Showing posts with label racial tension. Show all posts
Showing posts with label racial tension. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 21, 2024

3 Short Paragraphs (Or Not): American Fiction

2023, Cord Jefferson (feature debut) -- download

Kent's post. Timing is weird.

Was weird. I started the post soon after Kent posted his... post. But that got swallowed, as it is wont to do, by time.

"The Black Experience".

Even to write this makes me cringe internally. How can I even offer a thought on the subject, let alone discuss it an context? As a guy who is prone to saying The Absolute Wrong Thing (which gets replayed in my head for the rest of my life) but who always strives to Be Better, I try to be forthright about my place in all these things, but I am self-aware enough that no matter what I say, it can be misconstrued. But I will continue to try and say it.

What the fuck are you even talking about?

I am basically trying to say, I want to not come off as the (white) student in the movie's opening sequence, who feels she has to define the (black) teacher's outrage for him. She is not comfortable with the N word being written on a white board. He says it is the context in which the word is used that matters and does not diminish the vitriol in his opinion of her reaction. It gets him suspended. And that suspension gives him no choice but to spend time with family in Boston.

I always like a comedy where people laugh at the funny things they say. Lisa (Tracee Ellis Ross, [really? she's HER daughter?], Black-ish) picks up her brother Thelonious 'Monk' Ellison (Jeffrey Wright, Westworld) after his empty-seated seminar. She picks on him for not being around much, not keeping in touch, for basically being a stand-offish prick. They laugh at his expense. Its funny. But there is love in the teasing. Then, at lunch, she dies of a heart attack.

Fuck. 

Not only does the movie begin with a death, but it also brings to light how prevalent their mother's dementia is. Fuck. Their mother will need "taking care of" and that costs money, and its money Monk is not making, as his books are not selling, because they are intellectual novels by a stand-offish prick. BUT We's Lives in Da Ghetto, by an author he met at the seminar, is making tons of critical acclaim and money, much to Monk's chagrin. He doesn't believe black authors should have to pander to white people just to make money. Not every black American comes from a ghetto nor lives the "gangsta" life. Buuuut money is money.

So, in a drunken haze, he writes My Pafology under a pseudonym. As a joke, he has his agent submit it. White Publisher loves it. And thus the premise of the movie gets under way. It makes him the money he needs, and more. But in a lot of ways, as all good movies should, it is not really the premise that carries the rest of the movie. It wins hearts with the family drama, that while extremely heavy (grief on many levels), it is carries the plot along lightly, and not without small moments of joy. 

I am always so terrible at saying what I think was Good about a truly Good Movie.

There were two things that stood out for me. That I saw much of myself in Monk, his distance from his family, even if I don't come with the intellectual excuse. I just know well what it is like to be an irascible aging man with identity issues. But also the setting. To drive home the point, this is not a "typical black family", as they are very much Upper Middle Class, with a massive, lovely, family home AND a (not just summer) home on the beach. And a live-in nanny/house keeper who likely helped raise the kids and has lived much of her life in that home. It plays its part, when compared to the fiction that Monk has to create, which had to come from his knowledge of pop-culture depictions, for there is no way he knows this life, but from peripheral exposure. Of course, that charade has to come back to haunt him, and the movie's "LP scratch" moment really felt like the only way to end it all.

Thursday, November 2, 2023

3 Short Paragraphs (Or Not): Green Book

2018, Peter Farrelly (Dumb and Dumber) -- download

Do I need a That Guy tag, for the movies I tell myself I should be watching more of? We have been in a golden age of watching movies, where we have access to much much more than we can ever watch. We are no longer restricted to whatever is in the cinema, nor what might be in the handful of video stores in your neighbourhood. I suppose, with that in mind, if you lived in the right neighbourhood, you would also never run out of things you Should Watch (better tag?) but I guess its about ease of access. I can dial up a streaming service, or just hunt a pirate site, and usually find what I want. Still, we are kind of restricted in what we have access to in that "rep video stores" don't really exist anymore and most of the mainstream streaming sites let stuff drop off the end very quickly. You are not going to easily find a collection of 1970s noir film, nor Italian zombie flicks, nor French New Wave. There are some services that do cater to that, but... that becomes expensive. So, even if I wasn't going to always gravitate towards the easy finds and easy watches of my usual genre viewing habits, I might be challenged.

One of the Should Watch categories I have never really subscribed to is Oscar Nominations. Every year, friends who Watch Movies ask me how many Oscar flicks I watched. Usually, and even when I was That Guy, the answer was "not many", and now often, not a one. Oscar Worthy is not immediately diminishing to what I want to watch, but often it pigeon holes itself. There are historical noteworthy dramas, or torturous dramas, or painful performances, or uplifting tales of overcoming great odds. I won't deny that a heavy dose of talent is required to be included, but its not always my pint of craft beer (I don't drink tea). But some, some catch my attention.

The perpetuated myth that there is No Racism (in North America) Anymore boggles my mind. Right now, today, I could easily find a story in the news, and not just in the always news worthy, rage inducing US of A, where someone behaved mind-numbing-ly horribly to another person because of their origins or skin colour. I mean... <waves in the direction of Twitter> !!! And even considering how bad it persists, not so long ago, it was So Much Worse.

That there had to be a published book for black people, that identified safe & welcoming places in the American South, while traveling, and probably also highlighted the areas to stay away from (e.g. Sundown Towns) makes my white mind think it is just another myth being generated by the Internet. I am very well aware of my privilege. I might have my own issues traveling but I would never suffer violence so easily because I am white, on the vast scale of Traveling While Black. But despite the title of the movie, the book plays very little of a part in this movie.

Dr. Donald Shirley (Mahershala Ali, Luke Cage) needs a capable driver on a tour of the American Deep South. Shirley is a composer and player of classical & jazz music. This was modern composition, not quite popular jazz nor straight up renditions of know classicists like Mozart or Tchaikovsky. By "capable" I mean, someone who can handle himself in a tough situation, especially considering he would be driving a black man through areas not covered by the green book. He ends up with Tony "Lip" Vallelonga (Viggo Mortensen, The Road), from Brooklyn, a nightclub bouncer currently looking for work.

At first there is some tension. Shirley is an educated, pompous rich guy who literally interviews Tony from a throne. Meanwhile Tony is a typical lower middle class Italian guy with violent tendencies and not a lot of self-awareness.  More precisely, he has a LOT of situational awareness but accepts who and what he is without shame; so, maybe the perfect amount of self-awareness? Either way,  they don't mesh. But as the road runs out under the wheels of the Cadillac Tony drives, they get to know each other, and eventually respect.

Given this is an Oscar movie, it touches on all the right notes. Tony is being exposed to a level of racism he probably just passed off as acceptable for most of his life. But once he attaches a personal element to it, it incenses him. And Shirley learns to be a bit more comfortable with who he is, once he acknowledges things outside his European educated background & social circle. 

The thing I do always love about Oscar movies is that the actors inhabit their characters. This is Viggo with a few more pounds on, obviously not Italian, but... eventually the Viggo I knew slipped away and only Tony remained. Ali has always been precise in his depictions but there is a wee bit more nuance and vulnerability to this character. And the balance between drama, and funny and pathos is always there. 

I do have a desire to watch more of these "acclaimed" movies, to watch with a different eye, to write  about with a different hand, but its been over a decade of "tenaciously amateur" so will anything change?

...

Thursday, December 30, 2021

New Year's Countdown...of Excellence: 4 - Do The Right Thing (1980's selection)

4
Do The Right Thing
1989, d. Spike Lee - rental


The Story (in two paragraphs or less)

It's a sweltering hot summer day in NewYork.  The film traverses a block in the neighbourhood of Bed-Stuy over the course of the day, centering primarily around Sal's Famous Pizza, owned and operated by Italian-American Sal (Danny Aiello) and his two sons.  Mookie (Spike Lee) is Sal's delivery guy, with only a mildly contentious relationship with his employer.

The film is largely "a day in the life" of this neighbourhood, with Mookie as our main POV character, traversing its denizens, primarily Black, but also Puerto Rican, the white guy who signals gentrification anxiety, the Korean market owners, Sal and sons, and of course, the police. Most everyone gets along but there are people who have problems, and the attitudes are all very New York, a lot of aggressive, verbal confrontations.  But the heat only seems to be exacerbating the aggression, which spills out late in the evening into a racially charged confrontation.

What did I think I was in for?
Pretty much this, only I think I was expecting it to feel more of its time.  With the exception of a few touches (mainly the opening credits which features Rosie Perez dancing to the Public Enemy's "Fight the Power" in what is basically a music video for the song) this could very well be a contemporary film commenting on modern race relations, just set in 1989.  

What did I get out of it?
While it does sit in the uncomfortableness of race relations in America (in this multicultural microcosm of Bed-Stuy), it's not sermonizing.  Lee crafts a pocket world that, while stylized with its vibrantly painted backdrops, still is grounded in very tangible sentiments.  His street is populated with people with their own thoughts and minds and ways of being.  There's no hive mind here, no singular way of thinking, and everyone seems liberated to speak there mind, no matter what conflict it raises or what wounds they dig.  And yet, there's a sequence which Lee seems to signify that some (and perhaps the few are just stand-ins for the many) of these people are holding something back, mainly their most vilely racist thought and ideas about the people around them. Insinuating that underneath the bumpy, fragile surface, is rage.

