Showing posts with label trans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trans. Show all posts

Sunday, August 30, 2026

KWIF: Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma (+3)

 KWIF=Kent's Week in Film. I also saw The Odyssey in true IMAX. It's a big movie on the biggest screen. I don't know that the viewing experience was all that much different than the first, other than I could see a lot more sand and sky.

This Week:
Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma (2026, d. Jane Schoenbrun - in theatre)
Illustrious Corpses (or Cadaveri Eccellenti - 1976, d. Fracesco Rosi - bluray)
Pavements (2024, d. Alex Ross Perry - bluray)
Synecdoche, New York (2008, d. Charlie Kaufman - dvd)

---

Jane Schoenbrun's latest academic-cum-schlocky meta head trip opens with heavy breathing, and camera work implying we're watching from someone's specific point of view. It's every masked serial killer since... Jason? Michael Meyers? Leatherface? The intensity is ingrained when we watch from this perspective and hear the sounds of someone's breath reverberating inside a contained space. And then into view is tents and cameras and sound gear and crew, and someone steps very closely into frame and seems to be adjusting whomever it is that is behind the camera.  This should be our first indication that this isn't going to play out how we expect.

The opening credits - set to Okay Kaya's cover of R.E.M.'s Nightswimming - takes us through all the pop culture hoopla and paraphernalia of the (fictional) "Camp Miasma" horror franchise and it's vent-headed killer "Little Death". News articles, posters, video games, toys, websites, all detailing the rise and fall of the Miasma series, much like the 80's heavyweights like Friday the 13th or A Nightmare on Elm Street.  It's a series that had its day, and then it's corporate overlords kept trying to make it a thing, outstaying its welcome. 

This credits sequence is so information dense and so evocative it's easy to get lost in. As a pop culture and paraphernalia junkie, I just wanted to watch this opening on a loop five times over just to take it all in (my favourite bit is that "Little Death" released a much derided rap album). This density serves as an intentional disconnecting break from the film's initial imagery (and sounds). It's there, in part, to make us forget what we initially saw, so that when we meet Kris Williams (Hannah Einbinder) we don't suspect what the film will eventually be telling us.  

Kris stops in at a gas station convenience store, loads up on candy (so much candy, too much candy) and finds a random copy of "Camp Miasma VI" on DVD. When she checks in and asks the hotel clerk (Kevin McDonald) if there's a DVD player she could use, he lets her know he had a small part in the locally-shot film. We learn that Kris has been hired to be the director of the Camp Miasma reboot. The series has a problematic past in that its killer is problematically trans-coded and the studio execs want a queer director to reboot it for, well, optics.

Kris is in the Pacific Northwest to meet up with the original Miasma "final girl", played by Billy Presley (Gillian Anderson, adopting a thick Tennessee drawl... which I mean to say is she's doing Dolly Parton's accent...and laugh... RIP Dolly). Presley's been a recluse since declining to return for the sequels, and is basically a non-commodity, but Kris is infatuated with her, in particular the sex scene in the first Miasma film which was both a sexual awakening as well as kink origin story for her.

Billy, who now owns and lives on the camp grounds the original Miasma was shot, is introduced walking in on an obviously titillated Kris watching this scene. Billy is presented stepping out of the shadows, hair a vibrant golden yellow, lipstick a stark blood red, and an obscenely big hat, all making her look like a femme fatale straight out of a noir film.

This is all still very early in teenage Sex and Death at Vamp Miasma, and it's hard to fully describe what the actual experience of watching it is like. There is obscene, face forward product placement that, if it takes you out of the movie, it's acting as intended. If Anderson's just-shy-of-over-the-top drawl is almost too much, it's as intended. If you are, like I was, made to feel in awe of Anderson, to be reminded of how hot and iconic Dana Scully was in the X-Files then that too is intentional. It's all intentional and it's all part of the layers of artifice that this film puts on.

Kris is not at Billy's home just to recruit her for her reboot of the series, she's there for a more personal and intimate reason. She saw in a still frame of Billy's eye in that original film a look - at the crossroads of pleasure and pain - little death and Little Death. She's been fixated on this imagery and this idea and cannot get past it. Billy gets it. Kris has a kink that she's too ashamed to admit to, and she's a willing participant in unlocking that for her.  I don't think Anderson really cared for Scully being a sex symbol, but she certainly seems on board with making Billy Presley one. That there's a 30 year age gap between Billy and Kris hardly matters. There's no power imbalance, and nobody is taking advantage of the other. Consent is explicit.

The second act of the film finds Kris and Billy watching the original Miasma film, which Schoenbrun's spot-on riff on 80's slasher films (including making near-40-year-old Zach Cherry playin a teen sleepaway camp counsellor) is both entertainment and foreplay for them. The film-within-the-film (-within-the-film) explains the origins of Little Death, which dives into its own variation of the all-too-common transphobic origins of horror's cinematic murderers.

Schoenbrun examines the warping of young minds that comes with horror film's obsession with titillation and brutality, but from a feminine lens, not the masculine one in which most horror (particularly those of the 80's) were presented in. Schoenbrun doesn't cast judgement. That "Little Death" rises again and chases Kris (who intentionally doffs her clothes down to her underwear) all the way to Billy's rose-petal coated bed and skewers the both of them as they fornicate is all just part of the role play. It's not horror, it's leering and alluring. It's wrong, and yet, ok?

There's not a lot of direct horror in Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma, but there is a lot of flesh and fluids, as Billy says. It is a satirical examination of horror as a genre... both a loving and biting one. It's almost a sex comedy, but also... not really.  

I am not well versed in 80's horror, nor do I have any first-hand familiarity with women's sexual awakenings (that I know of!), and though I've done some reading of trans media analysis, I too am not an expert in that to comment extensively in the context of this film (critic Willow Maclay's review is exceptional from that context), so ...Camp Miasma is, in some respects, not in any way meant for me, a straight, cisgender, horror-averse man. But at the same time, it's also not throwing a hand up to explicitly excluding me either. 

Beyond the aforementioned themes of film and sex and transphobic media, it's also asking the audience, whomever you may be, to think about voyeurism, about what it can mean to be the watcher, or to be watched. How do these different perspectives impact us? What does it mean to look...is it leering? Is it desire? Is it judgement? And what does it mean to be looked at? Is it affirming? Is it off-putting? Is it exciting or upsetting? And where does context fit into all of that?

It's only once Kris reports back to the studio big wigs her progress on the film, kicking off the third act, that we start to understand the context which the film has actually been presented to us all along. Kris insists it's not "meta" but it very much is. The artifice is also the substance. I don't think a film has thrown me for a loop this befuddling and inspiring since Synecdoche, New York. 

It's a fascinating picture, deep in thought, with multiple themes playing in concert together (including Schoenbrun taking some jabs at the Hollywood intellectual property machine), each that could be picked apart and analysed from an academic perspective, but at the same time being playful and having fun with it all, not taking itself too seriously.  

...also, fyi...miasma: a heavy vaporous emanation...
---

I have been dipping my toe into giallo movies the past little while, a very tentative dip that likes the temperature but still won't commit to jumping in with full gusto. The Italian murder/mystery subgenre of film is pretty vast with many names of directors and stars swimming in the pool (if you'll allow me to extend this metaphor), it almost feels too crowded to just dive in. Amid all the splashy titles, and the plentiful boutique physical media labels just trying to sell their wares, it's hard to know what's truly worthwhile, it's like I need a coach at the end of my lane to tell me where to turn (ok, I've lost a grip this metaphor).

Illustrious Corpses was a recommendation on the relatively new-to-me (but not new overall) podcast The Big Picture from regular Chris Ryan... a recommendation that would test whether he was a trustworthy source or not. Turns out this film isn't a giallo at all, but the recommendation was still a good one... nay, a great one.

The film opens in the real Capuchin Catacombs, looking at real desiccated corpses. It's a stark visual but not one meant to scare or frighten. The character, an older man with a real lived-in face, looks deeply into the mummified faces, intrigued and ponderous. He leaves and is promptly assassinated. It turns out he was a prominent judge. Assigned to his murder case is Inspector Amerigo Rogas (Lino Ventura, another very lived in face, but with a little more mileage left to go).  He monitors the big, stately funeral, and suspects, maybe, mafia connections were to blam. In the streets, youthful protesters decry the dead man as being connected to the mob.

