Quentin Tarantino's Forgotten Gem: Jackie Brown — a Spotlight on Pam Grier & the Rest of the Cast.

Written & Edited by: Lee Fenton

Is Tarantino the best new-age director of our lifetime? 

Quite probably. 

Is ‘Jackie Brown’ one of his most underappreciated films – regardless of the cult status it’s gained in the years since its inception?

Also, yes.

One of the lesser known Tarantino classics – adapted from an Elmore Leonard novel of the same name, ‘Jackie Brown’ is a story about a woman who’s nearing middle age and has landed herself in a heap of legal trouble.  With her wits, charms, and guile – will she get herself out of the jam? Well, when 70s grindhouse star Pam Grier is playing a character; “she ain’t nobody’s sucka”. 

See Grier’s other films ‘Coffy’ and ‘Foxy Brown’ for examples of this.

JACKIE BROWN

Directed & Written by: Quentin Tarantino 

Original date of Release: December 25th / 1997

STARRING PAM GRIER

The opening sequence of the film foreshadows the main focal point, the titular character “Jackie Brown”. A long tracking shot follows Jackie as she rides an airport conveyor track to the departure gate. A flight attendant that “daylights” as a drug mule and ends up becoming the fall woman for her boss’s illegal activities, Jackie is soon apprehended with a purse full of cocaine and tens of thousands of dollars in unmarked bills.

Something I love about this film is how much quieter it is than other Tarantino flicks. Don’t get me wrong, Tarantino’s other films are always an experience but it’s nice that one of his projects takes its time with pacing, delivering a much deeper narrative because of it. ‘Jackie Brown’ is a slow moving crime-drama with an emotional core that strikes at your heart. The direction is seamless; with subtle shots, brilliant acting, a refreshingly classic composition, and immersive sound design – incorporating a soundtrack consisting of retro soul and funk. 

Most of the characters are extremely well-rounded and have clear wants and desires. The writing is poignantly romantic; truly captivating the hearts and minds of those who watch it. 

THE CAST & CHARACTERS

‘Robert Deniro’ 

Deniro plays an aging jail-bird “Louis” – laconic as all hell – complete with a pot addiction, beer gut, and mutton chops. He’s struggling to re-integrate himself into the criminal underworld after a “lengthy stint in the clink”. Deniro plays Louis with an aloofness that could easily be mistaken for passivity, however by the end of the film – it’s very apparent that this character still fits into Deniro’s wheelhouse of violent anti-heroes.  

‘Bridget Fonda’

Fonda is a blast as “Melanie”, a surfer chick who happens to be Jackie Brown's boss’s main squeeze, lazing around his apartment and inserting herself into his gun-running business. She is an obvious opportunist, and spends the majority of her time bickering with “Ordell” in an attempt to play his associates off of him. She also comes equipped with a bong and a ridiculously high libido, to make matters even more outrageous. 

‘Samuel Jackson’ 

Jackson plays the antagonist of the film: “Ordell”. 

Ordell is Jackie Brown’s crime-boss, a successful gunrunner who exchanges his product for drug quantities that he then offloads in other countries through Jackie’s unvetted access to the airlines. Samuel Jackson plays this role boisterously; with vigor, psychopathy, and a sardonic sense of humour. Ordell Robbie is exceptionally likable – which is highly concerning, yet also a testament to Jackson’s prowess in acting.

‘Chris Tucker’ has a small role in the movie as a low-level hood that works for Ordell. His short appearance is marked by snappy banter and self deprecation – opposite ‘Samuel Jackson’ – he manages to hold his own quite well, and there’s plenty of on-screen chemistry between the two. Whenever watching this film, I wonder what was left on the cutting-room floor; in regards to Chris Tucker.

 ‘Robert Deniro’ and ‘Sam Jackson’ also have some very iconic scenes – each getting to flex their respective weight as “tough guys”. Out of all the supporting actors in ‘Jackie Brown’, Deniro and Jackson are the most seasoned and it shows. They both offer portrayals of criminals that go far beyond the regular stereotypes. Robert Deniro underacting his character vs Samuel Jackson overacting seems like a very smart choice. It wouldn’t have worked nearly as well if both of them delivered a bombastic approach, or both gave a reserved performance.

 In other words: they play well off of each \other. 

So, Bravo!

‘Michael Keaton’ 

Keaton plays Ray Nicoletta (a character that appears in another film adaptation of an Elmore Leonard novel, 1998’s Out of Sight) a DEA agent that apprehends Jackie Brown along with an ATF agent. This is actually a rather compelling performance by Keaton as well, so much so that he got to star in a movie based on the character only a year later. His back and forths with Pam Grier (Jackie) allow for an outside perspective into the heist story that develops in act two, which is a nice viewpoint for the audience to have – since it is similar to our perspective. Keaton has a final scene that really shines, when he’s attempting to deduce what happened similar to a classic fictional detective like Holmes, or Hercule Poirot. The exposition is tremendously written and delivered.

‘Robert Forster’

I love Robert Forster in this movie; he’s great. I’ve really only watched him in this; in his cameo from the ‘Breaking Bad’ series finale, and as “Arthur Petrelli” in Tim Kring’s ‘Heroes’. It would be great to write a bunch about him, but I’m going to “phone this one in” since it’s getting late – and this review has ended up considerably longer than planned.

This is what an article on Forster from Variety.com has to say about the actor:

“This was the face that Quentin Tarantino chose in the 90s, with some inspiration, to play bail bondsman Max Cherry, the villains’ low-level functionary who falls for the beautiful Jackie Brown (played by Pam Grier): it was an intensely sympathetic, very old-school and unshowy masculine performance which earned Forster an Academy award nomination for best supporting actor. “ Variety [2]

Pam Grier 

Here’s the star that shines the brightest.

I cannot stress how strong the emovere [LATIN: emotion] that you feel from this woman is; emotionality is key in Grier’s process, and it’s evident. The character is something that she purportedly empathized with – seeing as when Tarantino approached her for the role she was in a lull in her acting career. Indeed, Quentin had her in mind while writing the movie script:

“Tarantino wanted Pam Grier to play the title character. She previously read for the Pulp Fiction character Jody, but Tarantino did not believe audiences would find it plausible for Eric Stoltz to yell at her.[6] Grier did not expect Tarantino to contact her after the success of Pulp Fiction.[4] When she showed up to read for Jackie Brown, Tarantino had posters of her films in his office. She asked if he had put them up because she was coming to read for his film, and he responded that he was actually planning to take them down before her audition, to avoid making it look like he wanted to impress her.” [1] Jackie Brown: How It Went Down. Jackie Brown DVD Special Edition. Miramax Home Entertainment. 2002. -WIkipedia

She provides the viewer with someone to root for in this movie, and Grier’s approach allows you to fully understand why Jackie Brown chooses to look out for herself – first and foremost. It’s inspiring to see Jackie plan her climb from rock bottom all the way to becoming an independent and liberated woman. Her arc is a full one – and Grier gives a mesmerizing portrayal that showcases the complete evolution of her character. She’s often having to play a role-within-a-role; since Jackie Brown often hides her true intentions from Ordell and the various other players.

