Because today is the birthday of the great actress Jennifer Jason Leigh, I decided to rewatch the 1991 film, Rush.
Loosely based on a true story, Rush takes place on the outskirts of Houston, Texas in the 70s. Jack Raynor (Jason Patric) is a veteran undercover narcotics officer who is determined to take down a local drug lord named Gaines (Gregg Allman). Raynor takes his new partner, Kristen Cates (Jennifer Jason Leigh), under his wing and trains her on how to work undercover. He tests her joint-rolling abilities. He has her fire a gun at cans out by the quarry. He teaches her how to shoot-up drugs. As he explains it, if she is going to get the local drug dealers to trust her, she is going to have to shoot up drugs in front of them. Raynor and Cates work well together, quickly becoming lovers in real life as well as undercover life. They manage to force one dealer, a likable but unlucky clod named Walker (Max Perlich), to turn informant. However, their efforts to get to Gaines are threatened by their own growing addictions and Raynor’s erratic behavior. Chief Nettle (Tony Frank) and Captain Dodd (Sam Elliott) want results but will the results be worth the cost?
(Are they ever?)
I’ve watched Rush a few times. I have to admit that I always remember it as being better than it actually is. Rush was the only feature film to be directed by producer Lili Fini Zanuck and it definitely has its problems. The pace, especially during the film’s second half, is often too slow. Visually, there a few good location shots but the film often feels rather static. As Jack Raynor, Jason Patric gives a performance that is all method intensity with little actual depth. Patric looks good with his long hair, his beard, and his intense eyes but there’s not much depth overall to Jack Raynor.
And yet, when the film works, it really does work. Whatever other flaws might be present in her direction, Zanuck does capture the anything-goes, slightly ominous atmosphere that one often finds in the small towns on the carcinogenic coast. While there’s nothing about his performance here that suggests he was a particularly talented actor, Gregg Allman is still very convincing as the menacing Gaines. (One sign of Gaines’s power is that he never speaks unless absolutely necessary.) Character actor Max Perlich gives a strong and poignant performance as Walker, a well-meaning goof who finds himself being manipulated by both sides in the war on drugs. Though the soundtrack is probably best-known for its use of Eric Clapton’s Tears In Heaven, the rest of it is full of classic Southern rock. Some of the choices are a bit obvious. Free Bird coming on the radio just as Raynor explains that he does things his way? That’s a lucky coincidence! It works, though. It’s a cool song.
Ultimately, what truly makes the film work is the performance of Jennifer Jason Leigh, who always manages to find the truth of her character even when the film sometimes seems to be determined to let her down. While Patric gets to have the showy breakdowns, Leigh shows the audience what it’s like for someone to be trapped by not only her job but also her relationship. The scenes between her and Walker are the strongest in the film because even though Walker is a criminal and Cates is a cop, they’re both stuck in a situation that they didn’t create. Gaines wants the money and the power that comes from being a drug lord. Chief Nettle wants the publicity and acclaim that comes from busting a major dealer. If they have to sacrifice Walker and Cates to get what they want, that’s what they’re going to do. Walker, Cates, and Raynor ultimately become pawns in a game where the victor ultimately wins very little. If Gaines escapes justice, someone else will just come after him. If Gaines goes down, someone else will inevitably replace him.
Rush is not a perfect film but it is a film that shows just how great a talent Jennifer Jason Leigh was and is.
The Winter Olympics have begun and, waking up this morning, I did what any American celebrating the 250th birthday of her country would do. I watched curling. I watched as Team USA defeated Team Switzerland. I enjoyed not only watching America notch up a victory but I also enjoyed the contrast between the super-intense, super-shriekey Swiss team and the relatively mellow American team. Watching the Americans laugh and joke while the Swiss couple yelled at each other left me feeling very patriotic and hopeful.
In fact, it left me in such a good mood that I decided it was finally time to watch Ella McCay.
It’s easy to forget now what a big deal it was when the trailer for Ella McCay was first released in August of 2025. It was the trailer for James L. Brooks’s first film in 15 years, a political comedy for adults. It was full of familiar faces and it looked absolutely awful. Seriously, the trailer was so unappealing that I became rather fascinated by it. Even the worst films can usually scrounge together enough good material to at least come up with a passable trailer. Watching the trailer for Ella McCay, I could only wonder who was responsible for putting it together. Who thought it was a good idea to lead off with that lengthy Woody Harrelson scene? Who thought the wedding scene didn’t look weird? Who didn’t take the time to do something about Spike Fearn’s hair?
