks was illegal and must be covered up. No one wants to tell the reporter Kate McPherson what really happened. But what happened wasn't actually illegal. On the shore line Sully shot Ray's private eye in the stomach. Sully was in the process of stealing Ray's money (hit money he was going to pay Sully with) even though he hadn't earned it (hadn't killed Ray's father Mickey). At gunpoint he was jumping a boat to leave the country. It's possible he was going to kill Ray, Mickey, and maybe even his partner Tiny before that boat shoved off. So Mickey shooting him was self-defense. Self-preservation. So why are they all so afraid to let the truth come out? Didn't the FBI agent who was there (and who got shot by Ray) tell the FBI that it was self defense? I don't get it. Sully was a murderer.

I have to say this is the only problem I have with the show. I love it otherwise. I have been renting all the episodes. I like watching how Ray handles crises with efficiency and a certain kind of fairness and justice. The bad guys get what's coming to them.

The Intern (I) (2015)

Wasn't the ending I wanted

[7/10 · 19 October 2015]

I really enjoyed this film. I overlooked that Ben was perfect. I mean, he had no faults. Do those people really exist? Why have I never met any of them? But I liked him so . . . .

What bothered me was the ending where Jules ignored Ben's advice and gave her philandering husband another chance. I realize she still loved him but I didn't want to see it. The reason is because he was the least likable of all the characters in the movie. He wasn't all that charming even with his kid when they were at play. He had no irony, wit, humor or charm. I couldn't see why Jules married him except that she talked him up during their early marriage days. So I wanted her to ditch him and go through the grief before finding someone more on her level. That's just me, perhaps. I've never been married and the history there may color my perceptions. Good film though. I laughed.

The Bastard Executioner (2015)

The Logic Escapes Me

[5/10 · 23 September 2015]

I've watched two episodes and the warrior/main character Wilkin Brattle seems to have dealt himself an impossible hand. (He can blame that witch but I'm sorry, I blame him.) He's a spy in the enemy camp in the role of executioner. That means he's killing the enemies of his enemies -- his own allies! He went on a field trip to the ocean and had to kill rebels in defense of the Baroness. But he's a rebel. He was killing his own men! Why? So he can finesse the names of the exact soldiers who killed his friends and relatives in his village. Who cares? They're all his enemies. How long will he work for them to the detriment of the side he's really on? It makes no sense. He killed a fifteen year old girl who the Baroness had promised to spare. She went back on her promise and there Brattle is doing her bidding instead of helping the rebel cause. I'd have helped her escape and then joined the rebel forces and attacked the castle. Something. Anything but kill the girl which is what he did. I'm going to stop watching this show. It's too bad because I like the action and the quality of the acting and also some of the dialogue.

A Walk in the Woods (2015)

Why leave out the best jokes?

[7/10 · 31 August 2015]

I read the book and wondered at the time how it could be transformed into a movie since better than two-thirds of it is a discussion of history and nature -- interesting but not at all cinematic. The funniest part is towards the beginning when they meet Mary Ellen. Katz calls her "a piece of work" though they leave this out of the film. When she brags about walking fourteen miles when it was really 8.2 and won't budge from that position Katz asks her, "How many miles did your lips hike?" She doesn't get the jibe and gives a straight answer, "Just as many as the rest of me." The film, like I said, leaves this out. Too bad. They part from her to go to town but she finds them again the next day as they have eaten all but one of their Hostess cream-filled cupcakes. (They're staring at it pleasantly as it sits on a log nearby.) She arrives with some insult about how slow they're traveling, and grabs the cupcake and with a, "Say,is that a Hostess cupcake? Well, I don't mind if I do,"-- wolfs it down in two bites. The film leaves this out. When she's trying to show off her sense of people and their astrological signs she quizzes them: What's your sign? She asks Katz. "Cunnilingus," he answers. I cracked up. But the movie left that out. The movie has them give some actual sign like Virgo. Then she asks Bryson his sign. "Necrophilia," he answers. "Ah, come on. Are you guys putting me on?" She asks. The movie left this whole thing out and went with an unfunny segment where she tells them they don't know their actual signs but she does know them. Amusing but not as amusing as what really happened.

The arduous journey, the hardship, the challenges are left out for the most part. Instead it is kind of a buddy picture. In the book they don't talk all that much. One thing that comes across in the book is how much Bryson is into seeing as much of the trail as he can, and knowing about it's history and doing the work of hiking it. He does quite a bit of it on his own while Katz is back in Iowa. He does day trips day after day. None of this energy, this craving to know and master . . . comes through from the book. Redford is too old to have carried off this kind of zeal and energy. So I missed seeing that. Perhaps he should have cast someone younger for both roles. Just a thought.