Pam Grier emotes expertly; little nuances in her body language, changes in her cadence, and superbly expressive facial acting are all utilized to the fullest extent. It really is one of the best lesser-known performances of all-time.

Her romance with Robert Forster is beautifully sensitive – logically unrequited, stupefyingly perfect – oh how it makes me cry, every damn time!

Their final moments together on-screen are award worthy.

(Forster was nominated for an Oscar; Grier for a Golden Globe)

Rating: 10/10

Food court burgers and fries, in addition – a bag of $550, 000 in Ordell’s drug money. Life’s good.

__________________________________________

Make sure to watch Pam Grier in ‘Coffy’ and ‘Foxy Brown’, her two breakout films; underground successes of the early B-movie era. She’s considered Hollywood’s first true female action-star – by many film insiders and film journalists alike.

 See here: 

“How Pam Grier became Hollywood's 1st female action hero — and what she thinks about the term blaxploitation

Exploitation films are generally low-budget B-movies characterized by their lurid content and formulaic plots. The blaxploitation subgenre emerged from this trend among the civil rights and Black Power movements as a way to describe exploitation films by, for and about communities of colour.

Grier says the term blaxploitation "was basically like a conspiracy" to keep her films out of theatres. "All the movies started being like mine because we were staying in the theatres too long," she says. "Coffy knocked James Bond out of first place [at the box office].” [3] CBC.ca

_______________

SOURCES:

[1] Jackie Brown: How It Went Down. Jackie Brown DVD Special Edition. Miramax Home Entertainment. 2002.

-WIkipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Brown#cite_ref-Documentary_4-1

[2]https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/oct/12/robert-forster-a-coolly-charismatic-character-actor-jackie-brown-mulholland-drive

[3]https://www.cbc.ca/arts/q/how-pam-grier-became-hollywood-s-1st-female-action-hero-and-what-she-thinks-about-the-term-blaxploitation-1.7125607

In Praise of Alex Garland's (Cerebral) Sci-fi Chamber Piece: Ex Machina

Written & Edited by: Lee Fenton

I’m a sucker for a good arthouse film. 

‘Ex Machina’ is definitely that – and much more.

Directed by Alex Garland in 2015, this film is an introspection on life, love, and creation; through the lens of artificial intelligence. With all the recent advancements in AI – I figured it was time to cover a fine piece of filmmaking that takes an in-depth look at the concept of synthetically created people.

 Once relegated to science fiction; the creation of “Turing tested” androids now seems like a distinct possibility – in the years to come. As of late, every company has begun to invest in AI Language Models, Automated Processes (driver assist, autopilot, Amazon’s Just Walk Out), and fully autonomous robots for personal and commercial use(s). The rate at which ‘Moore’s Law’ is now compounding means that our ability to create AI has exponentially increased. [see below]

Movies and television shows like: ‘The Matrix’, ‘Terminator’, ‘Westworld’, Stephen Spielberg’s ‘Artificial Intelligence‘, ‘The Creator’, ‘I, Robot’, ‘2001 a Space Odyssey’, and ‘Blade Runner’ – to name a few – are becoming increasingly relevant day by day. Their pertinence in light of recent funding for AI based military applications and the aforementioned advancements, is only becoming greater. 

Just type flamethrower robot dog into google, you’ll see what I mean.

 ‘Ex Machina’ has a lot to say about the hierarchical nature of society and how it subsequently affects our sense of right and wrong. Ethics vs scientific advancement is an ever present theme in the film. The plot craftily relies on an opaque narrative to obfuscate the true antagonist of the film. This is a risky inversion; yet it pays off by the end. Ultimately who the “villain” is, is left up to interpretation. The young, hot-shot programmer – Kyle certainly fits as the protagonist – but whether you side with AVA over her creator Nathan is left completely up to you (the viewer). And Nathan, the genius tech mogul who built AVA – also seems likely to bring about his own downfall through callousness and over-confidence. His arrogance blinds him from the seriousness of creating a new lifeform; the ramifications – ethical and otherwise.

Here are a few points on what makes ‘Ex Machina’ such a mesmerizing example of cinema.

-Dialogue elevates the piece, allowing for audience suspension of disbelief. Oscar Issac leads the chamber piece, both actors play well off of each other. 

-Nothing is wasted on-screen; everything has a purpose. Chekov’s gun is present in the film. When something is center frame – you are meant to dwell on the meaning of the object present. A Jackson Pollock painting is discussed by the characters; automatic action with a level of consciousness is the method Pollack applied; fugue state. This allows for contemplation on pre-determinism vs free will. Later the painting is focused on by the protagonist & the viewer, illustrating the overarching theme of “qualifying sentience”.   

-Framing is sublime; everything of importance is center screen, symmetry is used in the placement of actors, mise-en-scene, etc

-Scoring is synced perfectly to the mood/emotion. Elicits mystery when needed, at other times hopefulness, dread, eeriness, etc. The music accompanies the plot & propels the story forward.

-The moments of intimacy between the protagonist and AVA are solidly constructed; chemistry is felt with a mix of trepidation.

-Landscape sequences are magnificent and majestic. Panoramic-anamorphic lenses were used for these breathtaking sequences. My knowledge on lenses and video cameras is still somewhat limited, but if you would like to know a bit more visit the link below:

“The movie Ex Machina, released in 2014 and directed by Alex Garland, was shot on digital using GoPro HD Hero3 Camera, Sony CineAlta F65 Camera, Sony PMW-F55 Camera and Angenieux Optimo Zoom Lenses, Panavision Cooke Xtal Xpress (Joe Dunton Camera Millenium Anamorphic)  Lenses” [2]

shotonwhat.com

Oscar Isaac turns in a performance that is exhilarating due to his understated expression of megalomania. The narcissism that Nathan (Isaac) presents is insidiously attractive for the first half of the film. He embodies the “Sigma Male” in his pursuit of longevity, genius, and a self applied “Vitruvian” physical regimen. This showcases the pervasiveness of misogyny when presented in an individual that is both brilliant and enviable. 

Domhnall Gleeson’s unassuming charisma is put to excellent use in ‘Ex Machina’. His ability to “under-act” in a naturalistic way is impressive and beneficial to the character. Kyle’s loneliness is construed in a believable manner; a combination of superiority and aloofness that comes off just right. Introversion is a very apparent part of Kyle’s personality and his longing for connection is assumedly what drives him to excel in programming – while simultaneously keeping him isolated from other people. 