As Rogas investigates, there's another murder, another judge. And then a third. Rogas starts piecing together that the three judges were connected by more than profession, there is perhaps a vengeful aspect to this string of killings. But as he digs into these men, he starts uncovering information that might not be directly relevant to the case, but certain powerful people want to keep buried.

Soon Rogas' hunt finds the tables flipped. There's potentially a conspiracy afoot, and not only isn't it something he cannot solve, he may not be able to get out from under.  

I may have mentioned in my review of Dario Argento's The Five Days  that my knowledge of Italian history is verrry slim, so the backdrop of Illustrious Corpses, the political tensions involving student protests, labour shutdowns, neo-fascism and a burgeoning communist undercurrent are all pretty new concepts to me, but director Rosi certainly captures the mood. The vociferous chants of protests are a common soundtrack to the picture tell of a country ready to explode, and more than once we catch wind of a government doing everything it can to keep such an explosion from happening, even if it means scuttling a murder investigation or three (and committing a few more of their own).

What starts out as a high profile murder investigation soon bursts into full-blown '70's conspiracy thriller, and it is pretty incredible. Ventura's Rogas starts out so cool and assured, so observant and above it all, and we slowly watch that confidence, that comfort, that sense of being untouchable erode away and, eventually, collapse into the sea.

Director Rosi and his cinematographer Pasqualino Del Santis frame everything in beautiful, massive, old spaces, as if Italy itself is constantly threatening to consume our primary characters. We often see Rome and Venice in film, but Rosi takes us to many different locals, each with their own charm, some decadent, some rugged. The camera's gaze, often, is snapshot worthy, even if the innate colour tone is almost always some shade of brown (with maybe a hint of blood red).

This was a total surprise, as I had settled in for a delightful picture about a crazed murderer and instead felt the wave of historical anxiety and tension Rosi so ably builds overtake.  It's up there with the best of the subgenre, a real damn surprise.

---

Pavement was never my band. I enjoyed the few songs I heard of theirs back in the heyday(s) of my indie-rock years (about 1993-2011), but never actively pursued them, never owned an album. I was always just happy to hear a new tune every few years, but always felt listening to too much of them would perhaps sour what I did enjoy.

I have to say, watching director Alex Ross Perry's 128 minute avant garde "documentary" on the band was the most time I've committed to the band since first hearing "Cut Your Hair" back in the mid-'90s.

In Pavements we have:
- A behind-the-scenes document of the 2022 reunion tour;
- An archival footage retrospective;
- A making of the cliche-laden Hollywood biopic;
- A behind-the-scenes telling of Alex Ross Perry's attempt to launch an off-Broadway jukebox musical adaptation of the band's music; and
- The opening of a celebratory museum gallery tribute to the band and their history.

It's a lot to string together into anything approximating a cohesive narrative, but editor Robert Greene gets pretty close, and in the end, for all the fake productions attempting to mirror reality (the Hollywood biopic is completely fake, the musical is a bit of a tongue-in-cheek cheeky production, and the museum is not entirely fake but constructed for the purposes of the film), it winds up somewhere honest and tributory without being overly sentimental or fawningly admiring.

At once pretentious and silly, there perhaps too much facade to Pavements and not enough introspection/retrospective to function as a satisfying introduction for anyone not familiar with the band, or, for someone like me who only ever flirted with them, never committing. 

It's pretty clear though, frontman Stephen Malkmus was never going to approve of anything remotely standard, nor was he going to sit for anything approximating a conventional interview, and had little interest in assessing his band's, history or his own.

As is, I think this one is for the fans.

 ---

In referencing Synecdoche, New York in the above Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma review I was reminded how long it's been since I last watched the film, a time which predates this blog.

The impact of Charlie Kaufman's directorial debut never left me, although the majority of the details had long since faded. Was the comparison even apt between these two films? Am I just a fake critic who really doesn't know what he's talking about? A. Yes and yes. 

Much like Miasma, Synecdoche... is a very personal journey through the working thoughts of a director's brain. I don't think if Kris in ...Miasma or Caden Cotard in Synecdoche... are fully meant to be stand-ins for the directors of their pictures, but both are certainly speaking for the director.

While the themes are somewhat different, I still see synergy in how they approach their stories, layers of surrealism to inform the viewer that what they're about to see, that the world the characters in the film inhabit is a skewed depiction of reality.  Schoenbrun is more obvious about it in ...Miasma than Kaufman is (at first) but when Kaufman wants it to be known, he hits you with a literal house on fire.

The story of Synecdoche finds Caden (Philip Seymour Hoffman), a successful theatre director, inhabiting a life that's falling apart, but he's kind of oblivious to it, a passive player in a way. His wife Adele (Catherine Keener) is an artist who leaves him to exhibit in Germany, taking their daughter with them. She had been pretty disconnected from any engagement with him (though as we learn more about Caden, the disconnect seems to have started on his end). Caden also has had a string of maladies plaguing him that seem to reiterate his view that death is waiting specifically for him.  He flirts with Hazel (Samantha Morton) at the box office but he can't seem to take action even when Hazel couldn't be more direct about how she feels about him. His young actress from the play, Claire (Michelle Williams) is utterly infatuated with him, and at first he knows it's a line he cannot cross, but he crosses it when Hazel moves on from him. 

Caden gets a sizable grant to produce the play of his dreams, a very personal work, a play about death coming for us all, but the only story he knows to tell is his own, and so the world around Caden is largely shaped by his own reality, a mirror within a mirror within a mirror, without any real sense of identity or direction. Soon the world within starts to bleed with the world without and the become intractable. The one area of his life he proactively controls, he loses control of, and he needs someone else to step in and take over as him... and it seems the most comfort he has ever had in his life is when someone else tells him exactly what to do.

Time, in Synecdoche, New York, is the main thematic element. Kaufman lets us know without any exposition that time is passing in Caden's life and he's missing all of it, stuck in routine, stuck in ruts, stuck in his own mind, stuck in his own obsessions. The opening scene takes place over the span of the month, but plays as if it were one continuous scene. It's not obvious, but it's there. When Adele leaves, Caden thinks she's been gone a week or two, but Hazel tells him it's been a year, and she's not coming back, and the fashion magazine moments later tells us it's been two years.  Time in the film keeps moving like this, and Caden keeps losing track of it because he's so insular, so fixated on his own fixations.  The film spans Caden's life as he begins middle age to his very old age², and it seems to go by so fast.

In creating a lasting work of art, Caden misses out on actually living his life. His work misses the larger patches of what's going on in the world (things are bad outside of the confines of the warehouse he's operating out of, as implied by the increased military presence on the street, with no context given because Caden can't be bothered to pay attention to it). I'm not certain if this is Kaufman's specific point, but there's a reading that only drawing on one's own life for the sake of art can lead to one's art consuming one's life (as well as an obsession with not dying might result in losing out on actually living).

This is both a deep and purposefully obtuse movie. Kaufman is a very intelligent writer who obsesses about his own mindset and his career and the immediate world around him, and perhaps this is a self-criticism, but also with the awareness that he can't see another path for himself. Death is the inevitable. The end is prescribed at the beginning. 

I didn't really understand Synecdoche, New York when I first saw it. I understand it only a little better now, but I love the puzzle of it. A marvelous film.

---

Monday, April 21, 2025

KWIF: Black Bag, Anora and The People's Joker

 KWIF=Kent Watches, Intermittently, Film. I'm just, like, too tired, like, all the time.

This post:
Black Bag (2025, d. Steven Soderbergh - in theatre)
Anora (2024, d. Sean Baker - AmazonPrime)
The People's Joker (2022, d. Vera Drew - Blu-Ray)

---

A sexy espionage thriller starring Cate Blanchett and Michael Fassbender from Steven Soderbergh? That was an easy "yes, please and thank you."

Soderbergh's second release of 2025 (after Presence, which came and went so fast in January barely anyone noticed) certainly has the feel of this current stage of Soderbergh's career, marked by a curious use of different types of lenses (my knowledge of lens types and the effects they give is fleeting so I won't even attempt to elaborate any further) and natural lighting that give his digital movies almost the texture of film, while providing the filmmaker the tools to shoot fast, cheap, mobile, and prolifically.

