Review: Deadwood (by David Milch)


“Be in my joint in two hours—we’re forming a fuckin’ government.” — Al Swearengen

David Milch’s Deadwood is one of those rare television series that feels less like a conventional prestige drama and more like being dropped into a living, breathing, filthy historical world. Set in the rough gold-rush settlement of Deadwood, South Dakota, during the 1870s, the HBO series takes the familiar pieces of the Western—lawmen, gunfighters, prospectors, saloons, prostitutes, corrupt businessmen, and murder—and turns them into something far richer than a genre exercise. It is a Western, but it is also a story about the difficult, often ugly process of creating a society in the middle of chaos. Civilization in Deadwood is not built by noble speeches or clean acts of heroism. It is assembled through greed, fear, business deals, compromise, bloodshed, exploitation, loyalty, and the occasional act of real compassion.

The show’s biggest strength is its ability to make Deadwood itself feel like one of television’s great settings. At the beginning, the camp exists outside the reach of formal American law, which means everyone who arrives sees an opportunity. Some people come looking for gold. Others come looking to escape old lives, make money, gain power, or take advantage of people too desperate to protect themselves. Every character has a different idea of what Deadwood should become, and the series finds drama in the collision between those competing visions. A claim dispute, a murder, a business arrangement, an illness, a newspaper article, or even a random rumor can become part of the larger struggle over who gets to shape the town’s future.

At the center of that struggle is Seth Bullock, played by Timothy Olyphant with an intensity that makes him seem like he is always one bad conversation away from throwing somebody through a window. Bullock arrives in Deadwood with his friend and business partner Sol Star, hoping to start a hardware business and leave behind his past as a lawman. He wants a calmer, more stable existence, but the town almost immediately drags him back toward violence and public responsibility. Bullock has a powerful sense of justice, but he is not a smooth, patient hero. He is rigid, angry, stubborn, and frequently driven by instinct before reflection. Olyphant gives him a clenched physicality—the hard stare, the tense posture, the barely restrained frustration—that makes it clear Bullock is always fighting to keep the more destructive side of himself under control.

That is what makes Bullock such a compelling protagonist. Deadwood never treats him as a simple white-hat sheriff who comes to tame the frontier. He is more decent than many of the people around him, but he is not uncomplicatedly good. His moral certainty can become self-righteousness, and his willingness to defend the vulnerable can slide into an urge to control a situation through force. At times, Bullock’s anger is justified; at other times, it is frightening. Olyphant’s performance works because he does not try to make Bullock effortlessly likable. Instead, he makes him believable as a man who wants order, justice, and dignity in a place that seems designed to expose every violent impulse he is trying to bury.

If Bullock represents Deadwood’s rough version of moral order, Ian McShane’s Al Swearengen represents its ruthless understanding of power. As the owner of the Gem Saloon, Swearengen initially appears to be the obvious villain: a man who profits from vice, manipulation, intimidation, and murder. McShane gives him such enormous control over the role that every scene becomes more charged when Swearengen walks into it. His speech has a strange, unforgettable rhythm, moving between elaborate insults, sly observations, sudden bursts of rage, and dry comedy. He is part Shakespearean king, part criminal entrepreneur, and part exhausted manager trying to hold together a business and a town full of people who are constantly making life harder for him.

What makes Swearengen one of television’s greatest characters is that the series refuses to flatten him into a conventional bad guy. He is undeniably brutal, often monstrous, and capable of treating human beings as disposable pieces in a larger game. The show never asks the audience to forget that. But as Deadwood faces pressure from outside business interests, political maneuvering, and wealthy figures who see the camp as a resource to be absorbed, Swearengen’s investment in the town becomes clearer. He does not become a hero, but he develops into something more complicated: a man whose selfish ambition is inseparable from a practical, almost territorial loyalty to Deadwood. He understands that the camp can only survive if its people occasionally work together, even if he usually has to manipulate them into doing so.

The relationship between Bullock and Swearengen gives the series much of its electricity. They are rivals, reluctant allies, ideological opposites, and men who recognize certain necessary qualities in each other. Bullock sees Swearengen as a moral disease at the center of the camp. Swearengen sees Bullock as an unpredictable nuisance, but also as someone with the strength and authority to be useful. Their confrontations work because neither man can completely dominate the other. Olyphant and McShane create a tension that goes beyond physical threat. Their conflict reflects the show’s larger question: can Deadwood become a place governed by something closer to law and principle, or will it always belong to the people with the most money, violence, and influence?

Still, Deadwood would not be nearly as great if it were only the Bullock and Swearengen show. Its ensemble is one of HBO’s best, filled with actors who make the camp feel populated by people with histories, grudges, private fears, ambitions, and complicated ties to one another. John Hawkes is excellent as Sol Star, Bullock’s business partner and closest friend. Sol is quieter and more patient than Bullock, but Hawkes never lets that quietness fade into the background. He gives Sol an intelligence and decency that make him a crucial moral and emotional counterweight to Bullock’s volatility. His friendship with Bullock is one of the show’s most believable relationships because Sol understands the good in Bullock without ignoring the damage Bullock’s anger can cause.