It is very apt, then, that he falls in love with a physical personification of software; a digital homunculus that shares his social abjection.

If Domhnall Gleeson was a less talented actor, he wouldn’t have pulled it off.

Alicia Vikander’s subtle facial expressions fully display her character’s emotional core; the actress must have done some serious searching to be able to convey such intimacy through body language. Her voice acting is quasi-neutral – conveying her synthetic nature – a common decision for cinematic representations of androids. There are almost unnoticeable variations in her tone/register which really solidifies Vikander’s ability for nuanced vocals. As far as hard sci-fi love interests go – her portrayal of AVA stands side-by-side with the best: 

‘Solaris’ (2002), ‘Her’ (2013), and ‘Gattaca’ (1997), all honourable mentions in this category.

A relatively unknown actor, Alicia Vikander’s AVA is brought to life in a way that is truly innovative. 

‘Ex Machina’ has truly awe inspiring visual motifs. 

It was only upon my last rewatch – that I realized a blatant visual representation of Plato’s ‘Allegory of the Cave’ exists in the final moments of the film.  

***Spoiler warning*** Okay, you’ve been warned. ***Spoilers ahead*** 

After AVA has successfully escaped the research facility – we find her in a city – making good on her dream of visiting a street corner to observe people experiencing their day-to-day lives. The filmmaker chose to frame the shadowplay of people walking instead of focusing on the people themselves, lingering on the shot, until AVA’s shadow arrives – framed in the bottom/center of the screen. Then we switch to a shot of AVA watching from an overpass (or veranda?) above the crowded square. She is finally seeing the “real people” instead of the “shadows from the cave” that she was once limited to. 

Seeing as Plato’s ‘Allegory of the Cave’ is intrinsically linked to the idea of free will vs determinism – it doesn’t seem a long stretch that Garland would throw this motif in. If you view the final scene in ‘Ex Machina’, and don’t agree – that’s fine, but I am fairly certain that’s what the director was going for. 

Earlier in the motion picture, there’s a section of dialogue that references “Mary in the White & Black Room”, a thought experiment proposed by Frank Jackson (Famous Philosopher & Professor at ANU); a much more stringent and scientific take on Plato’s philosophical exercise. Even more accurately – it is a modern day evolution of the millenia old thought exercise.

“The knowledge argument (also known as Mary's Room or Mary the super-scientist) is a philosophical thought experiment proposed by Frank Jackson in his article "Epiphenomenal Qualia" (1982) and extended in "What Mary Didn't Know" (1986).

The experiment describes Mary, a scientist who exists in a black-and-white world where she has extensive access to physical descriptions of color, but no actual perceptual experience of color. Mary has learned everything there is to learn about color, but she has never actually experienced it for herself. The central question of the thought experiment is whether Mary will gain new knowledge when she goes outside of the colorless world and experiences seeing in color.

The experiment is intended to argue against physicalism—the view that the universe, including all that is mental, is entirely physical. Jackson says that the "irresistible conclusion" is that "there are more properties than physicalists talk about." Jackson would eventually call himself a physicalist and say, in 2023, "I no longer accept the argument" though he still feels that the argument should be "addressed really seriously if you are a physicalist."[1]

The debate that emerged following its publication became the subject of an edited volume—There's Something About Mary (2004)—which includes replies from such philosophers as Daniel Dennett, David Lewis, and Paul Churchland.” - [3] Wikipedia/Youtube

Alex Garland boasts an impressive oeuvre – which includes an equal amount of writing credits and directorial efforts. His body of work consists of five directing efforts and five scripts; making ten films in total; an eclectic collection of independent projects, ranging from gritty action flicks like ‘Dredd’ and ‘28 Days Later’ to cerebral thrillers that lend themselves to analysis and intellectual discussion, like ‘Ex Machina’, ‘Sunshine’ and ‘Men’.

His recent release ‘Civil War’ is a polarizing film, it was released under A24, a relatively smaller production company that Garland has worked with in the past. So far the reception has been positive (70% on RottenTomatoes) and the box office return is adequate. The movie tells a “what-if” scenario of the near future and how political tensions in the United States of America could lead to a violent conflict between US citizens.

The special FX and cinematography in ‘Ex Machina’ are bar none, some of the best I’ve seen in any independent film. Just impeccable.

‘The Creator’ tried to recently recapture the aesthetic and improve upon it – failing miserably in the process. That film “put the cart before the horse” in some respects; forgetting to craft an eloquent and compelling story, and instead relying on cheap visual gimmicks and expensive CGI. Yes, most people agree that the obviously stunning part of Alex Garland’s sci-fi meditation on AI is the look of AVA and how well it (the CGI) meshes with the rest of the world. This is a similar situation to ‘District 9’, it looks amazing but the real genius is in the world building and plot structure, as well as acting, pacing, scoring, and all the other facets that make an overall product enjoyable.

Thank god, Alex Garland gets this.

No “deus ex machina” required. 

RATING:

9.5/10

Serve with brown rice and mineral water. Detox all that vodka.

___________

Sources:

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law#:~:text=In%201975%2C%20looking%20forward%20to,known%20as%20a%20%22law%22.

[2]https://shotonwhat.com/ex-machina-2015#:~:text=The%20movie%20Ex%20Machina%2C%20released,Hardy%20as%20cinematographer%20and%20editing

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_argument#cite_note-1 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdTSymICyf4

Want to learn more about Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”?

https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-allegory-of-the-cave-by-plato-summary-analysis-explanation.html#:~:text=In%20Plato's%20''Allegory%20of,experienced%20anything%20beyond%20the%20shadows.

Moore’s Law CAGR:

“In 1975, looking forward to the next decade, he revised the forecast to doubling every two years, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 41%. While Moore did not use empirical evidence in forecasting that the historical trend would continue, his prediction has held since 1975 and has since become known as a "law".” [1] -WIkipedia

17 Entertaining Facts About One of the Most Famous Men in Hollywood, 'Robert Downey Jr.'

Written, Edited & Compiled by: Lee Fenton

1. Robert Downey Jr. is one of the highest paid actors in the world; holding the 8th, 9th, and 10th spot for “Highest-earning actors for a single production” (List of highest paid actors - Wikipedia).

2. He is known for his ability to improvise dialogue and for his extended monologues on-screen.

3. When is his birthday? Robert Downey Jr. was born on April 4th / 1965.

4. In Christopher Nolan’s film, ‘Oppenheimer’ he portrayed Former Acting Secretary of US Commerce ‘Lewis Strauss’ one of the first members of the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and a pivotal figure in WW2.