The director "retired" from filmmaking in 2013 after his Liberace biopic went straight to HBO, skipping theatres altogether, and decided to focus his efforts on entering the golden age of television. Since "retiring" he has directed 40 episodes of television (across 1 series and 3 mini-series) and, oops, 9 more films before this one. That's Soderbergh in retirement mode. Since returning to film in 2017, he's become fascinated with digital technology, including shooting entire films on his iPhone. There are obvious limitations to that kind of exercise, and some of those productions wear their experimentalism quite proudly. This isn't one of those productions, but it's not a straightforward Hollywood-glossy production either.  It settles in somewhere in the middle between daring and refined.

A large part of the polished feel comes from a script by veteran David Koepp (Jurassic Park, Mission Impossible) who has scripted three of Soderbergh's last four productions. Black Bag finds Blanchett and Fassbender as a long-time married couple who both work for British intelligence. It is a field that can be difficult for romantic partners to maintain trust in one another as they can bury any secret (including infidelity) under the "black bag" paradigm. But, Fassbender's George Woodhouse is utterly devoted to his wife, even more so than to his country (which he is very devoted to). When he's given a tip that someone in his circle of friends is possibly a double agent, including potentially his wife, he holds a particularly tense dinner party with the two other couples-from-work in question (Tom Burke, Naomi Campbell, Rege-Jean Page, and Marisa Abela).

The other couples provide a contrast to the pairing of George and Kathryn St. Jean, but also leaves the audience wondering if there are similarities too. After the party, the signs seem to point to Kathryn selling government secrets, and George's devotion to Kathryn is put to the test the more he investigates. The question the film asks isn't so much a "who's really the double agent?", but instead "is Kathryn as devoted to George as she says she is?", and conversely, "is George as devoted to Kathryn as he says he is?"

This isn't a big flash-bang Mr. and Mrs. Smith action movie, but something much more cerebral, and even more so emotional, despite George's steely, near-robotic demeanour when he's in dogged pursuit of his lead. As the film delves further into their relationship, and the intermingling of relationships of their colleagues, the intensity threatens to boil over. The metatext of the messy business of international espionage is only tangentially commented upon, this is more a relationship thriller than a political one, but it's also one laden with attractive people flirting and more. What's not to like?  

---

I've been hearing about Sean Baker for quite a few years now, about his dramas starring characters who are in the sex work field that sound like they're going to be real bummers but wind up being quite entertaining.  Tangerine, The Florida Project and Red Rocket were all films outside the mainstream but received a lot of commentary with each release. I don't know that anyone could have anticipated that Baker was about to level up to become the most decorated person at a single Oscars ceremony in history.

Baker won four Oscars for Anora, in the categories as director, writer, editor, and producer (the only other person to win four Oscars in one year: Walt Disney) and star Mikey Madison took home the best actress Oscar in a hotly contested year.

I have not seen any of Baker's prior films, because I've been afraid to. I have heard of the reputation of his films, and despite what they say about his fairly light touch, I still was thinking it would be a bait-and-switch and I was going to be challenged a lot more than I want to most of the time.

Anora opens in a strip club, with dancers strip teasing and lap dancing, tits out within seconds of the opening frame. I'm still that guy who gets uncomfortable with nudity in a motion picture (what's the appropriate reaction here?!?), and the first act of this production was pretty heavy duty with nudity and sex. To Baker's credit, his camera is never leering, it's pretty passive in its observation. Madison plays Ani, a dancer, who is pulled in to the VIP lounge to work the young Vanya since she's the only one who speaks Russian. The son of a wealthy Russian oligarch, Vanya is living in the States to escape the expectations of his parents. He and Ani hit it off, and he invites her out for a private gig, which extends into a weeklong, whirlwind gig as his girlfriend, and a lot of sex. A lot. But also, seemingly, connection. The girlfriend gig ends in an impromptu trip to Vegas, where they decide to get married, and a hard line between the very uncomfortable, sex-and-nudity laden first act and the rest of the movie is drawn.

As rumours of Vanya's marriage circulate, the family fixer gets involved, bringing in some goons to sort out the truth. Vanya fights for his marriage, tries pulling rank on the thugs, and Ani fights back herself. Things would feel pretty serious and pretty dangerous if Baker didn't really twist the physicality into something more akin to slapstick than brutal violence. Once Vanya hears his parents are coming, though, he, quite literally, runs, leaving everything and everyone behind (it's such a comedic moment, you could almost picture the cartoon trail of dust behind him).  It's all kind of shenanigans thereafter, as Ani and the goon squad try tracking down Vanya in the clumsiest manner possible, and the third act brings Vanya's parents into the picture.

It was as I heard it was, a surprisingly entertaining, light on its feet drama that basically sits on the Pretty Woman trope and farts quite loudly upon it. It's not a rousing or uplifting comedy, it's still a drama, but it's much much lighter than what I was expecting and the laughs come more from performance than situation (as the situation remains pretty intense for Ani). Madison's Oscar winning performance at the front of the film require her to craft a character who is comfortable with her profession, and knows how to handle herself in pretty much any situation. The second act finds her taking a back seat (sometimes literally) to the goon squad and much of her role is reacting to her increasingly desperate situation, quietly assessing the level of threat to her, and contemplating what her connection to Vanya really is. What Madison is able to get across in these quiet moments is, at least for me, the more impressive part of her performance.  Saying a lot while saying nothing can often go under the radar, but the film absolutely hangs off it through the latter 2/3s of the film.

I'm not going to debate whether Anora was the best film of 2024 or even the most deserving of the Oscars best picture nominees...awards do have meaning, but they are never unimpeachable (and the categories are so subjective to one's particular tastes anyway).... I will say I have no problem with its successes at all, I think Anora earned them.  I will work my way back through Baker's filmography at some point. Anora has confirmed the expectations that were set for me.

---

The People's Joker debuted at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2022 with the threat of a copyright infringement hanging over its head. The film screened once and was pulled from its remaining screenings, the result turned an unofficial, ultra-low-budget, cult-ready satire of the Batman-mythos-as-trans-allegory from maybe a blip on the radar of the Festival into a full-blown cult phenomenon. 

On the blu-ray menu screen, writer-director-star Vera Drew, in her "Joker Harlequin" guise, introduces the menu, and then proceeds to vamp for near upon five minutes before starting to launch into reading the letter from "an unnamed media conglomerate" and also to read from the multi-paged legal review of her film from a battery of lawyers she hired to ensure that her use of the characters fell under the fair use and parody banner. (Drew does mention that she was told the menu screen can handle up to 20 minutes of recorded content, and she seemed intent on pushing it all the way).

The People's Joker is a very personal tale for Drew, who starts off as a young boy (whose dead name is bleeped out whenever it is said, save for one choice moment) in Smallville, rural nowhere America, feeling lost in her skin, with a mother whose expectations for her child are utterly conformist (and a father visually absent from the story despite still being around). Young Bleep upon expressing her feelings of discomfort is taken to Arkham Asylum where Dr. Crane (not Frasier) assesses the child and prescribes Smilex, which chemically helps Bleep get through the next 20 years of life by numbing their everything with a smile.

Bleep becomes fixated on Lorne Michaels (voiced by Maria Bamford) and his UCB Live sketch comedy show, and its star Ras Al Ghul (David Liebe Hart of Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! of which Drew was an editor on), and ventures to Gotham to be a part of the UCB, only to find it's a multi-tiered system requiring a lot of money to progress through.

Bleep meets the Penguin and the two start an outsider comedy club which brings in more outsiders like Bane and Poison Ivy, and also the Joker, a trans man who Bleep immediately falls head over heels for.

The film is an exceptionally personal one for Drew, pretty much an autobiography told through a superhero filter. A scene between Nicole Kidman and Val Kilmer's Batman in Batman Forever was the key that unlocked Drew's gender awakening as a child, and her relationship with a trans comedian contained the combination that finally opened the vault. 

It's also a film about Drew's experience in the comedy scene and the various institutions that cowtow to profit-driven expectations rather than art (though Drew is the first to admit that her comedy, and that of her collective, is also pretty out there in its experimentalism, and often not very good).