The image of Malcolm X and Martin Luthor King, together, smiling, shaking hands, is used throughout the film, as is Radio Rahim's Love/Hate knuckle rings.  The film closes with quotes from both King and X, one condemning violence as a barrier to brotherhood and understanding, the other condoning violence as a method of last resort, as self-defence, at which point it is no longer violence.  This tug of ideologies is exemplified in the climax of the film, following the all-too-familiar choking death of Radio Rahim by the police (30 years later, it's still the same damn story) where a understandably emotional crowd cannot direct their anger at the real perpetrators, systemic racism and the police in power, so Mookie points it at Sal's restaurant.  For him, it is his most direct symbol of systemic oppression, and it becomes the outlet for hate, rage, and grief.

Is there still sympathy for Sal? Who aggrieved Rahim in smashing his radio, prompting the escalation that got Rahim killed?  Sure, but the point here, as was the same point in Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, lives should matter more than property, and yet the property gets attention, gets protection, gets value assigned to it where lives, Black lives, do not.

Do I think it's a classic?
It still feels so of-the-now it's hard (and very sobering) to be believe that it's over 30 years old, but yes, absolutely a classic.  Lee's direction, still in its early form, is so assured.  His in-you-face close-ups and from-the-ground perspective still feels like nothing else.  He only occasionally operates with these techniques today, but they're clearly still his own.

Did I like watching this?
One thing I was expecting, which didn't happen until late in the movie, was that I would feel uncomfortable watching this movie.  I did not feel uncomfortable until I started seeing Rahim being choked by the police, and I started tearing up instantly, knowing exactly where it was going, and knowing that it had nothing to do with George Floyd, Eric Garner or any of the all-too-many other Black men in the news who have been choked to death by the police in recent years, that this shit has been happening for decades, well before Do The Right Thing and well too long after.  Following the death and the destruction of Sal's, life just goes on in the film.  Sal and Mookie even come to terms with each other (and apparently there's little hints in subsequent Lee projects that Mookie's still delivering pizzas for Sal's).  

Would I watch it again?
Absolutely, and I'm kind of pissed with myself that this is the first time I've seen it. 


Saturday, May 22, 2021

Rutherford Falls Season 1 [updated]

 2021, Showcase (Canada)/Peacock (US)

There was a dead zone of new TV shows for about a month (well, it's kind of still ongoing), the impact of the COVID-19 shutdown coming to bear, and it seemed like the only new program being promoted was Rutherford Falls.  Whenever I'd turn on the TV, my cable provider's on demand service was promoting it.  I would walk the dog and see billboards and sides of buses showing the same image of Ed Helms and an actress I'm not familiar with sitting on a book in front of a statue.  This one:

It's an image that tells you nothing, unless you're really, really paying attention.  But it's such a plain image, who's paying that much attention?  I mean, Ed Helms is a very subtle comedic persona, he doesn't really stand out in any way.  I used to really like him on The Daily Show, and he's always a pleasant supporting player...even sometimes a pleasant lead, but he's never a draw.  So upon seeing these promotional images (but no commercials, since I watch everything recorded or on demand, I skip past commercials) my mind just said, without any maliciousness, "pass".

They bury the lede on this one, which is that one of the show's creators is Michael Shur, the guy who created things like Parks and Recreation, Brooklyn 99, and The Good Place...in other words, some of the best American situation comedies of not just the past decade, but of all time.  That, to me was the draw, and how did I learn that?  Well, I found myself waiting at a street corner for a light to change, time on my hands, and I actually paid attention to the bus stop poster which kind of subtly announced this.  Upon making the connection, Parks and Recreation specifically was invoked, in that Schur created one of the great goofy small-towns, so perhaps Rutherford Falls would be another such wonderfully goofy, well-populated small towns.  But at the same time, I also realized that Schur, with The Good Place, had bigger thoughts in mind, so who knows where Rutherford Falls might be going... the thought was enticing.

Within the first episode it became clear what the distinguishing factor to this show was, no, not the gentle amount of naturalistic swearing (thanks to being on NBC's streaming service), but the fact that a large amount of the show is centered around the fictional Rutherford Fall's also fictional regional Native American population, the Minishonka Nation.  The show is co-created by Sierra Teller Ornelas (as well as Ed Helms), a Navajo writer known for Brooklyn 99, Happy Endings and Superstore, and for Schur it almost seems a mea culpa to the more off-handed style jokes about (fictional) Pawnee's terrible history with the (fictional) Wamapoke Tribe in Parks and Rec.  It's not that Parks and Rec used Native Americans as the butt of the joke, but its inclusiveness was tenuous.  In Rutherford Falls, the Minishonka are a major part of the cast and the main instigators of the story.

So what is that story?  Well... Ed Helms is Nathan Rutherford, a descendant of the town's founder, and proprietor of the Rutherford Museum, a place dedicated to all things Rutherford.  He's obsessed with his family, their history, and their place in history, as well as the town.  He's undeniably proud of everything Rutherford.  He even sits as an honorary, non-voting board member of the Rutherford Inc., a powerful mutli-billion dollar conglomerate founded by his ancestors and uses the Rutherford name and town's wholesome visage as part of its own image.

There's a statute of Rutherford Falls' founder in the middle of the road downtown, which has been repeatedly crashed into over the years, and city council has proposed moving it as a safety hazard.  The statue was erected on the spot where "Big Larry" Rutherford made a "fair and honest deal" with the Minishonka for the land that would become town -- the "fair and honest" part being of particular pride to Nathan. 

But the issue of moving the statue has stirred up history, a deeper look at the deal that was struck, with Terry Thomas (Michael Greyeyes), owner of the Minishonka Casino, noting that certain terms of that original deal were not upheld, and at the same time Nathan facing the true Rutherford legacy, most of which has been whitewashed out.

Nathan's best friend from childhood, Reagan (Jana Schmeiding), runs the rather vacant, sparsely adorned cultural center in the Casino, and it's evident she is rather estranged from her Minishonka people, in large part due to a "runaway bride" situation.  Reagan winds up having a bit of a conflict of interest when Terry brings a lawsuit against Nathan for violating a hundreds of years old treaty that he values at around three hundred million dollars, and manipulates him into connecting Rutherford Inc.

If I've learned anything from The Good Place, it's that appearances aren't always what they seem, so this isn't just a pleasant small-town-America comedy - although it kind of is that, too.  No, there's a tremendous amount of meat on its sturdy structural bones.  

Nathan is posed in the first episode as our point-of-view character, which usually implies he'd be our protagonist, but that's not the case.  Nathan truly feels like a progressive - his best friend is Native American, his assistant at the museum, Bobby Yang (Jesse Liegh), is a non-binary person of colour, and he winds up (spoiler) in a torrid affair with Diedre Chisenhall (Dana L. Wilson), proudly the first black mayor of Rutherford Falls (also the Chisenhalls are historically the nemeses of the Rutherfords.  Yet, in spite of the people he surrounds himself with, Nathan refuses to acknowledge both his priviledge and his hurtful propegation of ugly, whitewashed history.  He believes the history he's been told, he believes the achievements glories, the traditions proud, his ancestors noble and righteous... be believes in not necessarily lies, but half truths.  So when the other sides of these stories he's been told (and has been repeating for years via the museum) start entering the conversation, he reacts defensively, with stern rebukes.  

The hope from the first episode is that Nathan, seemingly progressive that he is, will see his friend Reagan struggling with her Cultural Center and help her out, not just by listening to her speeches, but offering up space in his own family history museum to present the full story.  But that's never on the table for Nathan, because he's not interested.  He's too invested in the lie, the "great American fable", his family name and everything he thinks it stands for to let go of it.  Throughout his legal turmoil he is confronted with his own hypocrisy and rather than acknowledging it, he doubles-down on his ignorance and his white entitlement. 

By way of comedy, Schur, Ornelas and Helms seem to be painting the portrait the MAGA movement in a microcosm.  They are ostensibly stating that how a LOT of Trumpers have manifested is in rejecting awareness to their own failings, whether personally, or historically as a people.  Far too many people want to reject anything other than the fables of "American Exceptionalism", ignoring all the slavery, forced internment, mass murders, abuses, suppression of individual freedoms and rights that were perpetrated on so many cultures and genders in order to achieve such "greatness".  There are people refusing to acknowledge that horrible events even took place, nevermind any ancestral complicity in it. 

Without explicitly saying it, what Terry Thomas is looking for is reparations for what was taken from his people, and what he wants with it is to give back to his people.  Terry has done well for himself via the casino, but even when his actions are sometimes perhaps misguided, he's looking out for others, and a greater good.

Reagan, meanwhile, just wants her 'best friend" to look beyond himself for a change, something that, at least at this particular time when things have come to a head, Nathan is completely incapable of doing.

Everyone around Nathan - his brother, his friends, his mentor, the entire town, the corporation he's loosely affiliated - are all trying to tell him that there's something amiss buried in their past  (or in the case of the corporation, their present...they use the town to project a squeaky clean image when behind the scenes it's ...no good), and Nathan wants it to stay there.  He can't handle it otherwise, his whole sense of self has been invested into a lie.  The Rutherfords are his blind patriotism, and he's willing to burn every bridge to defend the lies.

---

This all paints a pretty heavy and bleak portrait of the show, it's season finale airing in Canada next week.  While it would be nice if Nathan sees the light, it'd be too easy, and not very interesting.  Plus I don't think that's Schur's style anymore.  There's no resetting back to zero every episode here like the Simpsons, no, there are going to be consequences.  If Nathan ever chooses to see the light, it's going to take work to get out of where he is.  

This wasn't the direction I thought the show was going, trying to understand at least some facet of the MAGA crowd (while in no way acquitting them of their position).  I was thinking the Minishonka Nation would win back the land of Rutherford Falls in court, and subsequent seasons would be the reverberation across America of such a landmark decision.