Molly Parker is equally strong as Alma Garret, a wealthy widow who gradually becomes much more than an outsider caught in Deadwood’s orbit. Alma could have been written as a standard symbol of refinement in a crude frontier town, but Parker gives her tremendous resolve, intelligence, and emotional restraint. Her story is about survival in a different but no less dangerous form. She is forced to navigate grief, addiction, business interests, motherhood, and the expectations placed on a woman in a violently male world. Her relationship with Bullock is complicated in the best way because it is built from longing, frustration, guilt, repression, and circumstance rather than easy romance.

Anna Gunn brings similar depth to Martha Bullock, who becomes increasingly essential as the series develops. Martha could have been pushed aside as merely the protagonist’s wife, but Gunn makes her one of the clearest-eyed people in the camp. She understands the weight of family, grief, responsibility, and compromise, and she gives the character an emotional firmness that Bullock himself often lacks. Martha does not need grand speeches to establish her strength. Her endurance and intelligence gradually make her one of the show’s most quietly powerful figures.

Robin Weigert’s Calamity Jane is another unforgettable character, and one of the series’ most heartbreaking. Jane is loud, drunk, funny, self-destructive, and seemingly incapable of admitting how deeply she cares about people without covering it in profanity or sarcasm. Weigert finds the sadness beneath every messy outburst. Her love for Wild Bill Hickok, her loyalty to those who treat her with kindness, and her profound discomfort with herself make Jane much more than a colorful Western side character. She can be hilarious one minute and devastating the next, which is exactly the emotional balance Deadwood handles so well.

The supporting cast is so strong that the show continually finds new ways to make minor characters feel essential. Gerald McRaney brings a cold, weathered authority to George Hearst, the wealthy mining magnate whose arrival makes Deadwood’s conflicts larger and more dangerous. Hearst is not simply another local schemer. He represents the corporate and political forces that can crush a place like Deadwood from the outside, turning its chaos into something colder and more organized. McRaney plays him with a calm menace that is often more unsettling than open rage. He does not need to shout to make it clear how much power he has.

Brian Cox is terrific as Jack Langrishe, the theatrical and charismatic impresario whose arrival adds another kind of intelligence to the camp. Langrishe can be charming, funny, and seemingly generous, but Cox always lets the audience see the calculation behind the performance. He understands how to survive around men like Swearengen and Bullock because he knows that people are always playing roles, especially when power is on the line. Garrett Dillahunt also does remarkable work in two very different roles. He first appears as Jack McCall, the disturbed and dangerous killer whose actions leave a permanent mark on the camp. Later, he returns as Francis Wolcott, a polished, educated, deeply unsettling man whose manners barely conceal something vicious underneath. Dillahunt’s ability to make those roles feel so distinct is one of the more impressive acting achievements in the series.

Keith Carradine gives Wild Bill Hickok a tired, melancholy gravitas that makes the legendary lawman feel human rather than mythical. He is aware of his reputation, perhaps exhausted by it, and Carradine captures the loneliness beneath the public image. Jeffrey Jones is wonderfully eccentric as A. W. Merrick, Deadwood’s nervous but idealistic newspaper editor. Merrick’s love of language and belief in the importance of a free press make him both funny and unexpectedly vital. In a town shaped by violence and backroom deals, the act of recording events and trying to tell the truth becomes its own form of resistance.

Kim Dickens is excellent as Joanie Stubbs, a woman carrying deep emotional scars while trying to carve out independence in a world that treats vulnerability as an invitation to exploit someone. Her performance brings tenderness and pain to a character who could have easily been reduced to a plot device. Brad Dourif is another major presence as Doc Cochran, the camp’s exhausted, haunted physician. Dourif makes him funny, strange, compassionate, and spiritually worn down by everything he has seen. Jim Beaver is equally memorable as Whitney Ellsworth, the gruff prospector who gradually reveals himself to be one of the show’s warmest and most honorable people. Powers Boothe’s Cy Tolliver, meanwhile, offers a sharp contrast to Swearengen. He is just as ambitious and cruel, but he lacks Swearengen’s strange capacity for loyalty and for understanding that a town, however dirty and violent, is still an ecosystem that must be maintained.

Milch’s writing is famous for its dense, ornate, profanity-heavy dialogue, and it can take a little time to adjust to the show’s rhythm. These characters do not speak in the clean, direct language of a standard television Western. They circle around their meanings, launch into bizarrely poetic insults, turn routine negotiations into verbal duels, and sometimes say more through implication than through plain statements. But once the language clicks, it becomes one of Deadwood’s greatest pleasures. The dialogue gives the show its own identity. It makes the town sound as alive and unpredictable as it looks.

That stylized language also supports what Deadwood is really about. The series is not interested in selling a clean myth of American rugged individualism. It shows the frontier as a collision between people who need one another and often cannot stand one another. Deadwood grows through compromise, manipulation, sacrifice, corruption, and a slow recognition that nobody can survive entirely alone. Even the most vicious people become tied to a larger network of obligations. The show understands that communities are not built by saints. They are built by flawed, wounded, selfish people who occasionally discover that cooperating is better than destroying each other.