This intersection of comedy and superheroes is certainly two of my big pop culture interests, and having trans and non-binary people very close to me in my life makes trans film a gateway to helping understand their experiences better without having to be totally invasive about it.

I found the story of The People's Joker very compelling, even if I did spend a lot of the run time doing mental gymnastics trying to translate Joker Harlequin's experiences in the film to maybe Vera Drew's real-life experiences with Lorne Michaels and the UCB. It's all the more disappointing then that I found much of The People's Joker to be somewhat painful to watch, especially when I have so much respect for the creative effort that was involved in its creation.

Drew's primary visual vehicle for the film is green screen acting in front of digital backdrops. The effects is not much different than the backdrop you might have on a Zoom call, and the weird fading and halo effects it causes. It's a style of production that was clearly one Drew was familiar with from her Tim and Eric years (as well as her many low budget and public access projects beyond that), but what's maybe entertaining for a 2-minute sketch is just rather ugly to sit through for the better part of a 93 minute runtime of a movie. 

There's a heavy dose of mixed media throughout, including extended fully animated sequences in different styles (as well as animated sequences inserted into TV screens), some stop motion and experimental visuals. It's a visually dense production that regularly and brazenly shifts styles that it embraces in the editing rather than feeling like a patch. It's pretty scrappy, and, as I said, admirable, but it doesn't make it any prettier to look at. (I should note that some of the costuming and makeup is pretty terrific...and also some of it's pretty bad). Drew's editing though, bridges it all into something quit legible.

But it's that personal story at the centre, with Vera Drew's writing, editing and acting talents carrying the film past it's less than appealing aesthetics and into key trans cinema, and its wild experimentalism, not to mention it's barrage of multimedia asides (like the in-world "Suicide Cop" TV show) that is certainly what has already made it a cult classic ready for midnight screening rotation.

(I should note the blu-ray comes with a low-budget pilot, a full 20+ minute production of Suicide Cop which felt like ready-made Adult Swim programming and I enjoyed quite a bit).

Wednesday, October 30, 2024

31 Days of Halloween: I Saw the TV Glow

2023, Jane Schoenbrun (We're All Going to the World's Fair) -- download

I entered into this movie, hearing only a bit of the buzz, with a concept as to what it was about... one that proved not quite accurate. I knew it was about a cult TV show that may be more than just a mere TV show, maybe one that was not quite ... real ? Like Channel Zero? And it was that, at one layer, but at the deeper layer it was more about the experience of gender dysphoria and being trans.

But let's talk about the horror movie as a horror movie aspects first, as I am not sure I am qualified to make much commentary on the actual meanings to the movie.

Owen (Ian Foreman, Let the Right One In) and Maddy are weird kids at school in the 90s. They find connection and Maddy invites him to experience a TV show she is into, a late night, sshhh-only-we-know-about-it low budget magic realism show about teenage heroes fighting odd creatures led by the evil Mr. Melancholy. 

The opening act sets the tone for the movie, definitely indie, definitely left of centre, weird and nostalgic, everything tinted in other worldliness. It wouldn't be for everyone, it would definitely be for That Guy, but it would also draw a lot of mundane viewers down the road of "I don't understand what I am seeing, but I know I am supposed to think its important". The creator has mentioned being influenced by Donnie Darko and I can definitely see that.

The movie shifts to years later, Owen (now oddly Justice Smith, Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves, only two years later) is still sneaking off to watch The Pink Opaque, at Maddy's (Brigette Lundy-Paine, Downsizing) place. I believe the horror is carried through the obsession the kids have for the very very bad looking show, the pink glow (yes, that pink glow) and the mild hallucinations Owen is having. Then Maddy confesses she is going to run away her abusive mother and wants Owen to come along. But at the last minute, he panics and bails. He confesses what he is doing to the mother of the child he was supposed to have been doing sleep-overs with. But Maddy does disappear, and it is depicted that its not seen as just a running-away, police tape and investigations.

And The Pink Opaque is cancelled.

Eight years later Owen lives a lonely, isolated life. His mother has passed and he is entirely disconnected from his father, an actor with nary a line, a father who he has to apologize to for coming home late, even though Owen is an adult. He works at the local cinema and is mocked by his coworkers.

Then Maddy shows up again. She tries to tell Owen what The Pink Opaque was really about, that it was not just a TV show, but... the real world? Maddy confesses to Owen that they are the main characters in the show (she does so in a bar on the edge of town; oh, look, there's Phoebe Bridgers on stage) and they were captured by The Big Bad of the show. This world, the one Owen lives in, is The Midnight Place, the scary dark realm of the show. And the only way to get back to the "real world" is to bury yourself alive. And she is going to do that soon, to go back, and wants Owen to come with her, because Owen is actually Isabel, the main character.

It is during these confessions that we get brief flashes of Owen wearing a dress, Isabel's dress from the show. There was more than just obsessing over a TV show going on in Maddy's basement. And when offered the opportunity to run away and embrace who Owen really was, he chose to stay. He chose to stay "he". Its not overt, the scenes are brief, but the disconnection you see apparent on Owen's face is terrifying, his voice thin and strained, his wheezing even more apparent.

Another time jump. Owen is in his 40s. He has embraced modern, adult, male life. He has a family (which we don't see), a career (fuck, he just works at a kiddie ball pit / entertainment zone because the movie theatre closed down) and a big screen TV. He looks half dead. He lives in the same house he grew up in, his father now also dead. The Pink Opaque is now available on streaming (so, it was a "real" show after all) but Owen sees it for what it was --- terribly low budget and badly done. 

One last time jump; he's in his 50s. He looks older, barely alive. During a kids party he has a breakdown, and... the other characters just... fade out... just NPCs without a script. We see Owen cut his own chest open, no blood, just the glow & static of an old CRT TV. Its still inside him, the "real world" but... he just leaves, meekly apologizing to everyone.

So, you may ask, where was the horror? What I recapped didn't have it, maybe a little bit here and there. But the style of the movie, how it was shot, scored and the tones all say that Owen was trapped in a world, both of his own making, and not ... real. Its too terrible a world, that initially was tinted with nostalgia for the 90s but once that has faded, the world is dark, dim, cold and empty. Nothing colourful, nothing PINK about it at all. Its fucking bleak. And the supernatural elements are very real to the movie, not just metaphors on top of the allegory. 

The director is clapping back against the response to the ending of the movie, people commenting on and complaining about its bleakness. But the salient point is that The Pink Opaque is still inside Owen, the possibility of finally letting it out, of finally embracing Isabel is there. There is always still time. Not everyone has to be trapped in an utterly mundane, middle-American, work to live, live to work lifestyle (OK, that's a bit of transference from my experience), where your true self is hidden -- you can become The Real You.

Kent's take on it, different yet more poignant.

Monday, May 20, 2024

KWIF: Next Goal Wins (+4)

KWIF is Kent's Week in Film where each week Kent has a spotlight movie in which he writes a longer, thinkier piece about, and then whatever else he watched that week, he just does a quick little summary of his thoughts instead of calling his mother. He must have been an evil bebe. 

This week:
Next Goal Wins (2023, d. Taika Waititi - Disney+)
Delicatessen (1992, d. Jean-Pierre Jeunet et Marc Caro - AmazonPrime/the binder)
Nemesis (1992, d. Albert Pyun - Tubi)
Requiem for a Dream (2000, d. Darren Aronofski - the binder)
Tokyo Godfathers (2003, d. Satoshi Kon - the shelf)

---

There is a consistent rhythm to the dialogue of Taika Waititi's residents of American Samoa which is not to dissimilar to the rhythm of the Maori denizens of most of his New Zealand films... full of charm, good nature, and prepetual sense of positive optimism. That type of dialogue, and general nature, is something that Michael Fassbender's reluctant, angry, drunken, heartbroken, belligerant coach just is incapable of joining in on. In part because that is what the role calls for, and partly because this type of comedy is definitely not Fassbender's baileywick.

It results in the character of Thomas Rongen, a real life man who was basically left no other options than to coach the worst national team in international soccer/fütböl, taking a very expected white man's journey of learning and growing by embracing a culture other than his own. It's a true-ish story but that doesn't make it any more played out as a story. 