This isn't the case though, but it's no less intriguing an exploration.

As I said, it seems heavy, but in reality it's all handled with a rather light touch.  It remains a comedy, and never saddles itself with its weight.  It acknowledges it is there and keeps moving forward.

I should also clarify that Nathan is not the only POV character, just the first.  Rutherford Falls cycles between Nathan, Reagan and Terry.  In fact, the fourth episode is all Terry and it's a really fantastic character profile that cements him as one of the great characters in these late stages of the Golden Age of television. 

Reagan is such a deep character that even 8 episodes in we've barely peeled back any of her layers.  All the tidbits we get that flesh out her past, informing her present show a character evolving before our eyes, connecting with herself and the world around her in ways she'd never thought she could.  She's got that delightfully awkward streak in her that will likely never leave, but it also hides the confidence that is firming up inside.  

I found it quite wonderful how the show developed Reagan's romance with Josh Carter - an NPR reporter who comes to Schitt's Creek on a hunch about the lawsuit - played by Schitt's Creek's Dustin Milligan.  Millgan is like a step or two above Hallmark Movie handsome romantic lead, and how the show handles him falling for Reagan is so natural, it just makes sense.  There *could* have been a narrative about disarmingly handsome man gets together with plus-sized woman, but they don't play it that way, and the fact that they don't play it that way (in conjuction with a few other shows where plus-sized women pair up with lean handsome men) literally is remapping my brain.  I'll get into that more in my Shrill Season 3 write up, but the point is when the entertainment culture can normalize women's bodies of all shapes and sizes and not make it the center of their identity, the rest of culture may follow suit.  Attractive is attractive, attraction is attraction.

Rutherford Falls is just kind of doing it.  They're doing the work.  It's a very entertaining show that explores some complex issues through its storytelling but with finesse, not a hammer.  It also constructs a social reality that seems ideal, but then dares to say "it could be better".  And it can, it can always be better.

---
[updated June 7]

So my read on the show -- having watched 8 out of 10 episodes -- was, as Toasty ponted out in the comments (with him having the advantage of finishing the season), pretty wrong.

Where I had thought Nathan would be doubling down on is bull-headed commitment to his sense of self, his identity build around his family, instead the realizations that come to him fracture him instead.  They kind of break him and the veil sort of lifts.  

It's a sweeter resolution but far less daring than I was expecting of the show.  Especially after The Good Place took some incredible swings in its storytelling, I was expecting more of that here.  But they're more of a bunt than a big swing, a little surprising but not as spectacular had they truly turned Nathan into an unintentional right-wing blowhard because of his adherence to his fallacious legacy.

As well, the show comes to resolutions on many of its big swings rather swiftly, which I found surprising, and, again, less daring.  The lawsuit especially seems like it took a 180 in terms of giving Terry what he wanted.  I thought the show was going for a STATEMENT, but it settles back into its character story and story of the town.

It's a good watch regardless, with a great cast and wonderful characters, but it's not as bold as I had anticipated.

Saturday, October 31, 2020

31 Days of Halloween: His House

 2020, Remi Weekes (Metamorphosis: Titian 2012) -- Netflix

OK, the final one of the run, and truly, the best of the entire season.

This is what I like about indie and "foreign" movies, in that they give me exposure to a life that I, in my privileged straight white male living in "the west", cannot imagine. In this case, two refugees flee from racial violence in Sudan, to the UK. While treated relatively (dose of salt here) kindly by the UK officials (they are assigned a house to live in, and a stipend, while their case is reviewed) nothing about uprooting your lives is easy, especially when the house you are living in is haunted.

Bol (Sope Dirisu, Gangs of London) and Rial (Wunmi Mosaku, Lovecraft Country)  are married, and from the intro, they lost a child on the journey to Britain. Sure, they have been given a house, but its a pigsty, obviously abandoned, full of garbage, holes, mold and the wiring is barely functional. But Mark (Matt Smith, Doctor Who), their  just keeps on telling them how lucky they are. It's obvious they are not, but Bol is doing his very best to stay positive; he's a capable man and willing to take on whatever he can to fit in, to fix up the house. Rial is traumatized by it all; she's not adjusting as well as her husband claims to be.

It doesn't help that they both begin experiencing strange supernatural events. We, the viewers, experience the enveloping shadows and the terrifying spectres in the background along with Bol, while Rial seems to accept the apparitions. The ghosts, the spirits have been brought with them from Sudan. There are so many things to unpack when you realize that. Is this psychological? Are these this culture's versions of the ghosts or evil spirits? Whatever is going on, the impact it is having is terrifying, and it seeped out of the screen into our living room. I felt what they were going through, both the supernatural and the more ... systemic nightmares.

Eventually, more things are revealed, more backstory, more history that brings revelation, and ... finally, some peace for these two refugees. Their life is not going to be easy anytime soon, but at least they get to deal with their ghosts. 

The performances were incredible. I have now seen Wunmi Mosaku in two roles, Lovecraft Country and Luther. She couldn't have been more different in all three roles, yet there is an emotional weight behind all three, something that tells me she is not to be fucked with, not even by deceptive spirits. Disiru's little reactions make his character, that laugh when he is stressed, the stoic "I am the man of the house" attitude that not even he is sure he can maintain, the constant tamping down of his emotions, so he can continue to appear to be "one of the good ones", whatever the fuck that means. Even Matt Smith in his small role is brilliant, as you don't know whether to slap him or commend him -- you never really know if he believes what he spouts, but there is something small there, some reminder of why he probably ended up in this job. All in all, the movie is small, mostly in the house, but occasionally in dramatic vistas of the spirit world, and yet, such a big scar world. 

And that final scene... so many MANY fucking ghosts, will that house ever give them up?

Friday, September 18, 2020

HBO-oh-OH! The premiere genre channel?

Raised by Wolves - HBO Max/Crave/CTV Sci-Fi (5 episodes watched)
Lovecraft Country - HBO (5 episodes watched)

Game of Thrones's success has led to a monumental shift in HBO's programming.  I'm hardpressed to think of a genre show (when I say "genre" I mean nerd-stuff like Horror, Superheroes & Sci-Fi, not like westerns and crime procedurals) on the Home Box Office prior to that series launch.  I would have to hazard a guess that it created such a seismic impact on how the channel views its audience that they're now trying very, very hard to keep feeding the beast.  The reality is Generation X and those that followed were raised on a steady diet of science fiction, space opera, horror and superheroes.  Look at the biggest films of the past 50 years - Jaws, Star Wars, Superman, E.T., Back to the Future, Batman, Terminator 2, Jurassic Park... and that just takes us from 1970 to 1995.  From '95 to 2020, it's monolithic superhero, fantasy and sci-fi franchises with horror always being cheap to make and making some major money for smaller studios.  Nerds and geeks are the mainstream.  HBO is aging out of its "sophisticated drama" and "elitist comedy" audience and striving for sophisticated and elitist genre programming, and by gum, it's working.

This year has been particularly stellar in HBO's slate of genre programming, starting with Watchmen, the absolutely brilliant de-facto sequel to the classic graphic novel which ended its 9-episode run January, followed by a revamped, Blade Runner-inspired third season of Westworld and the sharp and snarky Avenue 5, a comedy about a space cruise line gone horribly awry.  Then we have this summer two massive new endeavours: Raised By Wolves and Lovecraft Country.

Both shows are drastically different from each other but feel very "HBO" in that they play drastically different than most other television programming.  When other channels like AMC, Showtime, FX or even Netflix and Hulu are doing when they unveil the best of their best is trying to present shows that would feel at home on HBO.  An HBO program shows a commitment to integrity and vision, where storytelling is condensed, focussed, and swerves away from convention where others might veer right into it.

The trailer for Raised By Wolves looked like bog-standard sci-fi.  A refugee colony of children on an alien planet are raised by androids, and then come a group of human adults who want to disrupt their peace, not believing children should be raised by androids.   It looked like tedious, desert sci-fi, ala Earth 2  and other '90's snooze-fests.  What it had going for it was Ridley Scott, directing the first two episodes and executive producing the series.  It's not that Scott's genre track record is spotless (Gods of Egypt, Alien: Covenant) but generally, he fares well, and with this looks were most certainly deceiving.

 


Created by Aaron Guzikowski, his original concept as far as I could discern, a small shuttle crash lands on the planet Kepler-22b.  It's manned by two androids, Mother and Father.  They make each others' acquaintances upon evacuating the crash site, and saving its very modest cargo.  A portable shelter is erected and Father gets to work settling while mother is hooked up to small embryonic chambers and she brings the babies to term.  Through a quick series of vignettes, the children age, the agriculture of the settlement expands, and Mother and Father find a shared sense of purpose, a common ground for raising a family.  But the children get sick, and over time all but one of them dies, after ten years it's just Mother, Father and Campion as apparently the last gasp of athiestic human civilization.  

Then approaches a ship, the Mithraic refugees, the last survivors of Earth, have come to Kepler-22b.  A brutal war was waged on earth for years between the extreme poles of athiests and followers of Sol.  Their war left the Earth utterly scarred and uninhabitable.  Mother was a Mithraic siren, an adroid of mass destruction and murder, reprogrammed by an athiest to be the matriarch of a new, godless society, free from the corruption of belief and religion.  But if the harshness of survival on Kepler weren't enough to put that in jeopardy, the Mithraic survivors - mostly holy men, warriors and androids - certainly won't help.  Their first encounter trigger's Mother's siren protocols and things go very very badly for the Mithraic.  Mother saves the children from the ship and destroys nearly everyone else.