5. He has grossed over 14 billion worldwide from his various projects.

6. Robert Downey Jr. helped to launch the MCU by starring in the first ‘Iron Man’ film (2008).

7. He plays “James Barris” a character in the experiential “A Scanner Darkly”, a groundbreaking indie film based on a story (of the same name) by Philip K. Dick. This movie was shot entirely using rotoscoping; a process in which animators trace over live action footage. 

8. Robert Downey Sr. was a fairly well-known Hollywood name from the 50s onward. He’s starred in a handful of films over the years, but the majority of his work was done behind the camera. He has twenty listed filmmaker credits (19 of those as director) spanning from 1953 to 2005.

9. He was nominated for an Academy Award for his role in the biopic ‘Chaplin’ in 1996. This was the first film I saw Downey Jr. in – he portrays Charlie Chaplin expertly, and it will always have a close place in my heart.

10. He’s been happily married (with two kids) for over 20 years; his wife is Susan Downey, an active film producer and a success in her own right. Neat fact: They’re also in charge of a thriving production company (TeamDowney.com) that they co-own. Jeeze, and I’m stressed out trying to run an entertainment & film website. Does Robert Downey Jr.’s ability to hustle know no bounds?

    
    If you would like to learn more about Team Downey:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_Downey

11. What is Robert Downey Jr.’s favourite food? Well, how about I go to HonestCooksKitchen.com for that answer:

    “Cheeseburgers... I want a cheeseburger.  I want bacon on it... I want a lot of cheese. I want Thousand Island. I might even put some pizza oil on it" [1]

12. Downey first made his mark in the 1960s counterculture movement, acting in films that utilized the style of absurdism to make an artistic statement about the folie(s) of capitalism. His views were somewhat anti establishment, and the films he made were experimental arthouse projects, featuring symbolism and vivid imagery.

13. He’s been married three times.

14. Robert Downey Jr. is going to play 4 different roles in an upcoming miniseries ‘The Sympathizer’ (Cảm tình viên). It’s a Vietnamese based show that’s adapted from a Pulitzer Prize winning book by the same name. That’s more Downey that you bargained for, hell that’s more than anyone expected! Should be good, very political. 

15. He is no doubt one of the most talented, multi-faceted, and sought after actors of our generation. It’s hard to imagine anyone raising to the level of stardom (and critical acclaim) that this man has managed.

16. Robert Downey Jr. struggled with addiction early in his career (due to his father’s proclivity for partying drugs were readily available in the family home) and almost had his film career derailed from [a possession charge (1996)] and various drug infractions. Robert Downey Jr. has stated in multiple interviews that his father allowed him to smoke marijuana at the young age of six years old and he (Downey Jr.) was a regular user by age eight. 

    This is just wrong, on so many levels. No one should be using intoxicants at that young of age – in fact waiting until a person is legally entitled to use, is the right idea. There are links below provided for addiction services & outreach/rehab., please use them if you or a loved one suffers from substance abuse issues.

    [Clarification & Correction. Previously: possession charges, and specific date lacking]

17. What is Robert Downey Jr.’s favourite movie that he (himself) ever starred in? Well it just happens to be high on the my list — I even decided to do a review on it. The movie in question is: ‘Kiss, Kiss Bang Bang’. It’s a fun neo-noir comedy. He stars alongside Val Kilmer and Michelle Monaghan. I could say more or you could click on the link below to read a double-feature on ‘Kiss, Kiss Bang Bang’ and ‘Diehard’.

https://welldonemovies.com/reviews-and-articles/diehard-and-kiss-kiss-bang-bang-2-action-themed-christmas-movies?rq=kiss%20kiss

Links to Addictions & Substance Abuse resources

Addictions and Recovery USA:

https://nida.nih.gov/publications/drugs-brains-behavior-science-addiction/treatment-recovery

The Canadian Centre for Substance Use & Addictions

https://www.ccsa.ca/

________________________

Sources:

[1] https://www.honestcookskitchen.com/post/robert-downey-jr-s-favorite-meal

Shining a “Lantern” on The Weinstein Company; Misogyny in Hollywood

Written by: WDM(c) Staff

Well, Harvey Weinstein is in the news again.

I’m sure you’ve heard – a recent appeals court has thrown out Weinstein’s 23 year conviction for sexual assault against three women in 2020. Before everyone floods the streets in a #METOO movement – like the world has never seen, it would pay to keep in mind that the septuagenarian film mogul is still set to serve a 16 year prison term for a conviction from another rape case in 2022.

[Clarification]Unless the older conviction is overturned by an LA appeals court, Weinstein will serve his 16 year sentence. It is unlikely that the decision will be reversed since there is a difference in the LA and NY courts, when dealing with evidence that is not directly related to the trial. California tends to allow “character evidence” whereas the New York State does not.

Therefore, it is highly doubtful that Weinstein’s (other) sexual assault charge will be overturned. [Clarification]

So there is justice, kind of?

Without getting too into the nitty-gritty of the legal situation: character witnesses were introduced into the 2020 court case to supply background on Weinstein, in favour of the prosecution. At the time – the prosecution was hoping that these witnesses would establish a modus operandi for the jury, and convince them of the defendant’s (Weinstein) guilt. And it was a success – the jury ruled against Weistein, serving him a 23 year sentence in prison.

• “Weinstein, 72, was convicted in 2020 of first-degree criminal sexual act and third-degree rape, and he was sentenced to 23 years in prison. He has maintained his innocence and denied any nonconsensual [non consensual] sexual activity.” (sic) [1] cnn.com

. 

However, on April 25th / 2024, in The State of New York Court of Appeals it was decided that this was a violation of Harvey Weinstein’s rights and the evidence prejudicial. This amounts to “the rule of law” meaning, you cannot hope to use evidence, witness testimony, or other factors if they aren’t associated with the trial at hand. Since these character witnesses were accusers of Weinstein’s but not involved in the crime that was being tried it was deemed too far removed from the proceedings at hand, and the judge who initially allowed the character evidence was subsequently overruled by the appeals court. This relates heavily to the ideal, “that every man [or woman] is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and must be allowed a fair and reasonable defense.”

Or to be more exact:

“Every person accused of a crime is constitutionally presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial and the opportunity to present a defense (see U.S. Const Amend VI, XIV; NY Const art I, § 6; Estelle v Williams, 425 US 501, 503 [1976] “ [2]

This is a sound principle that the law is founded on. I don’t think I need to mention the ‘Salem Witch Trials’ and start off on a lengthy explanation of why presumption of innocence is necessary. It’s beneficial to everyone –  keep in mind, that can include the guilty, as well.