There were some who said that Ella McCay shouldn’t be judged based solely on its trailer. They pointed out that director James L. Brooks directed three films that were nominated for Best Picture, two of which were actually good. They pointed out that Ella, her brother, and her husband were all played by British actors who had appeared on niche television shows. Soon, there was a mini-civil war being fought on twitter between those who dismissed Ella McCay based on the trailer and those who promised that they would love the film once it was released.
Then, on December 12, the film was released, the reviews were uniformly terrible, and it tanked at the box office. It took the film a little less than two months to go from the theater to streaming online.
Having now watched Ella McCay, I can say that …. well, yeah, it’s pretty bad.
It’s not necessarily bad for the reasons that I thought it would be. Watching the trailer, I thought the film’s downfall would be the performances of Woody Harrelson and Jamie Lee Curtis. Both of them looked to be acting up a storm. Having now seen the film, I can say that both of them actually do probably about as good a job as could be expected to do with the material that they were given. Neither one is particularly memorable but they’re not terrible either. For that matter, Albert Brooks is amusing as Ella’s boss and mentor, Governor Bill.
Instead, the main problem with the film is that Ella McCay is not a particularly interesting or even likable character, not matter how much the film’s narrator insists otherwise. A policy wonk from a broken home who, at the age of 34, has become lieutenant governor of some nameless state up north, Ella is boring, humorless, and ultimately more than a little annoying. She’s the girl in elementary school who always told on the kids who talked while the teacher was out of the room. She’s your high school classmate who got all judgey if you wore a short skirt. She’s your self-absorbed college roommate who always had to remind you that, no matter what you were going through, her father was a philanderer and her mom was dead. She’s the colleague who voluntarily does all the work on your group project without being asked and then complains that no one helped her. She’s the person who insists that she can change the world but who is still so emotionally stunted and immature that, at 34, she needs her aunt to teach her primal scream therapy. Emma Mackey gives a disjointed performance as Ella, speaking with bland intensity whenever Ella is being serious and then overacting whenever Ella has to be flustered.
As bad as Mackey was, though, she was nowhere near as bad Spike Fearn, who plays Ella’s agoraphobic younger brother, Casey. For some reason, Casey gets a huge subplot that doesn’t really seem to go anywhere. We’re told that Casey hasn’t left his apartment in over a year and we repeatedly see that Casey struggles to communicate with people. The film treats most of this as being a joke and Spike Fearn gives such a twitchy performance that Casey comes across as being far more creepy than he probably should. We’re meant to cheer when Casey reconnects with his ex but I wasn’t silently yelling at her to run as far aways as possible. We spend so much time with Casey that it’s hard not to wonder if maybe the filmmakers themselves realized that Ella wasn’t very interesting but Casey is hardly an appealing alternative.
There’s a lot about Ella McCay that doesn’t work. Just the fact that the film features what appears to be hastily written narration from Ella’s secretary (Julie Kavner) would seem to reveal that someone understood that the film’s mix of tones and incidents really didn’t gel. (Having Kavner actually say, “Hi, I’m the narrator,” is a touch that is more than a bit too cutesy.) Ella’s husband (Jack Lowden) is such an obvious and odious villain that it was hard not to feel that Ella had to have been an idiot to marry him in the first place. There’s a weird plotline involving Ella’s state troopers trying to get overtime. Ella gets involved in one of the most jejune scandals of all time and the film ends with on a note that leaves you wondering how the 80-something Brooks can be so naive about politics.
But really, the main problem with the film is that it never convinces me that I should want Ella McCay to be governor. To quote Karen Black in Nashville, she can’t even comb her hair.
Today, we celebrate the 120th birthday of actor John Carradine.
John Carradine appeared in over 300 movies over the course of a career that spanned nearly a century. Born in 1906, Carradine made his film debut in 1930 and worked steadily until his death in 1988. He was so prolific that films featuring him were still being released for years after his passing. Though he’ll probably always be most-associated with the low-budget horror and thriller films that he appeared in, Carradine was also a favorite of directors like Cecil B. DeMille and John Ford. He played key roles in such Ford films as Stagecoach, The Grapes of Wrath and The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Carradine, however, often said that his true loves were Shakespeare and the theater and that the films were just something he did so he could afford to work on stage.
In this scene from 1945’s Fallen Angel, John Carradine plays a traveling fortune teller named Prof. Madley.