 


Among the Mithraic survivors are two athiest soldiers who have had plastic surgery to  disguise themselves as noble soldiers in order to evacuate the planet.  Further complications arise when they learn the identities they took over were parents of a young boy.  Yet even further complications for them when they are among the last of the Mithraic survivors, putting their sanctity and devotion to religion to the test, and also trying to lead the Mithraic back towards Mother's camp to rescue the children.

The show craftily explores what happens when two sides of an issue can no longer peacefully co-exist, as if only one side or the other has absolute right to exist, and the other must be destroyed.  There's a similar play in American (and to a lesser but no less troubling extent, Global) politics that finds the divide between different sides utterly unbridgeable.  The show is less about politics than the ramifications of being so inflexibly divergent, but even by the third episode the conclusion that both belief (or faith) and agnostic skepticism have their place, and moreover are essential to existence.  Utter adherence to doctrine finds man believing it absolves them of monstrous behaviour, while absolute adherence to the lack of existence of God to the point of intolerance, it makes enemies of believers.  Both sides find no room for doubt, but doubt is critical to understanding, entertaining the possibility is enough to find empathy.

The show also explores what makes a family, and I love how it handles the Mother/Father dynamic.  What starts out as very mechanical, very alien, almost an uncanny valley representation of parental dynamics becomes more an exploration of what give and take needs to occur in parenting.  Parents should ascribe to the same concepts of nurturing and discipline, but too often don't.  Even if programmed to do so, disagreements in specific methods of rearing young still come up, and the androids need to compromise.

Raised by Wolves is beyond the bog standard, for sure.  There's great thought put into the dynamics between characters, the evolution of both individuals and groups, and sufficiently making the desert seem like an interesting place (delving into the pasts of the characters on Earth and the war that was waged there help to break up the sandy monotony).  I find the Mithraic religion very curious, and the eye-catching military design resembling Arthurian knights (but with a futuristic spin) adds parallels to medieval crusades.

Post-apocalyptic + alien planet + robots + medieval inspired costumes = I don't think I've watch a show that just screams "Toast!" so much in a long time.

---


 

The first episode of Lovecraft Country opens in black and white in the trenches of the Korean War.  A soldier leads the charge, shooting, stabbing and bashing the enemy.  He pauses to breathe, an expression of both awe and horror on his face as he takes in his situation.  Planes roar overhead and bombs drop.  The subsequent explosion is a furious orange and yellow.  As he climbs out of the trenches, the black and white slowly gives way to stark elements of colour, as the battlefield isn't just men and guns and tanks but ufos glowing green,  red-eyed, long-legged tripods, and winged tentacled creatures, and it just gets more bizarre from there, until Atticus "Tic" Freeman (Jonathan Majors - the next big star) awakens from the dream where the fantasy stories have merged with his own experience of war.  Back in the US, Tic is returning home, but despite being a veteran he's still a second-class citizen, relegated to a segregated section of the bus, and forced to walk the rest of the way to town when the bus breaks down.

It's a bold opening, delivering the message that this show is going to both deliver some very highly fantastical elements while also be firmly rooted in America's dirty history.  It's the same slap-in-the-face that Watchmen delivered, instantly undermining any expectations of frivolousness, and backing it up with a solid hour of the uneasy reality of being Black in the 1950's (as opposed to the uneasy reality of being Black in any other decade).  Given protests around the many murders and racial injustices of Black men and women that have been dominating the news cycle in 2020 (next to COVID-19 and an endless stream of Trump bullshit) it seems an especially apt time for shows like Watchmen and Lovecraft Country to reflect upon the present day with historical context, but the sad reality is these types of stories at any time would carry the same relevance.  The positive is that they are receiving both the budget and attention they deserve, when this would likely not have been the case even ten years ago.

That first hour of Lovecraft Country deals with introducing our main players and their dynamics - Tic, his uncle George (Courtney B Vance), his Aunt Hyppolyta (Aunjanue Ellis - I loved that George and Hyppolita were introduced in bed together...not just expressing Black love, but also late-middle age love), his old neighbourhood friend Leti (Jurnee Smollett), her half-sister Ruby (Wunmi Mosaku) and the spectre of Tic's dad, Montrose (who we meet in the second episode, played by Michael K Williams).  George publishes a travel guide written specifically for Black Americans to navigate through the country (a big old middle finger to the Oscar-winning, white-gazing Green Book) and the tenor of the show hovers largely around the unease that white America has with their semi-liberated Black population, and the deeply aggressive racism that prevails.  Late in the first first act the omnipresence of racism is temporarily put aside as some seriously nasty, Lovecraftian creatures attack.  The threats are many fold.

I love how the show started so epically, then grounded itself in a rooted reality, built up the characters and some very relatable relationships, and then thrust these characters in an all too real and uncomfortable horror before upending it all with something much more fantastical.  And then it goes full Sam Raimi/Evil Dead 2.  It gets gross, but playfully so.  It's almost a welcome tension breaker from the racism to have something much more external come in and terrify everyone.

There's an abrupt jump after the attack of the Lovecraftian terrors ends where our protagonists find themselves at the door of a mansion, greeted by a character (and vehicle) which only appeared like a blur earlier in the episode.  It's a very strange editing decision, and it leads directly into the second episode which tonally takes such an abrupt turn from the first episode that it threatens to sink the series entirely.

Seriously, the second episode kind of sucks.

There's a mystery throughout the first episode, the maguffin of Tic's missing father, which leads us to a secret society where Tic and his family have a very important role to play. The bulk of the episode takes place in the aforementioned mansion, and tries to weave its way through destinies, and bloodlines, and magic and power...and more stuff.  It's a lot of world building that is at total odds with the world built in the first episode.  Certainly the role a group of Black people play in this very white organization does hold the lens of racism up to these types of stories, but it tonal whiplash that I found very hard to resolve.  Not to mention the editing is rough, and the score for the episode is so overbearing that it makes it hard to concentrate on what's actually being said.  I was almost ready to tap out of the series after that one.

The third episode rebounds, putting the focus squarely on Leti (and her relationships with her sister and with Tic), as she buys a haunted house in a white neighbourhood and has to deal with terrors both external and internal.  It's a little wonky of a story, but it helps establish that Lovecraft Country as a series is more episodic than serial in nature.  There is progression of relationships and character but each episode shifts into different horror subgenres and changes the spotlight.   The fourth episode is kind of Indiana Jones-inspired as Leti, Tic and  Montrose try and fill in some gaps in their understanding of their place in recent events.  The fifth episode is magnificent, putting Ruby in the spotlight and goes straight-up body horror as she takes a potion that allows her to temporarily become a white woman.

Any one of these episodes could fuel a much longer arc for the characters, but the show is designed (apparently like Matt Ruff's novel it's based on) as a series of almost separate vignettes that build the larger whole.  I really like this format of storytelling in novels, and it's rarely employed, nevermind employed well on television.  Usually a show is either firmly serialized or a very structured episodic, it's not very common to get what's essentially a serialized anthology.  But the sort of subgenre and style jumping the show does from episode to episode, for the most part (so far) makes it rather wonderful.  Even if I've only love 2/5ths of the output so far, the strength of those 2/5ths and aspects of the larger world make it very worthwhile.  And I like the shifting focus from character to character, which is certainly helped by an outstanding cast.  Seriously all the major players are outstanding even when the material is less so.  I'm eagerly awaiting the Auntie Hyppolita episode.

 It's been a crazy see-saw ride...from being all in within the first three minutes to almost bailing completely through the second hour, to appreciating it much more at the fourth hour to absolutely swooning for actress Wunmi Mosaku as much as the camera does every time Ruby's on screen.  It's not the nearly perfect streak of Watchmen, but it's upholding the same principles of telling a wildly entertaining story while also being very conscious of what its mere existence means, and handling that very responsibly.  

Monday, July 13, 2020

3 Short Paragraphs: Black and Blue

2019, Deon Taylor (The Intruder) -- Amazon

I am hesitant to talk about the Black Lives Matter movement. I consider myself a visible ally, but also I am very very aware of my privilege as a Straight White Male. This summer has challenged all of us of privilege, reminding us that we cannot just sit back and hope it gets better. And yet... I still do. I just find it hard to be the person who Acts. But I am not afraid to be confronted by it and acknowledging, especially in the fictional platform. The trailer of Black and Blue came out some time ago, long before the latest atrocities happened, and I liked the Gauntlet aspect it put the main character in, a young black, female cop in New Orleans who witnesses other cops killing someone, and ends up on the run herself.

New Orleans already has a rather checkered past when it comes to police corruption and visible racism. Alicia (Naomie Harris; Skyfall) escaped her past when she was young, but returns to her home town a recently graduated police officer. We're introduced to her being profiled while jogging. "She's blue..." says one of the white officers, by way of apology, as if she is supposed to understand. She doesn't. She shouldn't. But the prejudice of her job also carries over to her old neighbourhood, showing us that the bitterness held against the police is colour-blind. If you are blue, you are blue, and you are tainted. Sounds very very relevant right now. But she wants the faces from her past to see she is different.

Alicia blunders into a killing by some cliche corrupt narcotics cops, and is suddenly on the run. She is trapped behind enemy lines, ratted out to more corrupt cops and also to the gang leader, manipulated into believing his nephew was murdered by her, not the thugs with badges. So many layers of anger and bitterness and prejudice play out in this movie. It was not as much a gauntlet play through as I hoped, but the pit-of-your-stomach stress is there all the way through, as she has so very few people she can believe in, not her fellow officers or familiar faces from her past. But that body cam on her chest holds all the cards, tells all the truth, if only she can get it into the station and into the hands of the right people.