The original series ended after three seasons, which leaves it with an undeniably unfinished quality, but that does not lessen its accomplishments. If anything, the lack of a neat conclusion suits the show’s view of history. Deadwood is always changing, always threatened, and never fully settled. The later film provides a welcome return to the characters and offers some emotional closure, but the series remains the core achievement.

Deadwood is demanding television, but it is never hollow television. Its violence has consequences, its humor is vicious and surprisingly warm, and its characters become richer the more time the audience spends with them. Timothy Olyphant gives Seth Bullock the rage of a man trying to force order onto a world that resists it. Ian McShane turns Al Swearengen into a full, contradictory human being rather than a one-note villain. Around them, Milch assembled an extraordinary ensemble that makes every saloon, storefront, street, and muddy patch of ground feel inhabited. People may start the show for the gunfights, the outlaw mythology, and the famously inventive profanity, but the reason Deadwood endures is its people. It understands that civilization is not born cleanly. It is dragged into existence, often unwillingly, by damaged people trying to make a home in a place that barely resembles one.

Review: Justified (by Graham Yost)


“You do a good job of hiding it. And I suppose most folks don’t see it. But honestly? You’re the angriest man I have ever known.” — Winona Hawkins (describing Raylan Givens)

Justified is one of those rare TV shows that feels like a perfectly aged whiskey—smooth, rich, and with a kick that lingers long after you’ve finished a glass. Adapted from Elmore Leonard’s stories featuring the sharp-shooting, quick-witted U.S. Marshal Raylan Givens, the FX series is a masterclass in character-driven storytelling, sharp dialogue, and the kind of moral ambiguity that makes you question who you’re really rooting for. At the heart of it all is Timothy Olyphant as Raylan, a man who carries the weight of his past like a well-worn leather jacket, and Walton Goggins as Boyd Crowder, the charismatic, Bible-quoting criminal who might just be the most compelling villain—or antihero—you’ve ever seen on screen.

What makes Justified stand out in a sea of crime dramas is its refusal to take itself too seriously, even when the stakes are life-or-death. The show thrives on its dialogue, which crackles with the kind of wit and rhythm you’d expect from Leonard’s work. Raylan’s dry, understated humor is a constant delight, whether he’s trading barbs with a suspect, outsmarting a room full of criminals, or just trying to keep his cool in the face of his own family’s dysfunction. Olyphant delivers every line with a mix of charm and menace, making Raylan feel like a man who’s seen it all but hasn’t lost his sense of humor—or his moral compass, however bent it might be. There’s a scene early in the series where Raylan gives a criminal 24 hours to leave town, and the way Olyphant sells the quiet intensity of that moment is a testament to his ability to command the screen without raising his voice. He’s the kind of hero who doesn’t need to shout to be heard.

But as good as Olyphant is, Justified might just belong to Walton Goggins as Boyd Crowder. Boyd is the kind of character who could’ve been a cartoonish villain in lesser hands, but Goggins turns him into something far more fascinating. A former coal miner turned criminal mastermind, Boyd is equal parts philosopher, showman, and cold-blooded killer. He quotes the Bible one minute and pulls a trigger the next, all while delivering monologues that somehow make his twisted logic sound almost reasonable. Goggins’ performance is electric, and his chemistry with Olyphant is the kind of alchemy that elevates the entire series. Their dynamic is a dance—sometimes a waltz, sometimes a knife fight—where neither man is entirely sure who’s leading. Boyd isn’t just a thorn in Raylan’s side; he’s a dark reflection of him, a man who also grew up in the same rough-and-tumble world of Harlan County, Kentucky, but chose a different path. Their rivalry is the backbone of the show, and every scene they share is a masterclass in tension and subtext.

Then there’s Ava Crowder, Boyd’s sister-in-law and a force of nature in her own right, portrayed with fierce intelligence by Joelle Carter. Ava’s relationship with Boyd is a rollercoaster of love, hate, and everything in between. Their dynamic is just as compelling as the one between Raylan and Boyd, filled with a volatile mix of loyalty, betrayal, and an undeniable connection that neither can fully shake. Ava’s journey from a woman trying to escape her family’s criminal past to a power player in her own right is one of the show’s most compelling arcs. She’s tough, resourceful, and just as morally complex as the men around her, and her interactions with Boyd crackle with the same energy and tension as his showdowns with Raylan. Whether they’re working together, scheming against each other, or caught in some messy in-between, their relationship adds another layer of depth to the show’s already rich tapestry of characters.

The supporting cast is just as strong, filled with characters who feel like they’ve been lifted straight out of a Leonard novel. There’s Art Mullen, Raylan’s boss and the closest thing he has to a father figure, played with gruff warmth by Nick Searcy. And let’s not forget the various criminals, informants, and eccentric locals who populate Harlan County, each one memorable in their own right. Whether it’s the hilariously unhinged Dickie Bennett or the stoic, loyal Limehouse, the show’s roster of side characters ensures that every episode is packed with personality.