The thing is, knowing exactly what the journey would be deflated almost all expectations of true drama, and so the film  left with promoting the charms of the various actors playing the denizens of American Samoa, and every single one of them seems like someone you would just delight in being in their presence. It speaks to the dark place Coach Rongen had to be in to take so long to embrace it.

Waititi's film isn't a triumphant return to form by any stretch. It's a pretty wobbly narrative, a skeleton of story upon which hangs mere ribbons of characters, most of whom are teased with inner lives, but really none of which are not explored to any satisfaction. Yet it's not the nearly unwatchable mess of Thor:Love and Thunder, which was about as big a narrative and tonal misfire as we've gotten in the past 5 years.

I laughed a lot, and even cried a couple times. When a character explains to Coach the third gender of the island -- fa’afafine -- as a flower that makes our lives more beautiful, that got me real good. It takes Coach a little longer to come around, and given the increasingly crass and dangerously incendiary attacks by political and religious leaders on the trans community as a mode of riling up and distracting their followers from real issues affecting them, it makes for the film's most direly uncomfortable moments. The film takes place in 2011, which in the course of trans awareness was an eon ago, so Rongen at first is dismissive or insensitive or even aggressive about it, before befriending and mentoring Jaiyah (played by the stunning and charming Kaimana in what should have been a breakout role) as team captain, embracing her as its clear her community does.

I can see the editing lines of the film, the truncated drama, the expurgated character arcs, and half-remaining narrative framework in the remnants of Next Goal Wins. What is left is a mostly breezy picture about a group of people aiming for a low-stakes victory and probably being quite fine whether accomplishing it or not. I'm not sure I want to see the no doubt 30-minutes-longer version whose island breeze levity gets dragged down by too much emotional weight.

It's fine! Really!

---

Delicatessen is a film I've been meaning to watch for 30 years, and, in fact, have had a DVD of it in the binder for 20 (but, sadly, in another region format).

In an amber-drenched, wet and smoggy post-apocalyptic France, we find amidst the ruin an isolated square where, beneath a tenement house, a butcher shop sells human meat. The meat is sourced primarily by drawing in unsuspecting victims with an ad that promises room and board in exchange for building upkeep labour. The meat's consumers, primarily, are the building's odd motley of tenents.

Enter Dominique Pinon's Luison, an out-of-work clown who starts charming many of the locals (though others don't sway from their meat cravings and keep their distance). Luison makes a connection with the butcher's mousy daughter who wants to save him from his fate. She enlists the rebel Troglodites who live in the sewer to kidnap Luison, and all hell breaks loose in the building.

Until the third act, the film is largely comprised of a series of vignettes that form a picture of the people of the building and a sense of this should-be-horrible world they exist in. Yet Jeunet and Caro inject this bleak landscape with a sense of whimsy and playfulness (accompanied by a winkingly jovial Parisienne score) that undercuts any and all darkness.

It does feel like the film is biding time though to get to its rollicking third act which takes its multi-level set piece and absolutely wrecks it in gloriously practical fashion. It's wondrous to behold and elevates this film from pleasant curiousity to sheer joy.

Jeunet and Caro cast, dress and style their band of actors like human cartoons. You would think given their various exaggerated features they were shot with a fish-eye lens to further accentuate their unique traits, mais non, they are just that fascinating to look at...or at least feel that way given the directors' lovingly curious way of capturing them on film.

This would program well as a triple feature with Kung Fu Hustle and The Shape of Water.

---

I was listening to a podcast in which a trio of cult cinema fans (and professional screenwriters all) were nerding out over their love of Albert Pyun movies. Pyun has nearly 50 film directing credits (and a few uncredited efforts), of which the vast majority were released direct-to-video. The most "famous" of his features would be the Jean-Claude Van Damme feature Cyborg, and the not-even-laughably bad Captain America from 1990.

The funny thing was, as big a fan as these commentators were, they still could acknowledge that the majority of Pyun's work was, bluntly, pretty bad, but that the director has a penchant for getting putting a little more into some of his films, and getting a little more out of them, that his DTV contemporaries.

Nemesis was touted as the spotlight film for Pyun's filmmaking zeal, and, to be blunt, it's a pretty bad story about a largely nonsense war between humanity and cyborgs that is definitely riffing on both Terminator and Blade Runner, but having a fraction-of-a-fraction of the not just budget of either, but attention to detail in world building.

For starters, they get the definition of cyborg completely wrong. They call what are essentially sentient robots, "cyborgs" when the lead character, Alex Rain (the charmless Olivier Gruner), a "cyborg" hunter is himself a true cyborg, comprised largely of cybernetic parts. It's a maddening that a DTV genre movie that relies upon exploiting nerds for profit could get this one concept so wrong.

I won't go into the specifics of the story because the filmmakers didn't really seem to care, so why should I?  But within the first 30 minutes, Alex has been nearly killed and rebuilt twice, retired from his job and pulled back into it, and sent on a mission to do assassinate a "cyborg" rebel leader only to switch sides when he learns the truth. It's storytelling whiplash that would be infuriating if there was any sense of a character in Alex Rain at all.  Gruner seems to wrestle with any dialogue (it's clear English is not his first language) and cannot conjure up any sense of emotion. He does look good with his shirt off though, and it's off a lot.  

It's also insane how the film keeps pairing Alex up with characters and then killing the sidekick or companion off. It robs the film of any meaningful relationships for Alex, and pretty quickly you stop even trying to care about anyone that may pop up on screen, even plucky Max... Max Impact.

For as inane as the story is, and as checked out as I was, by the third act I was finding myself charmed by the film's action gusto. As noted, Pyun gets a lot out of his minuscule budget, and manages a pretty relentless stream of action sequences. They are not exceptionally well shot, but there are some clever flourishes amidst them, including one atop a collapsed building, one while two characters slide down a very long and wavy industrial (and very muddy) slide while shooting at each other, and a sequence in which Alex repeatedly shoots the floor out from under himself to descend four stories and escape a trap.

Then there's the big finale which results in Alex fighting a stop-motion robot skeleton which is not something you see anymore and for as silly as it looked, it was twice as charming.

Beyond Gruner, the acting is bad, but due to the script being so awful and the majority of the movie's dialogue being captured in post.  But we get small appearances from Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa, the ever reliable Tim Thomerson, a blink-and-you-miss-it Jackie Earle Haley appearance (I didn't even notice), and even a very nude, very young Thomas Jane.

I see the appeal of Pyun's work, but if this is the best of it (as per the podcasters' claims) I don't know that I could stomach anything much further down the quality scale.

---

(filed under: horror,not horror)

I was 24 when Requiem for a Dream came out, and it was one of the scariest, most intense, viscerally upsetting films I had ever seen.

I felt scarred, yet I listened to the soundtrack (Clint Mansell with the Kronos Quartet) I don't know how many times. I couldn't brave watching it again however.

So why now? Same thing that triggers most of my movie watching these days: a podcast. The Blank Check crew were stating that Satashi Kon's Perfect Blue had an noted influence on director Aronofski, specifying that Requiem was a benefactor of Aronofski's fandom. I wanted to see if I could pick up on that now, having just watched Perfect Blue a few weeks ago.

But I don't really see it at all. Perhaps I just havn't studied either film enough to really plot the parallels.

Aronofski does have a playful lens and a feathery touch with the editing throughout the film but the playfulness lessens and the editing becomes more intense as the severity of the story escalates. I liked the splitscreening, and doubtlessly the quick cut montage of the heroin process is going to be Aronofski's most lasting contribution to pop culture.

I was sucked in by the showiness early on, thinking that it would allow me to sail unscathed through to the finale but damn that third act, as cartoony as it gets, remains scarring enough to want to wait another 24 years for another rewatch.

Ellen Burstyn is still incredible, Jared Leto is just this side of trying too hard, Marlon Wayans is great but the character gets short shrifted in the story department, and Connelly's performance breaks me. 

Oh, and how had I completely forgotten about Christopher McDonald's TV pitchman? The DVD menu screen only comes up after being forced to watch a minute of McDonald's infomercial, and then it lands on the active "order now" screen where the menu is slyly buried. One of the all-time great DVD menu screens for sure.

But is it horror? Not traditionally, but yes.