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Distraction: What I Am Watching (Or At Least Attempting To) Pt. A

What I Have Been (or Am) Watching is the admitted state of me spending too much time in front of the TV. And despite what I said above, I have been avoiding telling you about what I have been watching. Not that you care. But at least I am not telling you about my D&D character. The theme almost always comes in batches.

I am sounding like a broken record (to all the kiddies out there, LP records used to get scratched easily, and would begin skipping, repeating the same bit over and over) but this Pause has me seeking easy distraction and not able to focus on much. We are into month... four (!!!) of this whole strange historical event, and I have to admit, it has become a New Normal. That doesn't mean I am dealing with it well, nor does it mean I am dealing with it particularly badly. But it has changed my psyche somewhat, and not for the better.

If I had a trouble watching content of value before, it has been exacerbated. More and more I need light and fluffy, often dumb and easily digested.

Kipo and the Age of the Wonderbeasts, 2019, Dreamworks/Netflix

I am surprised I am not seeing the Internet talk about this series more, and comparing it to the ultra-nostalgic D&D origins RPG called Gamma World. Ask any GreyBeard D&D player (from the 70s & 80s) and they probably remember and/or have strong nostalgic feelings for Gamma World. Or maybe it was just me.

The game was a Post-Apocalyptic world, once of mutated animals & humans, mixed technologies and mysterious ruins of the ancients to explore. The beasts were often weird hybrids of existing creatures, giant versions of what is around now, or even walking & talking people versions. The world was dangerous, deadly and the game never lent itself to long-term story telling like D&D or its other offshoots. It also never really took itself too seriously.

Kipo takes place after an unknown apocalypse where a young girl from a burrow -- humans living underground unaware of what's up on the surface (Pure Strain Human) -- is thrust upon the surface after a tragedy. Up there she meets Wolf, a primitive & pragmatic girl in a wolf headdress and a multi-eyed, multi-legged pig she calls mandu (Korean dumpling). She almost immediately runs afoul of some talking frogs in suits, who "drive" a car pulled by a giant dragonfly. And she sees her first MegaMute (Wonderbeast?) a gargantuan bunny with many-everything. As she is a cartoon main character, she embraces everything gleefully despite the danger Wolf says is ever present.

Each episode introduces more people and more mutated creatures of the surface, while tossing out the classic "explore the ruins" aspects of all PA fiction. And being a cartoon, we can ignore the logical hiccups that come with Cheetoes not being stale and the pop still having fizz. Also, everyone speaks English.  This show could so easily be retro-fitted into a Gamma World  campaign, that I am surprised there isn't a homebrew setting already created by someone. And no, that doesn't mean I will be doing so. I have enough RPG stuff I am ignoring.

Penny Dreadful: City of Angels, 2020, Showtime/download

The first Penny Dreadful TV series (2014) was about an American cowboy landing in London, England in 1891 where he initially investigates a murder, but ends up in an intrigue that includes encounters with Victor Frankenstein, Mina Harker & Dracula, Dorian Grey, Jekyll & Hyde and many other figures from Victorian horror fiction. It was a fun series with a dark, enigmatic supernatural focus. I did not write about it.

This series may be a spin-off but it (so far) has very little to do with the parent series. For one, it is set in Los Angeles, 1938 and does not have any cast members from horror fiction. What it is, is a bleak supernatural tale about a battle between two spirits: Santa Muerta, Mexican spirit of death (in the benevolent shepherd to the afterlife aspect), and her "sister", the demon Magda. Magda wishes to prove that mankind is irredeemable, while Santa Muerte believes in an goodness inherent to all. To that effect, Magda appears in many forms to many people (but always as a version of actress Natalie Dormer) influencing them to make the worst decisions. We get racial tensions between the Mexicans of California, and the establishment. We get the growing influence of Nazism in America, before they were even involved in WWII. And we get faith vs religion.

The performances are wonderful, and every episode has been very enthralling. But its so fucking bleak, and one cannot but believe that Magda is entirely correct. Her influence is minimal, but people are such terrible terrible beings. And considering what's going on outside our windows right now, primarily in the US, but truly, all over the world, I am not entirely sure I want my fiction to so terribly reflect this reality. I need a break from it.

Tales from the Loop, 2020, Amazon

And that is why I returned to watching this series. Not sure why I am in a Returned state, as everything about this show strikes me as being entirely written for me. The show began its life as a series of artbooks by Swedish illustrator Simon Stålenhag. His paintings are haunting scenes of the Swedish countryside in the 80s or 90s, with otherworldly, alternate timeline technologies inserted. Robots, fusion reactors, abandoned massive structures, etc. dominate quiet winter countrysides dotted with children.

The art books evolved into a table-top RPG (think playing the kids from Stranger Things but with robots instead of monsters) and then into this series from Amazon. I was not sure how they would translate the imagery into a story, but in the few episodes I have watched, they have captured not only the impossible technology but also the quiet emptiness. If I was to create film or TV, this is what I would create: quiet, lovingly put together character pieces full of nostalgia for something that never happened. I love the look and the style, and the only reason I have not become entirely wrapped up in it, is due what I started this post saying -- lack of ability to focus when focus is required.

Thursday, March 5, 2020

3 Short Paragraphs: Motherless Brooklyn

2019, Edward Norton (Keeping the Faith) -- download

I began my love for film noir (misspelled it nori which suggests a whole new sub-genre of Japanese detective flicks) when I was in high school, finding myself as the "cool kid" who liked 30s/40s black & white movies. I loved the distinctive characters, the gritty seedy urban underbellies and the period lingo. And, of course, the dames. Who doesn't love a hard-boiled mouthy dame. Now, you can do contemporary noir but something about the time period, the fedoras and trench coats, the cars and the architecture, all the etched in brownstone tropes, makes the genre more palpable. So much so, that Norton, when writing the movie (from a novel by Jonathan Lethem) he moved it back in time to the 50s.

Motherless Brooklyn follows Lionel, a gumshoe (who chews a lot of gum) working for Frank (Bruce Willis, Unbreakable). Lionel has Tourettes, which makes him a challenge to work with, but also an asset given one of his ticks is that he has to unravel things, physical objects and even plots. Early on, and in film noir this is no spoiler, Frank is killed; so Lionel takes it upon himself (donning Frank's fedora) to solve the case -- why was Frank murdered and what had he stumbled into. Lionel has to step from the shadows as Frank's comic relief support, control his personal demons and find out what is what.

If Chinatown was about water and land and people trying to control the money it makes through extortion and murder, then this movie is about "slum" demolition for the sake of NYC's expansion, and the men who benefit from it, and the (black) people who are dispossessed. It's a long, meandering movie, while staying focused on its statement that the grandeur of NYC today was built by paving over the communities of people unable to fight back. Lionel's ticks make for a memorable character, but they struck me as softened, as I always associated Tourettes with more graphic barks and explicit exultations. Meanwhile, Lionel says something mildly embarrassing or amusing, and people just smile or giggle, and then move on. The strife in race relations also seemed somewhat softened, as if Norton was afraid to write some of the truly harsh realities black people would have had to deal with, and likely still do. Everyone, even the bad guys, seemed reasonable or even affable. Maybe after the slap in the indifferent face of Watchmen, I want to be truly challenged by race relations stories. Make me feel bad, not just kind of agreeing that in order for NYC to become as we see it now, someone had to pay.

Wednesday, October 30, 2019

Watchmen (2009) / Watchmen (2019)

Watchmen (2009 - Ultimate Cut), d. Zack Snyder - bluray [Rewatch]
Watchmen (2019), cr. Damon Lindelof

The Watchmen comic book/graphic novel is a masterpiece in the medium.  Writer Alan Moore and artist Dave Gibbons crafted a story that could only be told via the comic book form.  It 's a self-contained epic that presents a richly detailed world somewhat askew from our own, where costumed adventurers emerged in the 1930's, won the Viet Nam war for America in the 1960's and were outlawed in the 1970's, following which is where the story picks up.  But the superheroics are ancillary to the people under the costume, the politics of the world in which they live (this was written at the height of Reaganism/Thatcherism and the last scary gasp of the cold war), and weight of what the future might bring.  It's not dystopian, but it does cast a pretty bleak eye towards the nature of the "western world".

It's a sprawling tale that was originally told over 12 issues (at that point in the 1980's most single issue comics would use 26-28 pages for story, as opposed to modern comics which only contain 20 pages on average per issue).  Also at that time most comics featured a letters' page, for fans to write in and interact with the creators.  Since Watchmen was a mini-series, a proper letters' page wasn't established and Moore instead used the extra pages for prosaic backmatter, often in the form of in-world magazine articles or book excerpts that would flesh out the history of this self-contained superhero universe.

That dense backmatter is so integral to the Watchmen experience that it makes even the idea of adapting the comic to screen a real challenge.  Not only that, Watchmen didn't just tell an immersive superhero story that doubled as a critique of the times (and human nature) but Moore and Gibbons also were deconstructing the medium in which they presented their story (there is a comic-within-the-comic even, with the Tales of the Black Freighter read by an ancillary character in the story), they deconstructed the superhero down from childhood idols and icons to flawed people under masks, dispensing with melodrama and forming more psychological profiles.  It was revelatory and changed the medium of comics and the way superheroes were styled for decades to come.  There's no way to adapt that to screen and have the same effect.