In the Weinstein case, the prosecuting attorneys should have realized that it was too “risky” a legal strategy they were pursuing: jurisprudence severely lacking. It is apparent that Harvey Weistein is not a guiltless individual due to his other conviction (2014 Rape Charge) holding fast, so the court of public opinion is reeling with this decision; feminists worldwide are not happy with the outcome. 

Hell, people worldwide are not happy with the outcome.

In short, it feels like the opposite of progress.

The biggest worry is the precedent this may set for court cases regarding SA crimes –  in the future; a potential by-product of this being a landmark case, media sensationalism, and all. Hollywood has long had some insidious power structures (like most industries in North America) allowing abuse to occur “unchecked”... 

The worry among the public is: since Weinstein didn’t receive a severe enough punishment, it may take away the protection that victims feel in being able to come forward. The accuser (plaintiff) will also have to endure another court case – a wholly awful experience for anyone – really. Other women who have allegations against Harvey, may now hesitate in pursuing those for fear of losing on a technicality.

Here’s a few links if you would like to learn more about the legal ins-and-outs related to the case(s):

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/york-appeals-court-overturns-harvey-132251263.html

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-heres-why-harvey-weinsteins-new-york-rape-conviction-was-tossed-and/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/harvey-weinstein-rape-conviction-new-york-court-overturned-metoo-1.7184493

Now, I wanted to have a quick afterword about The Weinstein Company. There are so many great, and unique films, that have to carry the tainted name, and yes, they helped to promote a man that we now know was a very despicable person – in fact every time I see the name ‘The Weinstein Company’ – I wince a little. 

I think most do.

So, this is the difficult part of the article. 

How do I segue from talking about victims rights to film rights.

Perhaps we should let Ruth Millington (UKart.org) do the talking:

This is one Picasso from Ruth’s article on separating the art from the artist.

[On Picasso]

“He cheated endlessly on his wives, and physically, verbally and emotionally abused each one of his romantic partners: Marie-Thérèse Walter, Jacqueline Roque, Olga Khokhlova and Dora Maar. Under Picasso's misogyny, these women provided the artist with inspiration for some of his greatest portraits, before being discarded for a younger model.”

“By separating artist from artwork, we ignore Picasso's misogyny towards those models who are pictured in his paintings. This reductive narrative also removes the agency of his muses who were key collaborators in the creation of numerous masterpieces. Surrealist artist Dora Maar, cast as The Weeping Woman (1937), played a seminal role in introducing the painter to photography, teaching him in her darkroom.” [3] UKart.org

Please keep in mind, Harvey Weinstein is not an artist. And I’m not calling him one. He’s a bloated, greedy man, who preyed upon the weak; no doubt promoted through incompetence. I am simply using this article to highlight the fact that more works of art – than you can shake a stick at – may have someone attached to them, that is less than desirable. It doesn’t excuse the perpetrator, and if you like you can ignore the art completely. That might be your only option.

That being said, when it comes to film – there are alot of people involved besides the producer at the top. One film production often creates a whole thriving secondary-industry in itself; essential for local vendors, prophouses, catering, tailors, and more. This is the ripple effect of a big motion picture; it not only employs on average 450+ people in its production, there’s also many more individuals that rely on the income from businesses associated with filming.

I guess my point is this: these films helped people start in the industry, pay their bills, and earn money to grow as an artist or proprietor. Some of them are considered top tier indie films – so much so that you’ll see a lot of Quentin Tarantino’s pictures in this slate. We may have to wait for HD remasters down the road – to remove Weinstein’s name entirely from these releases or at least add an asterisk, in the meantime though we can rest assured that his production company is defunct.

That’s right ‘The Weinstein Co.’ is no more.

TWC sold all its film properties for a hefty sum of $289 million to: ‘Lantern Entertainment, LCC’ (https://www.lanternent.com/) in 2018.

This includes 270 movies and 3 unreleased titles.

Those last three films don’t have to bear the mark of misogyny.

Unlike Harvey’s victims.

Sources:

[1]https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/25/us/harvey-weinstein-conviction-overturned-appeal/index.html#:~:text=Weinstein%2C%2072%2C%20was%20convicted%20in%202020%20of%20first-degree,his%20innocence%20and%20denied%20any%20nonconsensual%20sexual%20activity.

[2] https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decisions/2024/Apr24/24opn24-Decision.pdf

Court Decision New York Court of Appeals

[3] https://artuk.org/discover/stories/can-you-separate-the-artist-from-the-art

CORRECTIONS: A previous version of this article gave an imprecise name for the production company that bought The Weinstein Company’s film rights. [Lantern Productions]

It has been amended to include the proper name: Lantern Entertainment, LCC.

We apologize for any inconvenience and will strive to do better in the future.

A clarification was also added to inform the public that Weinstein’s other charge will probably go through. This required more research, as some news outlets were not entering into the specifics of the case. Again, we hope to have all the info required upon publishing; in the future WDM(c) will attempt to be more thorough.

35 Facts about World Renowned Filmmaker James Cameron: Pillar of Hollywood, and a Proud Canadian.

Written, Edited & Compiled by: Lee Fenton

-James Cameron was born in Kapuskasing, Ontario.

-His films have earned over 8 billion in total gross sales (worldwide).

-James Cameron is one of the most prolific directors of our lifetime.

-His net worth is in excess of 800 million, which makes him the 4th richest director in the world. 

-Some of his biggest (and most culturally relevant) releases include ‘Titanic’, ‘Aliens’, ‘Avatar’, ‘Avatar 2: The Way of Water’, ‘Terminator 2’, ‘Terminator’, and ‘The Abyss’.

-James Cameron’s style is bombastic. His pictures tend to incorporate massive set pieces, cutting-edge special effects, and big name actors/actresses.

-In the 90s he almost made a Spider-man film starring Leonardo DiCaprio as the web-slinger and Schwarzenegger as “Spidey’s” many-limbed foe Dr. Octopus.

-His country of birth is Canada.

-James Cameron has helped to revolutionize the special effects industry, and is seen as one of the most important progenitors of modern science fiction.

-His ability for visual composition is among the top of mainstream Hollywood directors.

- Most who know James Cameron can attest to the fact that his dedication to the craft is bar none. He expects his cast & crew to exhibit the same amount of vigor for filmmaking as he does.

-He managed to get real US Air Force jets for ‘True Lies’ at a rock bottom price.

-Cameron was hired by Sylvester Stallone to write a sequel to Rambo: First Blood. This script was eventually revised by Stallone and released as First Blood: Part II.

-James Cameron has four siblings, two sisters and two brothers.

-A hallmark of Cameron’s films are his airborne vehicles; all of which seem to behave like helicopters regardless of their actual concept. The front end (nose) dips forward before moving; style over substance.

-His visual style is one that often encompasses burgeoning technology displayed with a traditional filmmaking palette.