What’s so refreshing about Justified is that it never feels the need to over-explain itself. The dialogue is sharp and efficient, often delivering character development and plot twists in the same breath. The show trusts its audience to keep up, and it rewards that trust with some of the most satisfying writing on television. The banter isn’t just clever—it’s purposeful, revealing layers of the characters and their relationships without ever feeling like exposition. And the action? It’s as tight and precise as Raylan’s aim. The shootouts are sudden and brutal, but they’re never gratuitous. Every pull of the trigger feels earned, and the tension leading up to those moments is often as gripping as the violence itself.

The setting of Harlan County is almost a character in itself. The show paints a vivid picture of a place where the law is more of a suggestion than a rule, and where family loyalty often trumps justice. The rugged, coal-dusted landscape mirrors the moral grayness of the stories being told. This isn’t a world of clear-cut heroes and villains; it’s a world where everyone has their own code, and where the line between right and wrong is as blurry as the smoke from a freshly fired revolver. Raylan himself is a product of this environment, and his struggle to reconcile his past with his present is one of the show’s most compelling threads. He’s a man who left Harlan to become a marshal, but Harlan—and its ghosts—never really left him.

One of the show’s greatest strengths is its ability to balance humor and darkness. Even in its grimmest moments, Justified never loses its sense of fun. The writers have a knack for undercutting tension with a well-placed joke or a bit of absurdity, and the result is a show that’s as entertaining as it is thought-provoking. Whether it’s Raylan’s deadpan reactions to the chaos around him or Boyd’s theatrical antics, there’s always a moment to lighten the mood, even when the stakes are at their highest. This balance keeps the show from ever feeling too heavy, and it makes the darker moments hit even harder when they do arrive.

If there’s one thing Justified doesn’t get enough credit for, it’s its consistency. Over six seasons, the show rarely misfires. The writing remains sharp, the performances stay top-notch, and the stories continue to surprise. Even when it dips into more serialized storytelling in its later seasons, it never loses sight of what makes it special: the characters and their relationships. And when the series finally reaches its conclusion, it does so in a way that feels both satisfying and true to everything that came before. There are no easy answers in Justified, no neat bows tied around its themes. Instead, it leaves you with the sense that life—and justice—is messy, complicated, and often unfair.

At its core, Justified is a show about men and women shaped by their pasts, trying to carve out a future in a world that doesn’t always make it easy. Raylan Givens is a hero, but he’s not a saint. Boyd Crowder is a villain, but he’s not without his own twisted sense of honor. Ava Crowder is a survivor, navigating a world where loyalty is a currency and trust is a luxury. The beauty of the show is that it lets these characters exist in all their complexity, never forcing them into boxes they don’t fit into. And with dialogue that snaps like a twig underfoot and performances that bring every word to life, it’s a series that’s as rewarding to revisit as it is to experience for the first time. If you’re a fan of stories where the characters are as rich as the plot, and where every line of dialogue feels like it’s been polished to a shine, then Justified is the kind of show you’ll want to savor. It’s a modern classic, plain and simple.

I Watched Perry Mason: The Case of the Lady In The Lake (1988, Dir. by Ron Satlof)


Fifteen years ago, the sister of Sara Wingate (Doran Clark) was murdered at a lake near the family home.  Traumatized, Sara had a nervous breakdown.  It was only when she married Billy Travis (David Hasselhoff), a former tennis player, that Sara started to get over her fear of the lake.  When Sara disappears while walking along the lake, Billy is arrested and charged with murdering her.  Because Perry’s is an old friend of Sara’s uncle (John Ireland), he takes the case.  If you’re going to get arrested for murder, you better hope one of your relatives knows Perry Mason.

This movie wasn’t bad.  It had a twist at the end, which I saw coming but which was still unique for the Perry Mason movies.  The actual guilty party is pretty obvious but the mystery wasn’t as important as usual in this one.  The supporting cast was pretty good, though David Hasselhoff seemed to be too calm for someone accused of murder.  As Perry, Raymond Burr uses his cane again and leans against something whenever he has to stand up.  Della jokes that Perry won’t be skiing anymore.  Most of the action falls to Paul Drake, Jr. (William Katt), who gets beaten up even more than usual but who also gets to be the big hero in the end.

This was the last Perry Mason film for both William Katt and David Ogder Stiers, who played the district attorney.  I’m going to miss both of them.  William Katt’s hair was huge in this one and I was really looking forward to seeing how much bigger it could get.

Lisa Marie Reviews An Oscar Nominee: Nightmare Alley (dir by Guillermo del Toro)


In March, CODA won the Oscar for Best Picture.

By May, I think most people had forgotten about it.

I point this out not to be snarky about CODA (which, for the most part, I found to be a well-made and sweet-natured movie) but to just point out that occasionally, the Oscar for Best Picture Of The Year does not go to the nominee that’s necessarily going to be remembered and watched by future generations.  CODA’s victory is not a travesty, regardless of what some members of Film Twitter insisted.  This isn’t like when Green Book won.  It’s just that CODA seems to be destined to be remembered in much the same way that we remember Argo and Spotlight, i.e. a well-made and well-acted film that gets the job done but don’t necessarily stick around in your mind for long after you watch it.