For almost 25 years in the world of comic book fandom (and certainly before the world became engrossed in comic-book and superhero-based media) Watchmen was an untouchable property.  It lived a very pure form with no ancillary outreach save for a role-playing game handbook produced around the same time as the comic.  It was put on a pedestal, and there are a LOT of people who thing it should have remained there.  It was (and remains) a highly revered work, and DC didn't deign to touch it or alter it in any shape for so long, people forgot that it's just another corporate licensed property.  It's a comic book derived from other sources using analogs of more famous heroes to tell a very specific story.  It would be nice if Alan Moore didn't sign a crappy deal and still held rights to the property and had some say into it and made money from it, but that's not the case.  It's a DC/Warner Brothers/whomever-their-parent-company-is-today product, and since 2009 they've been steadily churning out action figures, video games, new prequels (and sequels), and media containing the characters and its stark iconography

Even in the height of Watchmen idolatry, adaptations had been tried a few times, most notably Terry Gilliam made a concerted effort to get a Watchmen movie made in the 90's, but ultimately determined that it was better served on television as a miniseries to allow the story to breathe.  But Hollywood has a hard time letting go of any idea, and certainly can't let go of any property that's steadily making money and garnering attention elsewhere.  Until recently, the Hollywood movie studio system was the ultimate destination for any story, the ultimate validation, the ultimate point of exposure.  It still sometimes just doesn't understand that some stories aren't meant for its medium.

While reports of previous attempts at Watchmen seemed like shady adaptations with ill-advised alterations, director Zach Snyder -- fresh off a very financially successful adaptation of Frank Miller's 300 comic -- promised to stick true to the source, effectively using the comic as storyboards for the feature with only a few tweaks (longer action sequences, wardrobe adjustments and very minor story changes).  It was still relatively nascent time in supehero cinema.  The Marvel Cinematic Universe was just starting, Christopher Nolan had just released The Dark Knight, and people were gleaning the real potential of big blockbuster superhero cinema that wasn't cartoons for kids, but deeply engaging, huge productions that offered up superheroes and their struggles as something legitimately worth investing into.  If there was a time for Zack Snyder's Watchmen, 2009 was it.



The cinematic experience of Snyder's Watchmen was a bit of a mixed bag.  He certainly captured the visuals of the comic book with striking, brought-to-life, slow-motion, moving panels that inspired familiarity and even a little awe in many fans (but by no means all).  The dialogue had ringing familiarity to those who had read the graphic novel, and the story presented itself, for better or worse, almost exactly as Dave Gibbon's panels broke it down.  It was far from a failure, but something was definitely off.

In the painstaking effort to lovingly recreate the panels of the comic, Snyder forgot to invest real time in the characters.  There's a roteness, a going-through-the-motions to almost every performance in the film.  There's little sense that the performers (most of whom have gone on to become quite familiar faces) had a real understanding of their character, and their emotional connection to each other (the unfortunate result of which was I thought for some time that Malin Akerman, Patrick Wilson, Matthew Goode and others weren't that good at acting).  They're exceptionally attractive people, in amazing costumes, perfectly lit, directed it seems more to recreate a scene that worked on paper rather than create something that works for the screen.

The 163-minute cinematic experience was beautiful but hollow.  It was certainly the story of Watchmen but it didn't do what it should have.  Where was the "wow" that reading the comic delivered.  I recall seeing (or reading) an interview with Snyder where he pointed out that the film was going to deconstruct the superhero movie the same way the graphic novel deconstructed the comic book superhero.  Aside from a few visual winks -- like Adrian Veidt's (Goode) costume, complete with Joel Schumacher's Batman & Robin-inspired nipples -- there seemed to be no other thought put into this sense of deconstruction.  There would have been real opportunity to take apart the "origin story" sensibility that guided most superhero films until the MCU era, and likewise Snyder could have really worked through visual aesthetics from various superhero films of the 70's/80's/90's in a pointed way.  It would have taken real vision to do that and (as we've seen from Snyder subsequently) that's not really his style.  Instead, what Snyder added to the Watchmen was just more fight sequences, and they're probably the least likeable aspect of the film, even more distracting than Dr. Manhattan's big blue penis.


There was a direct-to-DVD animated adaptation of Tales of the Black Freighter which seems like such an odd thing to do.  In the comic, the Black Freighter story is told in small, brief sections throughout the 12 issues, so presenting it as a whole seems incongruous to its origins.  A director's cut of the film emerged on DVD, adding an additional 20 minutes, but it's the Ultimate Cut of Watchmen, released around Christmas in 2009, that makes for a more definitive Watchmen experience.  This Ultimate Cut, clocking in at 215 minutes, takes the director's cut and seams in the Black Freighter in pieces throughout (as was originally intended).  The film does feel more whole with the Black Freighter and director's cut footage included, but it also feels like it should be more episodic rather than a barely-unified whole.  Gilliam was right.

In rewatching this ultimate cut, I found the first hour the most engrossing.  This is Snyder (and by proxy Moore and Gibbons) in world-building mode, and if anything the world of Watchmen is fascinating.  It's sense of alt-history, how things differed because of the presence of costumed vigilantes and, moreover, Dr. Manhattan, is riveting.  It was smart of Snyder to revert the production back to its mid 1980's setting if he was going to so literally translate it.  It wouldn't have worked otherwise.  And yet, there's a sense of anachronism between the costumes and the era its set in. 

Snyder's opening title montage -- the slow-motion retrospective through the history of the Minutemen in the 1940s all the way through to the Keene act barring masked vigilates in the 1970s, all set to Bob Dylan's "Times They Are A-Changin'" -- is easily his greatest contribution to the Watchmen legacy.  Snyder's seems to have more of a gift for music video storytelling than actual cinematic storytelling.



But after the first hour, once the world is well established, Snyder has to live with the characters, and the message of Watchmen and he couldn't seem less interested in them.  I have to say that the most vital parts of the film are the Black Freighter sequences.  They snap the viewer out of the lull that Snyder can't otherwise escape.  In Snyder's live-action, the characters say all the right words, the actors move with notable intent, they are framed as if posed, the shots all look right out of the comics, but it doesn't flow like a movie should.  It's only in the Black Freighter animation that the film escapes this need to "panelize" its shots.  What works best is it takes the conceit of a comic-within-a-comic and instead makes it an animated-film-within-a-film, which is the kind of thing an adaptation is supposed to do, adapt to the medium, and use it to its full advantage.

I honestly don't know anyone personally who loves this movie, and I know only a few who like it.  I do like it, but it's only effective as a "Cliff's Notes" version of Watchmen.  It doesn't even come close to replacing the graphic novel, but at the same time it does absolutely nothing to harm it.  Even the overblown sex scene and the unfortunate, overly elaborate, "bone-breaking" fight sequences aren't all that egregious.  I do have to say that Dr. Manhattan's glowing blue genitalia are utterly distracting every time they're on screen.  Whether prosthetic or CGI, it was someone's job to work with those things, either gluing them to Billy Crudup's suit or animating the movement of the phallus and testes as Dr. Manhattan moves around the scene.  It's just a bizarre thought to me.

This may be a controversial opinion, but I think the ending of this Watchmen is even tighter. more realistic to the reality of Watchmen than Moore's original ending.  Framing Dr. Manhattan as the bad guy for the world to rally around seems like a far more elegant solution than dropping a giant space squid on New York. 

The big box set the Ultimate Cut came with also includes a great 40-minute in-story "news programme" that investigates the former heroes of this world.  It covers some of the backmatter material that Moore had in the comics, and one could see how, were this an episodic TV series instead of a film, the post credits of every episode could feature a shorter 5-minute news segment akin to this.

Well, it's 10 years later, and we have a new Watchmen TV series.  I was initially worried when I heard about it because I was afraid of another adaptation of the graphic novel.  I think it was already proven that it can't be easily translated to any sort of screen, nor should it really be.  So it was to my relief to hear that Damon Lindelof, a year or two separated from the excellent The Leftovers (and still-beloved Lost) was spearheading this as a sequel, and a sequel to the graphic novel, not the film.  The Leftovers was such a richly envisioned world that I could only imagine what it is Lindelof wanted to do with the world of Watchmen 30 years later.

Halfway through the first episode of Watchmen I leaned over to my wife and said "I don't know what I was expecting, but it certainly wasn't this...and I'm so thankful for it".

Let's state it blutly, Watchmen is amazing.  It's uncomfortable, shocking, upsetting, striking, funny, exciting and invigorating.  It's definitely got that "Prestige HBO" vibeand it once again reiterates (like Game of Thrones and Westworld before it) that television is now capable of producing cinema-quality stories in a serialized format.  The times they are a-changin' indeed (callback).

The pilot opens brilliantly showing a silent film, fans of the comic will recognize instantly what the film is referencing, but the story pulls out of the film and into the reality of 1921 Tulsa, Oklahoma, when the prosperous black community of Greenwood was massacred by white supremacists.  I didn't even know this was a thing, and apparently it's a part of American history that's been forcefully swept under the rug.  I think it's bold that its been given such a high profile awakening, and that it serves as the primary backdrop for this show in many different ways.  It's a brutal historical reality which deserves to be remembered and addressed.  Just one of many mortally deep wounds in America's long history with racism.

This show could be its own thing, just dealing with the legacy of the Tulsa massacre, but those sorts of stories don't quite get the same eyes on it, the same response.  Lindelof, co-writer Nick Cuse, and director Nicole Kassell have taken this buried shame and displayed it boldly in front of their new "prestige superhero drama".  They're doing what Snyder and team didn't do with the film, which was adapt it for the medium, and for the times.  It's perhaps thanks to Snyder's film, though, that the pressure is off for Lindelof and co. to redo Moore and Gibbons' story.  Instead he gets to use Watchmen as a brand, and as a surreality to set his story in.  It's doing the same thing Watchmen did for Reagan/Thatcher-era and holding a reflective surface up to it to stare back upon it.  It may look different and distorted, but things are all too recognizable to the world of today.