---

I can't exactly recall when it was that Toast and Marmy screened Tokyo Godfathers for me, but I would hazard a guess that it was circa November 2005, where I needed to crash on their futon for a week.

I imagine I made it clear that anime wasn't my thing, and they must have made it clear that Tokyo Godfathers wasn't your typical anime.

My recollection of the events and characters of the film was naught, but the impression it had lasted these past two decades. I tried to coax my anime-loving kid to go see the film in the theatre this past holiday season, and they passed. Mainly because I didn't sell it very well. But I was disappointed we didn't go.

I had forgotten that the godfathers were not, in fact, three older, unhoused men but only one middle-aged unhoused man, a slightly younger trans woman, and a sixteen-year-old runaway. I had also forgotten it was, in fact, a Christmas movie, with elements of Buddhism and Shintoism that occur during the same week.

In the film, this rag-tag trio discover a baby abandoned amidst the trash (there is so much trash in this film). Hana, who had just been wishing to have a baby for Christmas, is overjoyed by the miracle. Both Gin and Miyuki think they should take the baby to the police, but Hana, herself having grown up a foster child, implores them to care for the baby, at least for Christmas so as not to forever ruin the holiday for the child. Hana names her Kiyoko.

Left with a bag full of clues, the film follows the trio for a week as they do their own search for Kiyoko's family. Throughout the search, there are numerous incidences of coincidence and happenstance that would feel far-fetched if not for the fact that the film is treading heavily in "the magic of Christmas".  I think many of the coincidences would usually annoy me, but director Kon is so adept at finding themes and meaning that most of the coincidences have deeper meaning for the story or a character, or both.

It is a remarkably compassionate and considerate movie. It humanizes its unhoused characters with great empathy without hiding any of their flaws or blemishes. Gin is a drunk, Hana is an impulsive loudmouth, and Miyuki may have some undiagnosed mental health issues. These traits, along with stubborn pride, seems to be keeping these characters on the streets. Gin, for all his flaws, is riddled with regret over his lost daughter, and definitely sees Miyuki and even Kiyoko (and perhaps even Hana) with that lens. Hana is full of love and affection, and shovels it out to all three of her found family in heavy doses in her own unique way. Miyuki is a scared, lost child, and needs her surrogate parents more than she cares to admit.

On Hana, Kon sort of conflates trans and drag as being the same thing, which obviously they are not. And while Hana is called a drag queen and has a community of drag performers she is a part of, she is very, very clearly a trans woman whom Kon has a tremendous affection for. Hana confidently and unwaveringly identifies as a woman, and her drag home seems to be more a safe place of acceptance.

The "one-crazy-night"-like scenarios they find themselves in are indeed maybe a little wild and crazy, yet still feel grounded. The impulse would be to ask why this is animated, as opposed to live action?  Animation allows the audience just enough distance reality that it demands one accepts and invests more into the characters. Animation makes it easier to live in the discarded world that the Godfathers find themselves in. In live action, we would be too confronted with the unpleasantness of all we throw away, that we discard and don't want to think about anymore. 

The colour tones Kon and his team of animators use for the characters is not vibrant, a lot of autumn tones, but the lights of the city are dazzling, so there's both a dinginess and a shimmer that play off each other. It is a beautiful movie visually and in its soul. I love it, and it's long overdue as part of my holiday viewing regimen.

I have loved each of director Kon's movies so far, but this is the clear frontrunner for me, definitely the sentimental choice. Paprika is going to have to do something pretty exceptional to unseed it (and while I hear Paprika is a mind-blowing exceptional movie, I wonder if the hype is maybe too much...we'll see next weekend).

 [hey, Toasty has a review! Of course we agree!]

Sunday, February 21, 2021

10 for 10: what even is TV anymore?

 [10 for 10... that's 10 movies (or 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: a bunch of teevee

The Flight Attendant Season 1(HBO)
Saved by the Bell Season 1 (W)
His Dark Materials Season 2 (HBO)
Big Mouth Season 4 (Netflix)
The Queen's Gambit (Netflix)
Star Trek Discovery Season 3 (CTV SciFi)
Los Espookys Season 1 (HBO)
Lupin Season 1 (Netflix)
Keenan - Pilot (NBC)
Young Rock - Pilot (NBC)

...m'kay...

---


No doubt about it, 2020 was a completely fucked up year, pardon my French. Nothing was normal, everything felt off, and, you know, for some people it was really really bad (and for some it remains really, really bad, or has gotten even worse).  I feel very fortunate for where I am living, and working and able to frivolously talk about TV and movies on the internet to literally tens of people!  Such a gift!

Had you asked me on January 1, 2020 what one of my favourite shows of the year would be, I never thought a quasi-spy/mystery/psychodrama starring the Big Bang Theory's Kaley Cuoco would be near the top of the list.  But there it is.

I loathe the Big Bang Theory to the point that I feel offended whenever someone thinks I watch it just because I'm a geek.  I'm not going to get into it, this is not a Big Bang Theory review, but I dislike the show so much that pretty much everyone associated with it I just want to write off completely.

Yet I've had to begrudgingly admit that Cuoco's vocal performance as Harley Quinn in the (now HBO Max original) cartoon is fantastic, and that as producer of the series she's actually had somewhat of a guiding hand in how that show comes together, and the messaging it presents.

The Cuoco softening continued with The Flight Attendant, which the wife and I started watching on a whim because a commercial before whatever HBO show we were watching made it look like a really really fun series.

And it is.

It's super fun, but the commercial made it out to be more of a Peter Sellers-esque farce with Cuoco's titular flight attendant bumbling through being a suspect for a murder and doing everything wrong in trying to clear her name.  In reality it's much more dramatic than that, as Cuoco's character, suffering intense PTSD and anxiety is coming apart at the seams while still trying to do something proactive.  And Cuoco is fantastic in the role.  She treads a very fine line between realistic and over the top and always stays on the right side of it.  The show goes broad but she stays grounded.  I've clearly misjudged her (though I have not misjudged The Big Bang Theory).

The Flight Attendant is utterly consumable, an effective mystery thriller, while also being supremely charming with a very well rounded cast.  There are some stretches and missteps and moments that feel too large for the story, but they're forgiven by how easy it is to invest in the story, the characters and the character dynamics.  The twist that Cuoco's character works through her issues in her head with her murdered lover is the shows fantastical conceit, but it's wonderful and works so well to help get inside the character's fractured midset.

Just an absolute delight.  Unfortunately they're planning a second season which I think is a mistake.  This feels so right self-contained, and I worry that Killing Eve syndrome will happen, where the show's quality dips so dramatically without an actual plan or guide... but you never know.

[16:23]

---


Just as I never thought that a show starring Kaley Cuoco would be one of my favourite things of the year, I would have never guessed at the start of 2020 that the rumoured Saved By The Bell redux would be one of my favourite things of the year.  And both The Flight Attendant and Saved By The Bell were airing at the same time, so I had two unlikely appointment television shows going.  I was really questioning my sanity for a moment.

I didn't much like Saved By The Bell as a pre-teen, because it was the lead program responsible for cartoons disappearing from Saturday morning network TV.  You know, the stuff that made getting up Saturday morning worthwhile and so very exciting.  I caught the odd episode, but I generally tried to find something else to watch or go off and play on the Commodore 64 or read comics or something.

So there's no way I should have been looking forward to a reboot.  I had no nostalgia for the show, and really the thing I like most about SBTB is the Funny or Die series on youtube, "Zach Morris Is Trash", where they run through an episode of SBTB in 4 or 5 minutes with the thesis of how Zach Morris is the worst person on earth, and they're usually proven correct.

But the redux/sequel/reboot was a curiousity, that's basically it.  And the first commercial for it, it actually made me laugh multiple times.  It was to my own awe and dismay, when, halfway through watching the first episode I not only found myself laughing constantly, but also genuinely appreciating what the show was doing.

This new SBTB finds an "urban" school being shut down due to budgetary and safety concerns and some of it's lower income students finding their way to the very upscale world of Bayside High, where everything is clean, bright and surprisingly progressive.  You would expect the show to play off of differences in an antagonistic way, but the rich kids are welcoming of the new wave of multicultural students (it's more their rich parents who have the difficult time).