-There was a thirteen year gap between ‘Avatar’ and its much hyped sequel ‘Avatar: The Way of Water’. Both these films pioneered the modern advancements in 3D filming and CGI Motion capture.

-’The Terminator’ franchise is highly regarded as one of the largest pop-culture juggernauts in sci-fi film and television.

-James Cameron is a proponent of tackling climate change, as evidenced by his founding of Plant Power Taskforce

“Cameron is passionately involved in sustainability issues, having founded the Avatar Alliance Foundation to take action on climate change, energy policy, deforestation, indigenous rights, ocean conservation and animal agriculture. He has campaigned for indigenous peoples in their struggle against encroaching industrialization in Brazil and Canada. His production company, Lightstorm Entertainment, installed a 1-megawatt solar array on the roofs of their soundstages at Manhattan Beach Studios, to offset the power used during the production of the Avatar sequels. Cameron also designed the solar Sun Flower, a sculptural solar array that tracks the sun and is installed at MUSE School. At the Camerons’ farms in Canada and New Zealand, Cameron and his wife, Suzy Amis Cameron, are developing new methods for organic, ecological farming, including planting one of the largest food forests in the world.” [2] PlantPowerTaskforce.org

-On the set of ‘The Abyss’ Cameron was so intent on getting believable underwater shots that he implemented state of the art and somewhat experimental filmmaking techniques in the process. This allowed ‘The Abyss’ to be the first movie that was actually filmed in completely submerged locations, requiring the actors to wear diving suits, undergo lengthy periods of little to no oxygen, and in the end – this style of filming traumatized more than a few of his principal leads.

One of the few things he [Ed Harris[ said about it was "Asking me how I was treated on 'The Abyss' is like asking a soldier how he was treated in Vietnam." Similarly, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio said, "'The Abyss' was a lot of things. Fun to make was not one of them."

“During the rigorous and problematic shoot, the cast and crew began calling the film by various derogatory names such as "Son Of Abyss", "The Abuse" and "Life's Abyss And Then You Dive". Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio reportedly suffered a physical and emotional breakdown because she was pushed so hard on the set, and Ed Harris had to pull over his car at one time while driving home, because he burst into spontaneous crying.” [1] IMDb.com

Now all of this may seem a little extreme, yet may I remind you that one of the most respected directors of all time, Stanley Kubrick, had the reputation of being unduly hard on his actors as well. Kubrick often demanded on average 30 takes (or more) from his actors — in Tom Cruise’s case more than 70 takes were required on the set of ‘Eyes Wide Shut’. Rumour has it that Kubrick reached the insane amount of 127 takes in ‘The Shining’.

That explains a lot about Jack Nicholson’s “unhinged” performance…

However, Kubrick and Cameron are not the exception, but the rule — through the ages there have been countless injuries and even fatalities of actors, stunt people, and crew; this is simply a by-product of Hollywood – any who are involved in dangerous filmmaking endeavours have at least some understanding of the risks involved.

No doubt James Cameron is a visionary –  thankfully, none of his later films would require the amount of personal sacrifice from the actors and crew that ‘The Abyss’ did.

-James Cameron has a Twitter (X) account but he has not used it since 2022.

-He is only a Canadian citizen NOT a citizen of the USA.

“But Cameron remains an exclusively Canadian citizen; he tore up his last application for U.S. citizenship in protest over the 2004 re-election of U.S. President George W. Bush. “I'm Canadian, motherf—-r,” is how Cameron described his citizenship during a 2012 appearance on U.S. late night television” [3] NationalPost.com

-James Cameron shot ‘Titanic’, “Aliens of the Deep’, and both ‘Avatar’ films on IMAX. 

The IMAX cinema projection standards were developed by Graeme Ferguson, Roman Kroiterr, Robert Kerr, and William C. Shaw in the 1960’s and 70s. These were also the founders of the corresponding IMAX corporation. 

Since it was a company based in Canada – the first IMAX cinema was constructed in Ontario Place, Toronto 

-He studied physics at a community college.

-Cameron’s super obscure directorial debut is a film by the name of ‘Xenogenesis’ (1978).

-In 1999, after ‘Titanic’ proved to be a big hit – James Cameron pitched the idea for ‘Avatar’ to every major studio; none of them wanted to touch a film that had such a bloated budget (400 million). Thus, ‘Avatar’ was shelved for a full decade (before becoming the smash success that it is today).

-Cameron always wanted to do a third Terminator film, but for a myriad of reasons it never became a viable option.

-Avatar: The Way of Water is either the second highest budget or the first, competing with Star Wars: The Force Awakens. (SW:TFA has a reported net budget of 447 million, while Avatar 2 is anywhere between 350 m - 460 m)

-James Cameron has worked various regular jobs, from a highschool custodian to a truck driver.

-Rebecca Keegan wrote an autobiography on James Cameron in 2009 tilted: “The Futurist: The Life and Films of James Cameron”

-A monumental Canadian filmmaker, James Cameron inspires his fellow countrymen and all those across the globe who love (and treasure) cinema as an artform.

-He strives for excellence and almost always attains it.

-James Cameron brings a complete vision to his projects, allowing the filmmaking process to be preparatory while maintaining an organic creativity.

-James Cameron is sixty-nine years old.

-James Cameron has won 3 Academy Awards – one for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Film Editing. All of these Oscar wins were for ‘Titanic’ - 1998.

__________

Sources:

[1]https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096754/trivia/?item=tr1052612

[2]https://plantpowertaskforce.org/people/james-cameron/

[3]https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/why-avatar-is-not-considered-canadian-by-ottawa#:~:text=But%20Cameron%20remains%20an%20exclusively,on%20U.S.%20late%20night%20television.

Antics and Actors in the Apocalypse – Now! (‘This is the End’ Analyzed and General Discussion)

Why not an apocalypse themed movie?

Ever wondered what it would be like to hang out with Jonah Hill, Seth Rogen, James Franco, Craig Robinson, Danny McBride, and Jay Baruchel, as they all get blitzed off their asses – during the end of the world?

If your response is “Armegeddon outta’ here!” then please, stop reading.

But if you do have a penchant for these members of the ‘Superbad’ alumni; their gross-out comedy and stoner hijinks, then by all means read on – in fact, you better be prepared for what may be the laziest movie of all-time. Is that a bad thing? No, not necessarily, and at its heart the meta-commentary in ‘This is the End’ about Hollywood slackers wouldn’t be complete unless the film ignores most (if not all) story structure elements; skewering Joseph Campbell’s ‘Hero’s Journey’ writing wheel and encouraging an hour and half of improvisational humour.

And when I say “improvisational”, I really mean – completely off-the-cuff, stoned-ass jokes; some that hit and some that don’t. The banter is quite similar to ‘Pineapple Express’ so if you’re not “in for” that level of raunchy gimmicks, you may hate your time viewing ‘This is the End’. 