The craft of Lindelof's Watchmen is in using its comic book history sparingly, nuggets that readers familiar with the graphic novel will catch and have greater meaning, but serve as curiosities for the inexperienced.  These tidbits, like the note that Viet Nam is an American state, or that the presidents can serve more than 2 terms now, or that whole raining squid thing, or even the "American Hero Story" segments...they all nod back to the comics and mean quite a bit more with the background knowledge, but they don't detract from the main story and they serve as intriguing world building on their own merits even without further elaboration.  This isn't our reality, it's warped and different, but not unrecognizable.

Another brutal massacre, this time a fictional one in the show's history, saw all of Tulsa's police department murdered by a racist terrorist group that sport Rorschach masks as their main iconography.  This has led to the police being masked and unidentified, and by the show's second episode, tensions have escalated into a war between the Seventh Kavalry and the police.

When I saw the commercials for this series, with the police in masks, it struck a note of "this is wrong", as in "what would the police get up to if they were anonymous, not held responsible"?  There's a credible threat in a masked police force for sure, but the show weaves that narrative trickily into understanding the necessity, but it never sits comfortably with that decision.

There will be "purists" (ugh) who don't want any other Watchmen other than what Moore and Gibbons created.  That's fine, nobody is asking them to read, watch, or play anything else, but this is vital TV right now, and Lindelof, Cuse and Kassell negotiate this unexpected superhero playground deftly, investing in all the right aspects, teasing all the right components and creating immensely engaging and thought provoking television in the guise of a comic book adaptation.

This feels like a comic book series properly adapted.  One which uses what came before as a launching pad, not a bible, not a story to tell over and over.  Its greatest success is with Regina King's Angela Abar as the show's focal point.  It teases out her family life, her professional life, her trauma and her competency.  She's a badass, in costume and out.  Louis Gossett Jr. is a 105-year-old wheelchair bound stranger who imposes himself upon Angela's life in the most shocking of ways and the revelations he has to bring to her are personal in so many ways (and likely bigger than what she already imagines).  There are cutaway scenes to Jeremy Irons' Adrian Veidt, living in isolation with only his genetic anomalies to keep him company.  What his deal is 30 years later is still anyone's guess.

I'm already excited for Watchmen week-to-week.  It's the first show in a while I'm making appointment television, not wanting to wait to watch it on demand or from the digital recording.  Netflix and binge watching has trained me to be restless when there's something this good that I have to wait for.  So I sit with anxious anticipation for episode 3.

Friday, December 1, 2017

10 for 10: "Netflix and chili" edition

[10 for 10... that's 10 movies TV shows which we give ourselves 10 minutes apiece to write about.  Part of our problem is we don't often have the spare hour or two to give to writing a big long review for every movie or TV show we watch.  How about a 10-minute non-review full of half-remembered scattershot thoughts? Surely that's doable?   ]


In this edition, 10 teevee programmes watched on Netflix.

1.Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23 - season 1 & 2 (Netflix)
2.The Crown - season 1 (Netflix)
3.The White Rabbit Project - season 1, 3 episodes (Netflix)
4.The OA - pilot (Netflix)
5.Chewing Gum - season 1 (Netflix)
6.Dear White People - season 1 (Netflix)

7.Maron season 1 & 2 (Netflix)
8.Friends from College - season 1, 4 episodes (Netflix) 
9. Wet Hot American Summer: 10 Years Later (Netflix) 
10. Big Mouth -season 1 (Netflix)

aaaaand...go!

I remember seeing promos in 2012 for Don't Trust the B... and thinking "what the hell"?  From the mouthful of a title to the "James Van Der Beek as himself" it seemed like a show that was trying waaaay too hard to be part of the new wave of TV sitcoms that Arrested Development bore.  I gave it a hard pass.  Through the year and a half-ish that it was on television I saw people I knew who had good taste giving it a go and liking it, review sites giving it favourably passing grades, and I thought "how".  I mean, I have friends who watch Big Bang Theory and I know that's garbage, surely this goofy-titled poseur was just another hot pile in disguise, right?  I mean, I'm not a John Ritter fan at all, and I didn't think I'd be a fan of his kids either, nepotism and all.  But after coming to love Krysten Ritter in Jessica Jones and learning she's not, in fact, even related to John Ritter, I needed to get more of a Krysten fix.  I hesitantly pressed play on Don't Trust The B... on Netflix and had a quick laugh very early on, plus saw  Nahnatchka Khan's name as creator (also created Fresh Off the Boat) and I was hooked.  Ritter's morally spurious Chloe is both just as nasty as her reputation suggests and nowhere near as nasty, really.  She could have been fairly one note, but I love how Ritter takes her on journies without ever getting "soft" (her on again/off again Aussie boyfriend/soulmate/nemesis is a show highlight).  Van Der Beek adds some "Sad Hollywood" humour and the extended cast of Dreama Walker, Eric Andre, Ray Ford as Luther (JVDB's assistant), Liza Lapria (Chloe's ex roommate and stalker), and Michael Blaiklock as the perv in the window across from them are all ridiculously fun.  This show hits it instantly with only a couple duds early on, and leaves a lasting impression.  I want a rewatch.

[12:46 -- oops]

---
Oh the Royal Family.  We shouldn't care, and yet, we do.  I don't know why.  There's something about Rulers and Monarchs that is so ... other.  Especially in modern times of democracies and governments, the idea of a monarchy and royalty seems solely symbolic.  Thankfully The Crown elucidates on that symbolism by taking us into Queen Elizabeth's early days as ruler, taking over after her father passes away and her uncle abdicates to be with an unlikable American socialite.  The show zeroes in on how the titular crown affects Elizabeth's relationships, with her husband Philip who expects to be king (and is sorely disappointed/emasculated), with Prime Minister Winston Churchill (Churchill's story takes on its own fascinating sub-plot of calculation and back-biting within his party to oust him), and with various members of her staff, not to mention the colonies she visits and her receptions, both the ones she's aware of and the ones her aides attempt to shield her from.  It's a phenomenal show, Claire Foy amazingly inhabits the role and expresses the weight of it tangibly.  Ex- Doctor Who Matt Smith puts in a great turn as Philip, his jealousy and pettiness combined equally with sympathy and love.  Surprisingly outstanding is John Lithgow in his Emmy winning turn as Churchill... it shouldn't be surprising that he's so go but he's above and beyond.  I was utterly engrossed at both the historical and fictional recounting of this time as well as with the care to show it in a reflective lens of modern concerns.  Just a beautiful production.

[23:01]
---

I miss Mythbusters.  I've been an on-again-off-again viewer of it since its inception, but it was in its final season when my daughter and I started watching it together.  It's science and entertainment, rolled into one, and highly educational while also being ridiculously silly.  It'll be back in some form soon enough, unfortunately The White Rabbit Project, which stars the Mythbusters b-listers Grant Imahara, Kari Byron, and Tori Belleci, doesn't quite hit the mark.  The basic premise of the show is to focus on one topic, find 5 or 6 prominent examples of the topic, look at the science of those examples, conduct some experiments and then judge which of them is the best based on whatever criteria they establish on the show.  The main problem with this is they go through their experiments much too rapidly on the show.  With 5 or 6 examples to get through every story and experiment feels rushed and the exploration factor, the trial-and-error part that Mythbusters did so well, is lost in the process.  Grant, Kari and Tori are capable, amiable hosts, but the premise of the show puts them in talking mode more than action/experimentation mode.  I really wish it were better.  As it is, I didn't get past the third episode, even with an enthusiastic 7 year old ready to watch.

[29:52]
---


The OA opens with a feature-length pilot about a woman (played by Another Earth's Brit Marling, also the show's co-creator) who famously disappeared as a teen and then returns inexplicably seven years later.  She has some oddities that surround her, mysterious scars, and she starts calling herself "the OA".  Meanwhile her adoptive family tries to reconnect with her with difficulty, and she begins establishing perhaps inappropriate connections with some of her neighbours (mostly all younger than her).  Eventually she starts to open up, both about who she is and what she went through, but her tale of lost time is a difficult one to believe.  The believers though, gather with her, and experience a touch of the supernatural.  It's all a little too self-serious, hitting the same tenor as Another Earth but leaning hard into its more bizarre elements (specifically leaning into Marling's more bizarre and frustrating behavior).  The pilot, around the 50 minute mark, takes a dramatic left turn, as the OA recounts her tale as a young girl in Russia.  It's a lavish production, a harrowing half hour story that seems at once a tangent and absolutely the reason why one should watch this show.  And yet, I haven't gone back to it.  I'm definitely intrigued, but the tangent being more engrossing than the main tale to me was problematic.  That said I'm not sure I was particularly invested, and I've not quite decided whether Marling is a good actress or painfully one-note.  The show's tenor doesn't exactly allow for a broad range from its lead.  The facebook reaction at the time it came out seemed to be "it's mostly good but what the fuck"...which leads me to believe it has a frustrating ending that may not make the journey worthwhile.... I need someone to sell me on continuing with it...