4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
Today, we celebrate the 83rd birthday of the great Michael Mann! It’s time for….
4 Shots From 4 Michael Mann Films
Thief (1981, dir by Michael Mann, DP: Donald Thorin)
Manhunter (1986, dir by Michael Mann, DP: Dante Spinotii)
Heat (1995, dir by Michael Mann, DP: Dante Spinotti)
Public Enemies (2009, dir by Michael Mann, DP: Dante Spinotti)
The original Dawn of the Dead, which was released in 1978 and directed by George Romero, is not only one of the most influential horror films of all time. (Even more so than Night of the Living Dead,Dawn was responsible for inspiring the Italian zombie boom.) It’s also a rather dark satire of humanity and commercialism. With the world ending, both humans and zombies head to the mall. Briefly, the humans manage to form their own peaceful society but, inevitably, they end up screwing it all up. The Dead may be slow and not particularly intelligent but, as poor old Steve discovered in that elevator, they’re absolutely determined to get what they want.
Dawn of the Dead ends with an apocalytpic combination of bikers, zombies, and one helicopter that has next to no fuel. Our two remaining survivors head off in search of some place safe but we all know that helicopter isn’t going to stay in the sky for long. In its way, the ending of Dawn of the Dead is even more bleak than the end of Night of the Living Dead. With the end of this film, Romero’s message is clear. Society is as dead as the creatures tearing it down.
4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
Today would have been George Romero’s 86th birthday.
Now, those of you who have been reading us since the beginning know how important the work of George Romero has been to this site. A mutual appreciation of Night of the Living Dead is one of the things that first brought many of us together. It’s a film that we watch ever Halloween and Arleigh’s review of the original remains one of our most popular posts. If this site had a patron saint, it would probably be George Romero.
And yet, Romero wasn’t just a director of zombie films. He made many films, dealing with everything from hippie lovers (There’s Always Vanilla) to wannabe vampires (Martin) to government conspiracies (The Crazies) and eccentric bikers (Knightriders). George Romero was one of the pioneers of independent films and today, on his birthday, we should all take a minute to consider and appreciate the man’s cinematic legacy. It’s not just horror fans who owe George Romero a debt of gratitude. It’s lovers of cinema everywhere.
With that in mind, here are….
4 Shots From 4 George Romero Films
Night of the Living Dead (1968, dir by George Romero, DP: George Romero)
The Crazies (1973, dir by George Romero, DP: S. William Hinzman)
Martin (1978, dir by George Romero, DP: Michael Gornick)
Dawn of the Dead (1978, dir by George Romero, DP: Michael Gornick)
Private Lessons is that kind of early ’80s sex comedy that feels like a time capsule from when movies could get away with stuff that would never fly today. It’s got this awkward charm mixed with some seriously questionable choices, centering on a horny teenager named Philly who gets schooled in the ways of love by his family’s sultry French housekeeper. The film tries to play it all for laughs and titillation, but it lands somewhere between guilty pleasure and uncomfortable relic.
Philly, played by Eric Brown, is your classic 15-year-old rich kid left home alone for the summer in a sprawling Albuquerque mansion while his dad jets off on business. Dad hires Nicole, this alluring European housekeeper portrayed by Sylvia Kristel—yeah, the Emmanuelle star herself—to keep an eye on things, along with the sleazy chauffeur Lester, brought to life by Howard Hesseman in full sleazeball mode. From the jump, Philly’s got a massive crush on Nicole; he’s peeping through keyholes and fumbling over his words whenever she’s around. It’s all very American Pie before American Pie existed, but with a Euro-sex vibe courtesy of Kristel’s effortless sensuality. She catches him spying one night, strips down without a care, and invites him to touch—Philly bolts like his pants are on fire. You can’t help but chuckle at his panic; Brown’s wide-eyed innocence sells it without overplaying the hand.
The setup builds slowly, which is both a strength and a drag. Philly spills the beans to his buddy Sherman, played with manic energy by Patrick Piccininni, who turns every conversation into a roast session about Philly’s virginity. Their banter is some of the film’s highlights—raw, boyish ribbing that feels authentic to awkward teen friendships. Nicole keeps pushing the envelope: a steamy makeout in a dark movie theater, a goodnight kiss that nearly melts the screen, and finally, a fancy French dinner date where they seal the deal back home. Kristel owns these scenes; her Nicole isn’t just a seductress, she’s got this playful confidence that makes the slow seduction believable. The sex scene itself is tame by today’s standards—soft-focus, lots of sighs—but it’s handled with a wink, pretending to be shocking while delivering the era’s softcore goods.