In fact, looking back at all of the 2021 Best Picture nominees, the one that has really stuck with me is Guillermo del Toro’s Nightmare Alley.

Nightmare Alley tells the story of Stan Carlisle (Bradley Cooper), a drifter who, in 1939, gets a job with a carnival.  Stan is running from his past.  He’s haunted by visions and dreams of a dying old man and a burning farm house.  When we first meet him, he avoids alcohol which is perhaps a good thing as getting drunk at the carnival just makes someone easier to exploit and, ultimately, the carnival is all about exploitation.  The carnival’s owner, Clem (Willem DaFoe), specializes in tricking alcoholics into becoming opium-addicted “geeks,” who bite the heads off of chickens for gawking country audiences.

It’s not a glamorous life but it’s one that allows Stan to hide from his past.  He comes under the tutelage of Madame Zeena (Toni Collette) and her husband, Pete (David Straithairn).  They teach him how to give “cold readings,” and Stan proves to be an eager student.  Pete tells Stan to never pretend to be able to speak to the dead and, from the minute that Pete says it, we can tell that Stan is already thinking about how much money he could make by doing just that.  Stan also appears to fall in love with Molly (Rooney Mara), a performer whose act involves a fake electric chair.  When Stan eventually abandons the carnival, Molly goes with him.  When Stan finds success as a fake medium, Molly is his assistant.

Stan becomes quite a success in Buffalo, trading in his shabby clothes and his unshaven appearance for a tuxedo and suave mustache.  With success comes arrogance and Stan soon ignore what Pete told him about pretending to be able to speak to the dead.  When Stan meets a psychologist named Dr. Lillian Rith (Cate Blanchett), he gets involved in a plot to con a judge who is still mourning for his deceased son.  It also leads to Stan meeting a corrupt and murderous businessman (Richard Jenkins).  Ignoring Pete’s lesson sets off a chain of events that leads Stan right back to where he started.

There’s something wonderfully subversive about taking Bradley Cooper, a legitimate movie star who is probably one of the most personable and likable actors working today, and casting him as such a sleazy character.  This isn’t a case, as in American Hustle or even The Hangover movies, where Cooper is playing a goof who gets in over his head.  Instead, Stan is someone who uses his eager manner and his natural charm to cover up the fact that he’s hollow on the inside.  Watching the film, you’re never quite sure as to whether or not Stan truly cares about any of the people who come into his life.  Does he love Molly or is he just using her?  Does he care about his friends from the carnival or is he just manipulating them into acting as a shield to keep out his former life?  When he goes against Pete’s lessons about pretending to speak to the dead, is he motivated by greed or arrogance?  Or does he truly want to believe that he’s somehow become the all-powerful psychic that he pretends to be?  Stan becomes a success because he knows how to con everyone but eventually, he meets someone who is even emptier than he is.  Ultimately, Stan cons himself.  He tricks himself into believing that he’s more clever than he actually is and he ends up facing the fate that he secretly always knew was waiting for him.  Cooper gives an outstanding performance as Stan.  Both he and del Toro cleverly play with what audiences expect when they see Bradley Cooper onscreen.  In the end, the film suggests that not even charm can ward off karma.

Nightmare Alley is work of what Lucio Fulci called “pure cinema,” one in which the imagery and the emotions generated by that imagery is even more important than the story itself.  The sets, whether it’s the carnival or Dr. Ritter’s office or the Buffalo ballroom where Stan cons the wealthy, are large and ornate.  The cinematography is gorgeous.  The supporting performances are arch and witty.  Cate Blanchett’s and Rooney Mara’s costumes are to die for.  Nearly every shot feels as if it could have been lifted from a particularly vivid dream.  Guillermo del Toro’s love of cinema is evident in every frame of Nightmare Alley.  It’s a film that celebrates the grandeur and the power of imagination and also warns about the destructive power of hubris.  Despite the fact that del Toro has gone on the record saying that there’s nothing supernatural about Nightmare Alley, it’s still a wonderful film for the Halloween season.  The costumes are beautiful and the final third of the movie plays like an homage to the classic German expressionistic horror films, with Blanchett playing her role as a mix of Dr. Caligari and a classic noir feeme fatale.  Nightmare Alley is a big, flamboyant, and unforgettable work of pure cinema and, looking back, it’s my favorite film of 2021.

It’s a film that stays with you.

Playing Catch-Up: Autumn in New York, Griffin & Phoenix, Harry & Son, The Life of David Gale


So, this year I am making a sincere effort to review every film that I see.  I know I say that every year but this time, I really mean it.

So, in an effort to catch up, here are four quick reviews of some of the movies that I watched over the past few weeks!

  • Autumn in New York
  • Released: 2000
  • Directed by Joan Chen
  • Starring Richard Gere, Winona Ryder, Anthony LaPaglia, Elaine Stritch, Vera Farmiga, Sherry Stringfield, Jill Hennessy, J.K. Simmons, Sam Trammell, Mary Beth Hurt

Richard Gere is Will, a fabulously wealthy New Yorker, who has had many girlfriends but who has never been able to find the one.  He owns a restaurant and appears on the cover of New York Magazine.  He loves food because, according to him, “Food is the only beautiful thing that truly nourishes.”