[40:37]
---


Haha, this show is great.  Just thinking about it makes me smile.  This British show is just goddamn fun.  Written and starring the formidable comedic talents of Michaela Coel as Tracey, it's a show about a repressed 20-something finally coming into her own sexuality it the the low-rent flats of suburban London, while still living with her mother and sister, both direly religious.  The show's explicitly frank sexual talk is utterly refreshing, and coupled with Tracey's ignorance, it's utterly hilarous.  It's a show that could easily fall into a cringe comedy trap, but because the characters are largely so open and honest with each other, the cringe factor rarely (I won't say never) manifests.  Tracey's just a supremely joyful and awkward person, naive but willing.  The supporting cast from her mother and sister, to her almost-kinda boyfriend and his invasive, liberated mother, to her in the closet ex, to her promiscuous friend and her suffering boyfriend, the show is full of amazing supporting characters, most delivering comedy gold.  (Tracey's sister having her own sexual awakening is just one of many, many highlights).  If you're not put off by sex or sex talk, give the pilot a shot.  If it doesn't hook you in then the show won't be for you, but it's practically genious.  So gloriously vibrant, fun, and riotously funny.  I don't think I've ever seen Coel before, but with this series, she's already a comedy legend to me... just a phenomenal spotlight for her.

[48:32]
---


Oh, the heavy stuff.  Well, heavy, but not, but still heavy.  Dear White People is an series extension of the film of the same name which I've never heard of before.  The series itself is brilliant, exploring issues of race in America, largely African American but not solely.  The series uses its microcosm of a black dorm on an Ivy League campus to explore the macro issue, without ever forgetting that some of its characters who seem to have all the answers are still, in effect, kids without a lot of real world experience.  I loved the exploration of different black thought, and it's not that the show manages to come from every possible perspective but it does effectively reiterate that there's not just one voice when it comes to the black experience, but it equally effectively reiterates that there are common experiences across the board that are largely a result of systemic and even unintentional racism.

The genius of the show is in how it plays out.  It starts with an event, a campus party, an un-PC party put on by the campus humour/satire publication (a Harvard Lampoon of sorts), and it approaches it from our main character, Samantha.  Or at least we think it's our main character.  She hosts a campus radio program with the same title as the show that seeks to incite and inform in equal measure.  But the next episode our lead switches to Lionel, the demure side character from the first episode, as he becomes fully aware of his homosexuality, and we see the party and events leading to it from his perspective, but advancing slightly.  Each subsequent episode retraces steps with another character, but moves things forward, by midway the rather lighthearted take on race relations becomes in your face and dire, as an encounter with campus security turns almost deadly and the show does an incredible job at hitting to the core of what the police violence against black people means, the lack of safety in the world, the crawling unease.  Eventually the show swings back to it's lighter perspective, but after that it never lets go of the fact that America (and many other places, let's not kid ourselves) still treat black people as "other".  The show explores the roots and continued fight for equality in a systemically corrupt reality.

It's not a straight comedy, it's not a drama, but it manages both incredibly well.  The cast is incredible, and many of the characters become instant favourites, such that we're eager to see the spotlight circle back on them but also disappointed that it's to the detriment of other favourites.  Just an incredibly well put together show.

[1:02:16]
---


I've reviewed Maron once before, back when IFC threw fans a bone and place a couple episodes on youtube.  In the years since Maron had four seasons and is now finis, but has been available on Netflix for some time.  I've slowly worked my way through the first half of the show in fits and starts, pretty much the same way I consume Marc Maron's podcast now.  The podcast has hundreds of episodes, each with a famous or semi-famous person, always with a cold open of Maron discussing his life.  The TV show flips that.  The show is mostly about his life with a bit of the podcast where he's interviewing a celebrity creeping in.  It's Maron's angst that leads the show.  Nearing 50 at the show's inception Maron's past the mid-life crisis, has done a ton of self-help, and is a much better person than he used to be.  He's not a slave to his demons anymore, but they occasionally return to remind him of who he was, which only surges him on to try and do better.  But old habits die hard.  Maron is a compelling central figure, a solitary man not looking desperately for love, a man only marginally burdened by his parents, a man whose friends are as messed up as he is, only generally more secretive about it.  Maron's life, especially towards the end of season 1 and the start of season 2 spiral out of control when a particularly destructive and invasive relationship begins and then decays.  It's a relationship I knew from Marc's real life told through the podcast but it's fascinating to see it play out in fiction.  Part of my fun was recounting to my wife the reality of the situation which was actually just as crazy if not crazier than the show.  There's a hint of cringe comedy to Maron, but most of it is Maron fighting with his own worse tendencies in a given situation, sometimes side stepping the cringe, and sometimes stepping right into it, it's not knowing which way it will go that makes it so satisfying, and funny.  With a tinge of DIY and a hint of melancholy, few other comedies have felt like Maron, and few others trying to find this balance are as successful at being funny.

[1:10:51]
---


Oh I was so looking forward to Friends From College as an exploration of how friends you made from one of the peak times of your life have grown or not grown with you, how friendships have evolved or stagnated, how those old habits and tendencies you have with those friends crop up every time you see them, and how those same things impact your significant other when they're invited to join in yet are perpetually the outsider.  Ostensibly these things happen in Friends From College, but the show is less a broad exploration than it is a very specific one, for this very specific group of friends.  I dunno, I just couldn't relate.  Nick Stoller has done some fun, funny, accessible films, but this, this was off putting, despite it's fantastic cast which includes Keegan Michael Key, Cobie Smulders, Nat Faxon, Annie Parisse and Fred Savage.  The show opens with Key and Parisse engaging in a post-coital discussion in a hotel room, their long-standing relationship obvious by the familiarity they have with one another.  As the conversation progresses, these are obviously people who are in love with each other and still good friends after all these years, a real solid relationship to start the show on...except when it becomes clear that these two are not married to each other, and in fact have been cheating on their own spouces with each other since before either were ever married.  It makes the show wildly uncomfortable from the get go, and despite the likability of both actors, it's hard to like or sympathize with the characters at all, and it's hard to find something to root for... do we want them to break up their otherwise happy marriages/families (Parisse has a child, Key and Smulders are going through IVF to try to have a child) and friendships?  It's a no win situation for the show, even if Key and Parisse choose to never sleep with each other again.  After four episodes of this horseshit sneaking around and cringe-inducing situation comedy around covering tracks and friends finding out, I couldn't really take watching anymore.

[1:20:00]
---


The first Wet Hot American Summer Netflix series, First Day of Camp was great for how it played with the timeline of the original movie in relation to the actual timeline in real life...that is to say, it was old comedians attempting to play teenagers, the results were never not funny.  This sequel series Ten Years Later takes its cue from the end of the film where the characters promise to regroup in 10 years time, and we get to see where they all wound up.  The First Day of Camp succeeded in spite of its logistical challenges, bringing together its repetoire of now very successful actors and comedians, and having a script that juggled their availability in any one scene adeptly.  Ten Years Later feels less well planned, the logistics not working out as well, and rushed in spots.  The excuses they make for replacing Bradley Cooper with Adam Scott, for instance lends its own spot of comedy, as does the retroactive inclusion of two new players Mark Feuerstein and Sarah Burns and the continual flashbacks that insert them into sequences of the film or preceding series where they never were.  This would be more amusing if the show didn't spend so much time with them.  The cast of characters was large enough that spending (a lot of) time on two new characters only makes them stand out more as outsiders (and for them to be quite unlikable as well doesn't help anything).  There's an absurd plot involving George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan that also doesn't quite take off, primarily for how much cheap comedy circulates around them, and yet the show's under-arching plot pretty much hangs off it.  There's a lot of fun stuff in Ten Years Later but not nearly as much as First Day of Camp.  Like most comedy sequels, it's diminishing returns on similar jokes.

[1:28:38]
---



I can't say that Chewing Gum inspired Big Mouth, but these are two peas of the same pod, despite one being very British, the other very America, one a live action cartoon being about people in their 20's discovering their sexuality, and the other a highly animated cartoon about teenagers discovering sexuality as they go through puberty.  Both are incredibly frank and hilarious, although I might have to give Big Mouth  an edge largely for what it dares to do with it metaphors come to life.  Created by Nick Kroll and his childhood friend Andrew Goldberg (with Jennifer Flackett and Mark Levin) its a mostly fictional recounting of their pubescence, with Kroll playing Nick and frequent collaborator John Mulaney playing Andrew.  Andrew's puberty is hitting him hard, and he's shadowed constantly by the Hormone Monster (also played by Kroll), who's like the little devil on his shoulder telling him to get into trouble, only there's little sinister about it, it's just a personification of urges.  Nick and Andrew hang out with Jessi (Jessie Klein) who has her own Hormone Mistress played brilliantly by Maya Rudolph and, for some reason, Jay (Jason Mantzoukas) who is that kid who's just the filthiest kid, extremely annoying, you never want to be around them, and yet you're friends with them for some reason.  The show's exploration of pre-teen sexuality is very daring, but necessarily frank, and absurdly true to life, despite its grandiose metaphors.  At one point Jessi has a conversation with her vagina (as played by Kristen Wiig) and there's a sequence where Nick, still having not hit puberty, catches a glimpse of Andrew's post-pubescent crotch and can't think of anything but...it's penises everywhere.  The casting is brilliant, the show is largely spot on (one episode's spotlight on Jay's relationship with his pillow is, perhaps, too weird, stretching the metaphor way past its breaking point), and it's full of quotable quotes (as often based on inflection as cleverness).  I'm a huge fan of Kroll, from his stand-up to Kroll Show to Oh, Hello on Broadway and now this... it's not just about how talented Kroll is, but the people he surrounds himself with.  Outrageous, and again, like Chewing Gum, not for prudes.  Watch the first episode, if it puts you off you won't want to continue.

[1:42:22]

-fin-