Though the child of Zach Morris and Kelly (Tiffani Amber Theissen) whatserface is in the show, they mercifully make him a side character, and he's delightful in a supporting role, a prankster and oblivious spoiled rich kid.  Instead the lead of the show is one of the transfer students, Daisy, who is the one who breaks the fourth wall and addresses the camera directly (remember in my last 10 for 10 talking about Enola Holmes and how people were upset with it using the "Fleabag device" of talking directly to screen, Zach Morris did it decades earlier).  Haskiri Velazquez as Daisy is very endearing and fun in the role, giving those glances and asides a lot of unique charm and character.  

The show examines the class and race divides and it has a character who is trans (Lexi, the most popular mean girl in the school), which seems like it would lead to a lot of "very special episodes" but instead the show expertly weaves a rather deft comedic narrative about topics that should be quite sensitive.  It purposefully defangs the tension and gets the point of acceptance across (if not always activism, although that's one of Daisy's big things).

The pilot was so good, I rewatched it when I made my wife watch it, who agreed that the show is a thousand times better than it has any right to be.  I neglected to even mention how it continues the Saved By The Bell continuity, carrying over cast and characters from the previous series and making deep cut references to episodes and events and tropes of the old show.  These things are there, and they're hilarious even if you don't get the reference, because it's evident that these absurd events they're referencing were things that happened once on the old show.  But it's not stuck in the past or reliving it, it's just joke fodder.  And seeing former cool guy A.C. Slater as now the kind of pathetic Coach is just fun in its own right, but Mario Lopez plays the character so tone perfect as to not make him sad (that's reserved for John Michael Higgins' ineffective principal).

It was when I saw the credits and Tracey Wigfield's name came up that it all became clear why this show worked so well.  Wigfield was a Tina Fey disciple, having a hand in 30 Rock and The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, and this adopts that production and comedy style... that rapid-fire, jokes-per-second pacing that's a kind of comedy gold.  But the young actors are so well cast and the midset is so perfect... I love this show, so unexpectedly, but it presents such an optimistic world, while acknowledging there's still bad stuff.  It's kind of the show we need right now.

More please.

[41:33] 

---


The first season of His Dark Materials was a bit of a slow burn, it took its time to get going, and even when it did it felt like it was still in complete set-up mode.  Season 2, covering the second book of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy moves at a much faster pace.  Lyra and Will meet, they hop between dimension, and there's kind of a more focused trajectory for them.  We know the dangers they're facing, we know what they're looking for, but the more important part is they have each other. It works well, the budding friendship and connection.  They both have destinies to achieve, and they're both kind of oblivious to the fact.  Lyra has greater designs than Will, but will is comfortable with the fact that he's the guy who needs to help ensure Lyra's destiny comes to fruition.  

In the background, there's the machinations of our evil beings over at the Magisterium, with some polite murder and a new patsy regime taking hold, if only so that Ruth Wilson's fantastically perplexing Marisa Coulter can do whatever she wants without any real oversight.  

The first season seemed bogged down with too many characters, but not enough sense of what to do with them all.  The second season feels so much more streamlined, so much tighter, much more consumable.

It also helps that it's playing with parallel realities, which is, next to time loops, my favourite sci-fi trope.  And perhaps that's ultimately what makes Season 2 resonate with me more than Season 1, it's more science-y than fantasy, and I do favour science fiction over fantasy, (but I'm usually pretty happy with a blend).

I was nervous that the show wasn't doing well and that it wasn't going to get to wrap up, but thankfully HBO is committed to the project and is closing it out with a third season.

[51:47]

---


Uh oh.

Big Mouth is back.  It's about to get uncomfortably hilarious.

We rewatched Season 1-3 during the lockdown and were quite ready for season 4 when it came.  This season promised both more of the same as well as something different...some growth for the characters, if not necessarily maturity.

The third season ended with Nick and Andrew's friendship dissolving and the fourth season picks up with them forced to bunk together at camp where Nick's summertime best friend, Seth, played by Seth Rogen winds up becoming fast buds with Andrew.  Meanwhile there's a trans girl who everyone used to know as someone else, and it's Jesse who is the first to accept it.  As usual among all this is the plethora of dick, fart, and poop jokes as well as the hormone monsters only serving to make bad situations worse.  The camp setting is only the first three episodes of the season, but the show easily could have extended it.  Hopefully there's more camp in subsequent seasons.

Big Mouth accelerates rapidly through storylines, pushing its dense cast of characters through dramatic paces at a stupefying rate.  Missy finds her own voice as a young Black woman (which culminates in Jenny Slate passing on the voice work to Ayo Edebiri, a proactive choice made by the show just as the cries for accurate vocal representation were starting).  Jay an Lola get into a very weird relationship which seems to sweetly work for those two disgusting kids. Matthew gets more involved with his boyfriend and so much more.

It's all a lot, and very outrageous, and frequently in questionable taste, but that's the show.  It's very progressive in some ways but still mired in little kid poop and fart humour, and 80's-influence raunch comedy. 

If there's one takeaway from season 4 though, it's that Nick as a character is becoming a real asshole, and that Andrew, who was already aware of his own asshole tendencies, is at least aware of it where Nick is not.  And that makes it harder viewing when the ostensible lead of the show becomes more and more unlikeable.  I hope that Nick finds some sense of self in the upcoming seasons.

[1:07:05]

---


I avoided The Queen's Gambit because it was one of "those shows", you know, the ones that becomes a thing, and everyone watches and says its the greatest thing and you must watch it.  I buck up against that kind of stuff, because therein lies mediocre shit like The Da Vinci Code right?

But COVID hit the industry hard, and new content suddenly became a trickle rather than a flood.  Sure I could have went and started, say, Orphan Black or something, but The Queen's Gambit was right there, staring me in the face.

And yeah, I have to admit, there's definitely something there.  A young girl, traumatized by the death of her mother, and orphaned, becomes addicted to the pills the orphanage used to help the kids sleep (oh, the 60's).  But Elizabeth also finds chess, and becomes fixated.  Not only does she have an aptitude for math, but even more a preternatural ability to read the chess board, to calculate possibilities.

Young Elizabeth is interesting, but it's when the show jumps forward to her being a teen in the second episode and Anya Taylor Joy takes up the role that the show becomes fire.  Joy takes the character from a naive newbie to a shrewd and calculating ingenue, and handles the varying paces required of her with aplomb.  She's clearly got an emotional disconnect from her reality but those moments where she breaks the facade, Joy plays so perfectly.  The relationship with her adoptive mother is one of convenience at first but becomes one of intense meaning, it's where Beth learns to be a strong, independent woman, to look out for herself and not compromise anything.

It's all framed in Beth's experiences in the world of competitive chess, where she is one of few women, and certainly the only woman of world-class caliber.  The show never really goes too deep into what probably was an actual misogyny minefield, and instead seems to have more fun with chess players as intellectuals who respect skill and smarts. It also enjoys how capable Beth is at cutting down most anyone she meets.

If the show flails, its in its final act, where Beth goes to a Russian invitational, a big deal for an American chess player.  The Russians are the gold standard and considered unbeatable.  The mini-series falls into a lot of happenstance and cliches, and improbable logistics to be emotionally manipulatate, to give the audience the feels in an unjust manner.  It taints the whole production for me.  I'm sure most people wouldn't even notice.  But other than that, it's a wonderfully sumptuous production, so well crafted visually, the wardrobe is out of this world, and Taylor Joy just a captivating presence.

[1:22:39]

---


Season 1 of Star Trek:Discovery was difficult for many because the visuals looked far too advanced when compared to what we see in the original series ("TOS"), and being a show that takes place roughly ten years before TOS creates a cognitive disconnect that was hard for many to resolve.  When at the end of the second season, the crew of the Discovery find themselves a thousand years in the future, it seems like, finally, the show is where it should have started.  It should be home now, exploring a far different reality than the 80 year timespan explored between TOS and Voyager.

I love how the season opened, with sole focus on Michael Burnham, as she finds herself separated from the crew in traveling to the future, and makes friends with a bounty hunter (?) named Book who shows her the ways of the further.  A friendship is forged and adventures are had.

The second episode shows what was happening on Discovery while Burnham was off on her own thing. And I was liking the idea of alternating between Burnham and Discovery for a few episodes as they had their own adventures on their way to finding each other.