Winona Ryder is Charlotte, a hat designer who is always happy and cheerful and full of life.  She’s the type who dresses up like Emily Dickinson for Christmas and recites poetry to children, though you get the feeling that, if they ever somehow met in real life, Emily would probably get annoyed with Charlotte fairly quickly.  Actually, Charlotte might soon get to meet  Emily because she has one of those rare diseases that kills you in a year while still allowing you to look healthy and beautiful.

One night, Will and Charlotte meet and, together, they solve crimes!

No, actually, they fall in love.  This is one of those films where a young woman teaches an old man how to live again but then promptly dies so it’s not like he actually has to make a huge commitment or anything.  The film does, at least, acknowledge that Will is a lot older than Charlotte but it still doesn’t make it any less weird that Charlotte would want to spend her last year on Earth dealing with a self-centered, emotionally remote man who is old enough to be her father.  (To be honest, when it was revealed that Charlotte was the daughter of a woman who Will had previously dated, I was briefly worried that Autumn in New York was going to take an even stranger turn….)

On the positive side, the films features some pretty shots of New York and there is actually a pretty nice subplot, in which Will tries to connect with the daughter (Vera Farmiga) that he never knew he had.  Maybe if Farmiga and Ryder had switched roles, Autumn in New York would have worked out better.

  • Griffin & Phoenix
  • Released: 2006
  • Directed by Ed Stone
  • Starring Dermot Mulroney, Amanda Peet, Blair Brown, and Sarah Paulson

His name is Henry Griffin (Dermot Mulroney).

Her name is Sarah Phoenix (Amanda Peet).

Because they both have highly symbolic last names, we know that they’re meant to be together.

They both have cancer.  They’ve both been given a year to live.  Of course, they don’t realize that when they first meet and fall in love.  In fact, when Phoenix comes across several books that Griffin has purchased about dealing with being terminally ill, she assumes that Griffin bought them to try to fool her into falling in love with him.  Once they realize that they only have a year to be together, Griffin and Phoenix set out to make every moment count…

It’s a sweet-natured and unabashedly sentimental movie but, unfortunately, Dermot Mulroney and Amanda Peet have little romantic chemistry and the film is never quite as successful at inspiring tears as it should be.  When Mulroney finally allows himself to get mad and deals with his anger by vandalizing a bunch of cars, it’s not a cathartic moment.  Instead, you just find yourself wondering how Mulroney could so easily get away with destroying a stranger’s windshield in broad daylight.

  • Harry & Son
  • Released: 1986
  • Directed by Paul Newman
  • Starring Paul Newman, Robby Benson, Ellen Barkin, Wilford Brimley, Judith Ivey, Ossie Davis, Morgan Freeman, Katherine Borowitz, Maury Chaykin, Joanne Woodward

Morgan Freeman makes an early film appearance in Harry & Son, though his role is a tiny one.  He plays a factory foreman named Siemanowski who, in quick order, gets angry with and then fires a new employee named Howard Keach (Robby Benson).  Howard is the son in Harry & Son and he’s such an annoying character that you’re happy when Freeman shows up and starts yelling at the little twit.  As I said, Freeman’s role is a small one.  Freeman’s only on screen for a few minutes.  But, in that time, he calls Howard an idiot and it’s hard not to feel that he has a point.

Of course, the problem is that we’re not supposed to view Howard as being an idiot.  Instead, we’re supposed to be on Howard’s side.  Howard has ambitions to be the next Ernest Hemingway.  However, his blue-collar father, Harry (Paul Newman, who also directed), demands that Howard get a job.  Maybe, like us, he realizes how silly Howard looks whenever he gets hunched over his typewriter.  (Robby Benson tries to pull off these “deep thought” facial expressions that simply have to be seen to be believed.)  There’s actually two problems with Howard.  First off, we never believe that he could possibly come up with anything worth reading.  Secondly, it’s impossible to believe that Paul Newman could ever be the father of such an annoying little creep.

Harry, of course, has problems of his own.  He’s just lost his construction job.  He’s having to deal with the fact that he’s getting older.  Fortunately, his son introduces him to a nymphomaniac (Judith Ivey).  Eventually, it all ends with moments of triumph and tragedy, as these things often do.

As always, Newman is believable as a blue-collar guy who believes in hard work and cold beer.  The film actually gets off to a good start, with Newman using a wrecking ball to take down an old building.  But then Robby Benson shows up, hunched over that typewriter, and the film just becomes unbearable.  At least Morgan Freeman’s around to yell at the annoying little jerk.

  • The Life of David Gale
  • Released: 2003
  • Directed by Alan Parker
  • Starring Kevin Spacey, Kate Winslet, Laura Linney, Gabriel Mann, Rhona Mitra, Leon Rippy, Matt Craven, Jim Beaver, Melissa McCarthy

For the record, while I won’t shed any tears whenever Dzhokahr Tsarnaev is finally executed, I’m against the death penalty.  I think that once we accept the idea that the state has the right to execute people, it becomes a lot easier to accept the idea that the state has the right to do a lot of other things.  Plus, there’s always the danger of innocent people being sent to die.  The Life of David Gale also claims to be against the death penalty but it’s so obnoxious and self-righteous that I doubt it changed anyone’s mind.