But here’s where Private Lessons swerves into darker territory and kinda loses its footing. Midway through their romp, Nicole fakes a heart attack and “dies” right on top of Philly. Freaked out, he confesses to Lester, who smells opportunity. Turns out, the chauffeur’s been blackmailing Nicole over her immigration status and hatches a scheme to pin her “murder” on Philly, forcing the kid to cough up a chunk of his trust fund to cover it up. They bury a dummy in the desert, and Lester plays the concerned adult while pocketing the cash. It’s a twist that amps up the stakes, but it also shifts the tone from fluffy comedy to something creepier, leaning hard into moral panic territory. Hesseman chews the scenery as Lester, all smarmy grins and side-eye; he’s the perfect villain you love to hate, but the plot machinations feel forced, like the writers ran out of seduction gags and needed conflict.
Nicole, developing real feelings for Philly amid the con, has a change of heart and spills the truth. Together, they rope in Philly’s tennis coach—Ed Begley Jr. in a quick but fun bit—to impersonate a cop and scare Lester straight. The bad guy panics, gets nabbed trying to flee with the money, and everyone agrees to a truce: no one rats anyone out. Nicole’s “child molestation” (the film’s own loaded term for her role in seducing a minor) and immigration issues stay buried, Lester technically keeps his job, and Nicole splits before Dad returns. It’s a tidy wrap-up that dodges real consequences, which fits the film’s escapist fantasy but leaves a sour taste ethically. The romance fizzles without much payoff; you half-expect a heartfelt goodbye, but it’s more pragmatic than emotional.
Tonally, Private Lessons is all over the map. The first half thrives on its lighthearted horniness—Philly’s fumbling advances, Nicole’s teasing allure, and a very of-its-time soundtrack that pumps up the montages. It’s got that innocent raunchiness of films like Porky’s, where sex is the big mystery and everyone’s in on the joke. Brown holds his own as the lead; at 15, he’s convincingly flustered yet game, making Philly relatable rather than cartoonish. Kristel brings actual star power, turning what could be a one-note vixen into someone with hints of depth—her chemistry with Brown sparks genuine warmth amid the sleaze. Hesseman leans into Lester’s slimeball energy, turning every scene with him into a mix of funny and gross.
That said, the film’s not without flaws, and they’re glaring by modern eyes. The premise is straight-up predatory: a grown woman systematically grooming an underage boy, played for comedy without much self-awareness. It’s the male version of Lolita, but without any critique—instead of examining the situation, it just sort of grins and shrugs. The blackmail plot tries to add intrigue but mostly undermines the fun, turning Nicole from free spirit to reluctant crook. Pacing drags in spots; the relatively short runtime still feels stretched when the seduction stalls so the script can set up the con. And the ending? It papers over everything with a shrug, letting all parties walk free like it’s no big deal. The whole thing feels very much like a product of a moment when taboo could be turned into box-office bait without much pushback.
Visually, it’s a product of its time: glossy ’80s cinematography, plenty of skin but no hardcore edge, and that mansion setting screaming wealth fantasy. Director Alan Myerson keeps it breezy, never letting the comedy get too mean-spirited until Lester’s scheme really kicks in. The score and song choices nail the vibe—upbeat for the flirtations, a bit more tense for the con, always keeping things light even when the story goes to shadier places. It very much feels like something that would play late at night on cable and stick in your memory more as a vibe than as a fully coherent film.
Does it hold up? Kind of, if you’re in a nostalgic mood or digging for ’80s cheese. It’s honest about teen lust without being judgmental, and the performances carry the silly plot. But the power imbalance and the underage angle make it tough to fully endorse—watch with that lens, and it’s more cringe than chuckle. Still, for what it is—a raunchy romp with a surprisingly soft center—Private Lessons delivers just enough to warrant a spin on a bored night. Eric Brown and Sylvia Kristel do a lot of heavy lifting; without their chemistry, this would be forgettable smut instead of a strangely endearing, if deeply problematic, relic. If you’re into retro sex comedies like My Tutor or Zapped!, this one sits comfortably in that same dusty corner of the genre, flaws and all, as a snapshot of looser times that’s best taken with a big grain of salt.
How many westerns do you know that open with a graduation ceremony at Harvard? I can only think of Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate.