Alas, at the end of the second episode of the season, they find each other.  Too soon.

From there Burnham becomes fixated on "The Burn", the event from 100 years prior wherein all the dilithium in the universe exploded all at once, crippling interspace travel.  Though people way out of time, and their technology seemingly archaic, it's the Discovery that is the only ship that can travel pretty much anywhere in the cosmos thanks to the spore drive, thus making them both invaluable asset to the fractured remnants of the federation, but also a dangerous weapon in the wrong hands.

There's some floundering in the midseason, and frankly too much Burnham focus for my liking.  The conecit of the show being centered around someone who wasn't Captain of a ship seemed like a good idea to start, but the crew has come together and the cast has gelled, it's time to become more of an ensemble and stop having not just the universe, but the damn timeline revolve around Michael Burnham.  I don't even dislike the character, but I dislike the gravitational pull the show puts on the character, the center of everything.

The last third of the season is nicely propulsive, if not always sensible.  It gets big and resolves a lot of the big issues they set up, but almost too cleanly, as it really could have spent a lot more time being more traditional Trek in navigating this future reality, but instead it ends with a triumphant new normal.  That said, it does poise the fourth season to be this future reality exploration in a traditional Trek sense... but we know this show buck up against that expectation time and again, so we'll see how it fares.

A mixed bag, but more better than worse...just frustrating
(SPOILER:
how!? How do they promote Burnham to captain after she goes rogue time and again and follows nothing but her own intuition even when it clashes with the established morals and guidelines of the federation.  It's maddening that they did that.  She should have been thanked for her efforts and cast out.)

[1:37:08]

---


Some of the comedy and film review podcasts I listen to had in the past mentioned Los Espookys and the name stuck in my head.  I tried looking up the show, but it was just never something remotely accessible in Canada, until recently when it popped up on our Canadian HBO streaming.  I hopped right on, really not knowing anything about it.

What it is a delightfully silly, mostly Spanish language comedy about a group of 20-somethings who are obsessed with horror and operate a upstart business that does spooky things upon request.  It seems like a bad idea for a business, and it is, but it's a niche idea and the show takes us through their adventures with their niche clients.

I don't really know how to explain Los Espookys.  It's its own comedic reality, where everyone acts a little weird so people acting a little weird doesn't seem weird to anyone.  Movies like Nacho Libre or Kung Fu Hustle come to mind, where the reality that the characters inhabit is one which everyone accepts, but obviously are patently absurd to us. Like, there's this whole side thread about Andres, a fabulously droll and goth gay man who is the young heir to a chocolate empire.  He is dating and later engaged to a statuesque but vain and superficial heir to a cookie empire... and their relationship makes no sense, but that's kind of the point.  Or Tati, the most awesome, out there character of the show.  She's supremely positive and up for anything, but also utterly incompetent and oblivious to her incompetence.  She's always doing odd jobs, seriously odd jobs, like breaking in peoples shoes, or moving the second hand in the clocktower (it's now running 3 minutes slow as a result).  There's weird asides, like the local tabloid news broadcaster who seems to be brainwashed, or Uncle Tico in L.A. played by Fred Armisen whose gift in life is parking cars, and can only seem to relate to people on that level.

It's an utterly delightful and silly show, and I was very sad that it was only six episodes long.  At the same time, six episodes seemed to be the perfect amount to work through its various arcs while still readying itself for more to happen in a sequel season.  This is a show where I think less is more.  It feels like it's taking the path of British comedy, in that way, and smartly so.  It's a good plan to obsess over the comedic details watching on repeat than to drown in too much absurdity.  I'm ready to rewatch, any time.

[1:51:30]

---


Lupin
is a famous French thief from novels.  It's been adapted many times and even inspired a famous anime series.  This is a modern take on it from Louis Leterrier, which is more about a character who is inspired by the Lupin books, rather than Lupin having been a real person in this reality. 

The show is very watchable, with Omar Sy being a very charming lead.  The story, over its six episodes, is kind of a mystery that unfurls, as Assan Diop pulls off a very daring heist at the Louvre, which seems like just a gig, but then reveals to have very personal layers for Assan.

Assan is a father and has an ex-wife whom he gets along well with.  It's clear there's love still there but Assan's profession keeps him distant.  But this very personal journey he's on brings up aspect of his past, his immigrant father framed for a crime he didn't commit, and Assan finally understands that there's actually a wrong to right.

But he must first understand who is to blame, and the many skills he's adopted over the decades as a master thief are put to work in solving that puzzle.

At six episodes, the first season ends on a cliffhanger which feels like a cheat.  So few serialized shows are six episodes anymore that it seems like it was an intentional ploy to get more money for less episodes and guarantee a reorder.  The show appears to be quite popular, so a second season is likely, and, well, I'm up for it.

[2:00:44]

---


Keenan Thompson has been on Saturday Night Live for a record smashing 19 years now.  It's hard to remember a time when he wasn't on the show, and yet his presence is always welcome.  He hasn't seemed to age at all and he's so comfortable in the live setting he's able to be a naturally funny presence in almost any role he's playing.  He's got recurring characters, sure, but his best roles are ones where he gets to mug or react to something.  He's a top notch supporting not-ready-for-primetime player, but now he's got his own show that, well, doesn't seem ready for primetime.

Keenan the show puts Keenan as a widower father who is also a morning show celebrity in Atlanta.  His morning show curiously isn't a sort of  parody of morning but rather tries to earnestly ape the morning show vibe in a scripted sitcom.  It doesn't work.  They should let the characters improvise here, give it a sense of flow, but as it is, it's just dull pap.

Outside of the morning show, Keenan has two daughters in sort of the pre-teen/early teen age range.  They're a good heart to the show and have that kind of "we know whats really going on" precociousness.  Also living with Keenan is is father-in-law, played bafflingly by Don Johnson.  I don't say that as a race thing but more of a ...Don Johnson? thing.   Also Keenan's brother lives with him, a rather shiftless Chris Redd, the only one to bring any laughs to the pilot.

Where this first episode of Kenan fails is two fold.  Firstly, it seems like a sitcom that has no audience or laugh track, the pacing is all off.  It may be COVID fallout, where the show was written as a live studio audience comedy, and so it just plays off flat as it waits for laughs never to come. The second reason is it doesn't let Kenan do what Kenan does best, which is react wildly to things.  I mean yeah, that could get tired very quickly, but it what I want to see and there is literally none of it in the pilot.

Maybe it's a work in progress, but this pilot is so dire, I don't know that it's going to get enough episodes to really work out its rhythms

[2:11:32]

---


Young Rock
is a bizarre vanity project for Dwayne Johnson, where they mine stories from Johnsons life to present a show that takes place in many eras with many different people playing Johnson at different stages of his life.

We see Johnson as an 8-year old, living with his mother and idolizing his absentee father, the wrestler Rocky Johnson.  In the pilot we find young Dwayne given all sorts of promises by his dad, going to back rooms to meet wrestlers like Junk Yard Dog, Andre The Giant , and "uncle" Iron Sheik where they're just casually hanging out.  I loved this behind the scenes of classic wrestling, but also there's a really good emotional core as young Dwayne looks up to these glorious behemoths talking both life and the biz.

We then catch up with Dwayne in high school, where he was a bit of a shrewd shoplifter, and trying to elevate his status at a new school... with semi disastrous results.  There's some pretty good comedy bits here, including the shoplifting tag exploding, and the fact that all the other high school kids think he's a Narc ("dude, you're bigger than my dad").

There's a third arc as Dwayne starting his football career and trying to get off on the right foot with his new teammates goes awry.  It's all about the facade, the kayfabe, the fake reality you build to fool others into perceiving you how you want to be perceived.  

All these individual parts, honestly, are pretty good.

What's not so good is the bizarre framing sequences set in 2032 where real Dwayne Johnson, is running for president and is being interviewed by Randall Park, now the host of a popular news journal.  One of the hardest things to write well is this kind of talk show interview, and it's too easy to have characters say lines that fit the plot or whatever rather than talk like real people.  It's kind of off putting how bad these sequences are despite starring two extremely charming performers.

There's definite promise here though but a lot of bugs to work out.

[2:22:32]