David Gale (Kevin Spacey) used to the head of the philosophy department at the University of Texas.  He used to be a nationally renowned activist against the death penalty.  But then he was arrested for and convicted of the murder of another activist, Constance Harraway (Laura Linney) and now David Gale is sitting on death row himself.  With his execution approaching, journalist Bitsey Bloom (Kate Winslet) is convinced that Gale was framed and she finds herself racing against time to prevent Texas from executing an innocent man…

There’s a lot of things wrong with The Life of David Gale.  First off, it was made during the Bush administration, so the whole film is basically just a hate letter to the state of Texas.  Never have I heard so many inauthentic accents in one film.  Secondly, only in a truly bad movie, can someone have a name like Bitsey Bloom.  Third, the whole film ends with this big twist that makes absolutely no sense and which nearly inspired me to throw a shoe at the TV.

Of course, the main problem with the film is that we’re asked to sympathize with a character played by Kevin Spacey.  Even before Kevin Spacey was revealed to be a sleazy perv, he was never a particularly sympathetic or really even that versatile of an actor.  (Both American Beauty and House of Cards tried to disguise this fact by surrounding him with cartoonish caricatures.)  Spacey’s so snarky and condescending as Gale that, even if he is innocent of murder, it’s hard not to feel that maybe David Gale should be executed for crimes against likability.

A Movie A Day #2: Blue Chips (1994, directed by William Friedkin)


blue_chips_movie_posterBlue Chips is a movie that will always make me think of England.

When I was a kid, I would spend every summer over in the UK.  When I flew over for the summer of ’94, the in-flight movie was Blue Chips.  I can still remember sitting in the back of the plane, trying to watch the movie on that tiny screen.  At the time, I did not pay much attention to Blue Chips.  It was about basketball, which was not something that I was interested in.  It also starred Nick Nolte, who, over the years, starred in a lot of the movies that I saw while flying over the Atlantic Ocean.  Try as I might, I could not understand a word that Nolte was saying.  It was impossible to separate his gravely voice from the drone of the plane’s engines.  I didn’t care much about Blue Chips.

Two months later, I was sitting in the back of my return flight when the flight attendant announced, “Our in-flight movie will be Blue Chips, starring Nick Nolte.”  Still not caring about basketball and still unable to understand a word that Nick Nolte was saying, I sat through Blue Chips for a second time.  What else was I going to do?  Step outside and go for a walk?

Looking back, I can understand why Blue Chips would be shown on a plane.  There’s nothing unconventional or controversial about Blue Chips.  It’s not going to start any fights or leave anyone offended.  Nick Nolte plays Pete Bell, a college basketball coach who, coming off of his first losing season, resorts to unethical measures to recruit three star players.  Ricky Roe (Matt Nover) is a farmboy from Indiana and his racist father wants the college to buy him a new tractor.  Penny Hardaway plays Butch McRae, whose mother (Alfre Woodard) wants a new house.  Neon Bordeaux (Shaq!) doesn’t want anything but still gets a new Lexus.   The corrupt head of the school’s booster club is named Happy and is played by J.T. Walsh.  Other than Happy Gilmore, has there ever been anyone in a movie named Happy who hasn’t turned out to be bad news?

Blue Chips was directed by William Friedkin, though you’d never guess that this by the numbers movie was from the same director who did The French ConnectionThe Exorcistor To Live And Die In L.A.  In his autobiography, The Friedkin Connection, he devoted just a few words to Blue Chips, saying, “It’s hard to capture, in a sports film, the excitement of a real game, with its own unpredictable dramatic structure and suspense. I couldn’t overcome that.”

Friedkin’s right but I’m always happy whenever I come across Blue Chips on cable because it reminds me of that long-ago summer in England.

For tomorrow’s movie a day, it’s another sports-related film that always makes me think about Britain: Alan Clarke’s The Firm.

blue-chips-nick-nolte

Horror Film Review: Crimson Peak (dir by Guillermo Del Toro)


CrimsonPeak

The fact that Crimson Peak, Guillermo Del Toro’s wonderful new film, is only getting mixed or grudgingly positive reviews tells you everything that you need to know about the sorry state of modern film criticism.

Taking place at the turn of the 19th Century, Crimson Peak tells the story of Edith Cushing (Mia Wasikowska).  The daughter of industrialist Carter Cushing (Jim Beaver), Edith is haunted by a childhood memory, in which her mother’s ghost appeared to her and told her to never go to Crimson Peak.  Edith grows up to be an aspiring writer.  She writes stories about ghosts, though she is always quick to point out that the ghosts are just meant to be a “metaphor for the past.”  Her publishers tell her that no one wants to read a ghost story written by a woman and they recommend that she concentrate on writing a nice romance.