However, if you’re the type that loves seeing comedic actors drop the charade and just play themselves – drug addictions, sex-capades, and narcissistic tendencies on full display, then you might just find that this film tickles your funny bone. The meta aspect of the film is that every actor in it is performing a sort of heightened version of themselves, allowing for a healthy dose of self deprecation. This is achieved in a very hodgepodge way – implying that the cast was sort of just allowed to “wing it.” The crude elements do have a sort of unpolished allure, as I often found myself wondering – who the hell let them make this movie? 

Although some of the references haven’t aged that well, (I’m looking at you James Franco), the movie has a through-line that ends up dichotomously being both its saving grace and one of its weakest elements. Jay Burachel is the protagonist in ‘This is the End’, and his exclusion (self-imposed or otherwise) from the West LA cliques is what propels us forward in the story and also provides hope for a main character that won’t suffer damnation for the rest of eternity.

Oh, yeah – did I forget to mention?

The gang from ‘Knocked Up’ and ‘Superbad’ gave this movie a religious theme… 

Religious themes in horror are a dime-a-dozen but when it comes to horror-comedies there’s marginally less offerings, but still some hugely iconic titles; ‘Dogma’, ‘Lil Nicky’, ‘John & Tucker vs Evil’, AMC’s ‘Preacher’ (Seth Rogen; Produced, Directed), and ‘Ash vs The Evil Dead’ to name a few.

‘This is the End’ proves itself capable of handling the clashing tones without too much dissonance but ultimately the lack of a solid script leaves it a little wanting. I didn’t find myself laughing out loud, so much as shaking my head in disbelief, and chuckling occasionally. There were a lot of “cringe” moments that I could’ve done without 

(extended sequence of Franco & McBride threatening to ejaculate, could’ve easily been cut...) and a good number of softballs that made me roll my eyes into the back of my skull. In my opinion, none of these actors were mining comedy gold. If you really enjoy “Broken Lizard” films such as ‘Super Troopers’, ‘Beerfest’ and ‘Club Dread’; this movie might be more of a treat for you.

Myself, I find those comedies to be sub-par.

This film’s strength lies in its star power – and those stars are shining… dimly.

A part of me just couldn’t wait for ‘This is the End’ to be over.

Irony aside — am I being too harsh?

Rating: 4.5/10

A very stale Milky Way bar…

Still great for low blood sugar.

AFTERWORD:

I did want to highlight that ‘This is the End’ managed to snag an insane amount of cameos for its $30 million budget. Quite the feat! As stated by other publications (facts.net) this aspect deserves some attention in itself. So, I’m going to take the time to list every celebrity appearance and role in the picture – ranging from miniscule to major, from minute to massive, from miniature to metropolitan.

Here we go:

Michael Cera (extended cameo at the beginning)

“In what is one of the best cameos of the movie, Michael Cera features as himself, but with characteristics completely unlike himself, as he’s parading around doing drugs and generally acting like a jerk.

In one scene, he pretends to slap Rihanna’s butt, but, while shooting, it didn’t look right, so Cera reportedly asked Rihanna if he could slap her butt for real. The singer approved just as long as she could slap him across the face for real, too.” [1] ScreenRant.com

Emma Watson (extended cameo)

“Wielding an axe and shouting f-bombs, Watson survives the threat of apocalyptic monsters outside, then seems to find solace inside James Franco's house. But she is soon alarmed after overhearing the rest of the house's inhabitants, who are all guys, discuss whether they think she feels uncomfortable as the only female in the house. Reacting to such talk, she puts the boys in their place and then leaves the residence.” [2] 

Read More: https://www.looper.com/920827/every-cameo-in-this-is-the-end-ranked/

Mindy Kaling (blink and you miss it)

David Krumholtz (small)

Christopher Mintz-platz (small)

Channing Tatum (mid)

Paul Rudd (blink and you miss it)

Rihanna (mid)

Kevin Hart (mid-large)

Aziz Ansari (small)

Martin Starr (small)

Martin Starr (blink and you miss it)

Sources:

[1] https://screenrant.com/this-is-the-end-movie-behind-scenes-facts/

[2] https://www.looper.com/920827/

20 Facts About Emerald Fennell (Director; Actress, Writer) – Famous for Her Recent Breakout Films, ‘Promising Young Woman’ and ‘Saltburn’

Written & Edited by: Lee Fenton

-Emerald Fennell received her first acting role in 2007, playing “Sheena” on the tv series Trial & Retribution.

-The announcement was made on October 23rd, 2018 that Emerald Fennell would be playing the character of “Camilla Shand” on Netflix’s The Crown. The appearance of the character was highly anticipated due to the scandal of Princess Diana, who was a victim of infidelity at the hands of Camilla and Prince Charles.

Her turn as Camilla was met with appraisal and positive critical reception.

-’Promising Young Woman’ was Fennell’s feature length directorial debut; it did not disappoint.

Claiming a consummate 90% critics score and 87% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, the 2020 thriller has also received a bastion of awards, among them an Academy Award for Best Writing (Original Screenplay), a BAFTA Award for Outstanding British Film, and Writers Guild of America for Best Screenplay.

 Fennell not only directed, but also wrote the screenplay for ‘Promising Young Woman’.

-Her birthday is Oct. 1st, 1985

-Emerald Fennell’s story is empowering to women everywhere; working hard for years in Hollywood and later being able to showcase her artistique inspirateur (artistic inspiration) for the masses.

-’Saltburn’ is the talk of the town, although the reception was a bit lukewarm in comparison to her last feature, — the picture has still garnered praise for being an innovative reimagining of ‘The Talented Mr. Ripley’. 

The film examines social hierarchies among the elite and how it affects our societal obsession with status.

-Fennell’s place of birth is Hammersmith, London (United Kindoms).

-Her father was Theodore Fennel – a jewelry designer.

-Her mother was a published author, Louise Fennel.

-She won the AACTA (Australian Academy of Cinema & Television Arts) Award for Best Film in 2021. -Promising Young Woman-

-Emerald’s middle name is: Lilly

-She wrote and executive produced Killing Eve a British spy-thriller series that follows an MI6 agent Eve Polastri (Sandra Oh) as she tracks female assassin Villanelle (Jodie Comer) in an attempt to outwit, outmaneuver, and ultimately – ensnare her adversary; at the cost of her own sanity.

-Her grandparents are the founders of ‘The Society for the Welfare of Horses and Ponies’ in Wales.

-Emerald Fennell published a children’s story in 2013, Shiverton Hall.

-She played “Elsa” in The Danish Girl.