Today’s scene that I love comes from the controversial 1981 epic western. Some people feel that Heaven’s Gate is a secret masterpiece. I’m not quite one of those people but I do think the Harvard graduation scene was a great way to launch Cimino’s idiosyncratic vision of the Old West.
4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
Today, it is time to celebrate the birth of one of the most intriguing (if uneven) filmmakers of the 20th Century, Michael Cimino! It’s time for….
4 Shots From 4 Michael Cimino Films
Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974, directed by Michael Cimino, DP: Frank Stanley)
The Deer Hunter (1978, dir by Michael Cimino. DP: Vilmos Zsigmond)
Heaven’s Gate (1980, dir by Michael Cimino, DP: Vilmos Zsigmond)
The Year of the Dragon (1985, dir by Michael Cimino, DP: Alex Thomson)
Kathleen Kelly (Meg Ryan) owns a children’s bookstore in New York City named “The Shop Around the Corner.” It’s a small, cozy store that she inherited from her dear mother, and it’s part of the lifeblood of who she is as a person, as well as the community itself. Joe Fox (Tom Hanks), on the other hand, is the heir to a major bookstore chain, Fox Books (think Barnes & Noble), that threatens to wipe places like Kathleen’s off the map. As fate would have it, the two meet anonymously online where they trade their hopes, dreams and insecurities through daily e-mails, with both excitedly opening their computers each night hoping to hear those three little words, “You’ve Got Mail.” Things begin to get interesting when Joe plans to open up a Fox Books Superstore just around the corner from Kathleen’s place with neither knowing that they’re real-life business adversaries. When will they find out that they’re enemies in the business world? Can true love find a way in the most difficult of circumstances? And isn’t that why we watch these kinds of movies in the first place?!
I’ll start off by saying that Meg Ryan is operating at the top of her “America’s sweetheart” phase here… she’s cute, sincere, nostalgic, slightly neurotic, and ultimately quite believable as a person who romanticizes her world and truly believes there will always be a place for her small store and the gigantic superstores! I grew up and still live in the state where Wal-Mart started so I definitely know how hard it is for the “mom and pop” stores to compete. Tom Hanks walks a bit more of a tightrope as Joe Fox. He’s likable enough that you want him to be able to win her heart, but he’s also just arrogant enough that you understand why Kathleen resents everything he stands for. Ultimately, Hanks is able to pull it off with enough charm that you still root for him even when he can be a little bit of a jerk at times.
What’s really strange about revisiting YOU’VE GOT MAIL at this point in my life is the fact that it takes me back to the late 90’s when the internet was something new to me and it seemed like something magical. In this movie, the internet connects two souls, and when we hear “you’ve got mail” as they fire up their computers, the movie expects you to feel genuine excitement, without a hint of irony. Compare that with where the world is today with almost any kind of online activity, especially social media. While there are still a lot of positives to be found, it’s sad that going online now is often exhausting, hateful, and stressful! In 1998, though, it was still possible to believe that logging on could lead to something incredible!
Nora Ephron, who directed the film and co-wrote the screenplay, does a good job of presenting a sad reality of the real world underneath this romantic comedy’s love story. “Progress” can be cruel, and it seems like it just can’t be stopped no matter what! I spend a lot of time talking about the wonderful hours I spent in the video stores of my youth. Those stores are all gone now and have been for decades. The stores that replaced them are mostly gone now, and almost all of my movie viewing is now done through online streaming. In YOU’VE GOT MAIL, Fox Books certainly isn’t better than Kathleen’s Shop Around the Corner. As a matter of fact, it’s not nearly as educational or personal. What it is, however, is bigger, cheaper, and more efficient, and that’s what seems to win in the end, just like it did with the local video stores and Wal-Mart. This is where Ephron does her strongest balancing act. Joe Fox and Kathleen Kelly still fall in love despite the fact that the realities of the world around them take their realistic and natural course. A true human connection is made in the most difficult and painful of circumstances, and that ultimately means more than anything else in the film.
Revisiting YOU’VE GOT MAIL now doesn’t feel that much different than revisiting the film that inspired it, 1940’s THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER, starring Jimmy Stewart and Margaret Sullavan. Both films are time capsules of a world that no longer really exists. However, both films ultimately realize the time-tested truth that it’s our relationships with other people that provides the most meaning to our lives. That’s a truth that won’t change whether we’re writing letters, sending e-mails, exchanging texts or whatever “progress” the human race achieves in communication in the future! I find some comfort in that.
Through the Shattered Lens 