Following the violent death of her father, Edith marries the charming inventor Sir Thomas Sharpe (Tom Hiddleston) and moves to his family home in England.  Still in shock over the death of her father, Edith struggles to make things work in England.  Tom is nearly penniless and seems to be more interested in his inventions than with her.  (Not only did they not consummate the marriage during the honeymoon but Tom sleeps in a separate bedroom.)  Meanwhile, Tom’s older sister, Lucille (Jessica Chastain), does little to hide the disdain that she feels towards her new sister-in-law.

As for the house itself, it is on the verge of collapsing.  At one point, Tom mentions that, because of the red clay that sits underneath the mansion, their new home is sometimes called Crimson Peak.  If that wasn’t enough to panic Edith, she keeps seeing mysterious figures wandering through the halls.  Edith swears that she is seeing ghosts and that they are trying to tell her something.  Tom and Lucille tells her that she’s imagining things and continue to insist that she drink a special tea.  Could that tea be the reason why Edith finds herself coughing up blood?

(Actually, there’s a lot of blood spilled over the course of Crimson Peak.  It’s not just the clay that makes the ground red.  If Edith Wharton had written a horror movie, the end result would probably be a lot like Crimson Peak.)

And let’s just get this out of the way right now — Crimson Peak is an absolutely brilliant movie.  Those critics who have complained that Crimson Peak doesn’t have any of the expected “shock” scares are totally missing the point.  Crimson Peak is not about cheap scares.  Del Toro is not looking to make you jump by having a cat jump out of a closet.  Instead, Crimson Peak is all about atmosphere.  Del Toro maintains an atmosphere of consistent unease throughout the entire film.  The scares come less from what is shown and more from what is implied.  In that way, Crimson Peak pays homage to the great gothic horror films of the past.

And remember when I complained about how terrible Jessica Chastain was in The Martian?  Well, she absolutely brilliant in Crimson Peak.  The role of Lucille is not one that demands a lot of subtlety and Chastain appears to be having a great time getting to play such a menacing character.  If anything, this is one of Chastain’s best performances.  (One need only consider how overly mannered Meryl Streep would have been in the role to realize just how great an actress Jessica Chastain truly is.)  Mia Wasikowska is the epitome of fragile loveliness as Edith and Tom Hiddleston is perfectly cast as a handsome, slightly decadent aristocrat with a secret.  In fact, all three of them are perfectly cast.  Taking their roles too seriously would have been a mistake but so would have not taking the movie seriously enough.  The entire cast strikes a perfect balance, embracing the melodrama without going too far over the top.

So, why are so many film critics having such a hard time embracing Crimson Peak?  It’s pretty much for the same reason that a lot of them had a hard time with Pacific Rim.  Guillermo Del Toro’s films are masterpieces of the pulp imagination.  As such, he exposes the condescending attitude that most contemporary critics take towards “genre” films.  When mainstream critics dismiss Crimson Peak as just being “a horror film that isn’t scary enough,” all they’re really doing is revealing how ignorant they are of the horror genre.

So, in other words, don’t listen to those mainstream critics.  They are not worth your trouble.  Crimson Peak is a wonderfully acted and visually gorgeous gothic romance and it needs to be seen on the big screen.

Reportedly, Crimson Peak struggled at the box office this weekend.

Well, you know what?

If you haven’t seen Crimson Peak, you need to go out and see it this week.  It’s a great film and what good are we if we let the great ones go unseen?

Crimson Peak’s Visually Stunning Gothic Horror


CrimsonPeak

Guillermo Del Toro has become the one filmmaker who seems to excite both the elitist cinephiles and the geek community whenever he comes out with a new film. He’s done both pop-friendly extravaganzas (Pacific Rim, Hellboy) to critically-acllaimed arthouse fares (Pan’s Labyrinth, The Devil’s Backbone). His name has been attached to so many projects of all stripe that one wonders if he ever gets time to rest.

Most of these projects never get past the concept stage, but when one does and he goes all out in directing such projects we get something that excites the fanbase like his upcoming gothic horror film Crimson Peak. It looks to be Del Toro’s love letter to gothic horror of the past with his own visual flair for the morbid and the beautiful in one package.

The film stars a who’s who of powerful performers from Jessica Chastain and Tom Hiddleston to Mia Wasikowska and Charlie Hunnam.

Crimson Peak is set to haunt the public this coming October 16, 2015

Trailer: Crimson Peak


crimson-peak-poster

When will studios finally smarten up and realize that Guillermo Del Toro is one of the preeminent fantasists of our time. Just give him the money and talent to finally make his dream project for the bigscreen: At the Mountains of Madness.

Until that happens we shall have to wait with anticipation for every new project he does see through to completion. This time around he leaves the world of Jaegers and Kaiju and takes us into the world of gothic horror with his upcoming film Crimson Peak.

The most talented cast he has work with to date, Crimson Peak is Del Toro’s take on the classic gothic ghost story but with more than just a tad and smidgen of his own narrative and visual style when it comes to horror. It stars Tom Hiddleston, Jessica Chastain, Mia Wasikowska, Charlie Hunnam and Jim Beaver.

Crimson Peak is set for an October 16, 2015 release date. Just in time for Halloween.