-”Fennell’s win for her darkly comic screenplay made her the first woman to win an Oscar in any writing category since Diablo Cody’s win for the screenplay of the 2007 film Juno.” -Britannica [1]

-She employed Benjamin Kracun as the cinematographer on ‘Promising Young Woman’ and Linus Sandgren on ‘Saltburn’. Her films have highly compelling visuals, suggesting an eye for detail and understanding of film grammar.

“In film, film grammar is defined as follows:

1. A frame is a single still image. It is analogous to a letter.

2. A shot is a single continuous recording made by a camera. It is analogous to a word.

3. A scene is a series of related shots. It is analogous to a sentence. The study of transitions between scenes is described in film punctuation.

4. A sequence is a series of scenes which together tell a major part of an entire story, such as that contained in a complete movie. It is analogous to a paragraph.[citation needed]” [2] -Wikipedia

-Emerald’s father was an “old Etonian” (which means he attended the public school Eton College in Berkshire, England).

-’Promising Young Woman’ was a financial success overall, clearing nearly 19 million (18.9m) internationally against a  budget of 10 million.

-’Saltburn’ was a critical win, earning accolades during its festival circuit run (Saltburn premiered at the 50th Telluride Film Festival on 31 August 2023.) Critics loved the arthouse aesthetic – allowing it to overcome its somewhat meager returns at the box office. The film made 21 million worldwide on a budget of approx. 15 - 38 million.

Finances for the picture are still undisclosed (April 4th, 2024).

Sources: 

[1] https://www.britannica.com/biography/Emerald-Fennell 

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_grammar

Reboot Fatigue be Damned! Roadhouse — 2024 is a Raucous Good Time. (Critique + Focus on Previous Doug Liman Films)

Written & Edited by: Lee Fenton

Road House (2024)

I was hesitant going in.

Hell, I think we all were.

But thankfully, the pairing of Jake Gyllenhaal and Connor McGregor managed to work, and gave us a smashing update to the 80s classic that we all know and love, ‘Road House’ (1989).

Yet, there will be detractors –- those who prefer Swayze’s take on the beat-em-up action flick — which enthralled audiences with its unabashed update of a revisionist western. Interestingly, the original ‘Road House’ was a retelling of ‘Shane’, a 1957 western – that starred a laconic hero who rolled into town and went head-to-head with the local riff-raff. I’ve never viewed this motion picture that provided inspiration for the original, and myself, I’m not even a diehard fan of Road House (1989), although that isn’t to say I don’t enjoy the film, I just happen to think this new version rocks a bit harder! 

Road House (2024) takes the premise – tweaks it slightly – and then runs with it, benefiting greatly from the director instituting a healthy serving of self-aware “camp” and the right amount of classic action-movie tropes. The screenplay was written by Anthony Bagarozzi and Chuck Mondry; Road House is the type of film that tells you “it’s okay to shut your brain off for a couple hours and just have fun” — it encourages hollering at the explosive set-pieces and laughing due to cheesy one-liners. 

I feel like this is the first “event movie” that Amazon Prime has released. The fight sequences are out of this world, CGI is used extraordinarily; managing to emphasize every hit and physical interaction, intensifying the whole affair and creating a super polished action flick, in the process.

Man, hats off to the filmmaker.

Doug Liman. 

If that name doesn’t ring any bells for you, then perhaps, I should mention a few of the projects that he’s renowned for:

Swingers (1996)

The picture that began Vince Vaughn’s career – love or hate him – I’m in the first category by the way, he’s easily one of my favourite early 2000s “funnymen”. 

‘Swingers’ stars Vince Vaughn alongside Jon Favreau (who’s famous for such movies as: Ironman I & II (director/actor), Chef (director/lead), Couples Retreat, Elf) playing two best friends Nikki & Trent. Both are out of work actors navigating love, life, and whatever else ‘the City of Los Angeles’ throws their way. The movie takes place during the 1990s, focusing on the re-emergence of swing music. 

Although I haven’t seen this film myself, it received a great reception by critics and fans alike – launching Favreau, Vaughn, Ron Livingston, and Heather Graham’s acting careers. Also Doug Liman. He did very well.

I am actually a huge fan of swing music (due mostly to it gaining popularity in the 90s from bands like ‘The Brian Setzer Orchestra’). 

So, ‘Swingers’ is next on my watchlist.

Go (1999)

Go is a brilliantly made film that manages to achieve a Tarantino-esque weaving of the narrative, a narrative that combines multiple POV from different characters, the unfolding story is one that involves a road-trip to Las Vegas, undercover cops, three friends absconding with a drug dealer’s product, a hit-and-run, even a gun-fight in a stripclub.

The cinematography is the essential independent film; adding surreal elements just for the heck of it, and utilizing low volume locations for most of the scenes. ‘Go’ still manages some impressive shot-on-location credits  – New Frontier Hotel & Casino - 3120 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, and various locations around Hollywood and greater LA. The film manages to make the best of its meek budget of twenty million.  

The movie packs a punch! also, an awful lot of emotionality.

The Bourne Identity (2002)

This movie is responsible for changing the entire landscape of fight choreography, more so than any other film, (save for ‘The Matrix’, and perhaps ‘Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon’) in the last fifty years of cinema. I feel confident saying this, since almost every action blockbuster since has emulated the fight styles present in the Bourne series. The violence in ‘The Bourne Identity’ is commonly achieved through the use of everyday objects, as well as guns, knives, and explosives. A spy-thriller that finally did away with the gimmicky gadgets and high-tech weaponry; illustrating that real life espionage can be as simple as understanding the utility of a book during a knife fight.

Hint: use it as a shield.

All kidding aside, the amount of ingenuity that the Jason Bourne series implements is jaw-dropping, the way that the actors brawl in the film – is in reality a highly skilled reenactment of actual violence. It’s almost impossible to tell the two apart; if you prefer visceral and gritty combat… Well, that’s what the Bourne franchise is full of. 

‘The Bourne Identity’ also played a huge role in changing the way action flicks are shot in Hollywood. Prior to Jason Bourne exploding onto the screen with spin kicks and jujitsu – shaky cam and quick cuts were seldom used in conjunction with fight scenes. And when they were, it was not always successful. Similar to the way that ‘The Matrix’ and ‘Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon’ helped to revolutionize line-work (as well as martial arts) in film, ‘The Bourne Identity’ managed to cement how modern films should (and would) shoot fight scenes. 

The only downside is that for years after there were many imitators but only the best managed to hold a flame to Doug Liman’s original film. ‘The Bourne Identity’ turned Matt Damon into the massive success he is today, and also managed to spawn a franchise of successful five feature length films. 

“The Bourne series has received generally positive critical reception and grossed over US$1.6 billion.” [1]

 -Wikipedia

An afterword,

on the cast of Road House

Jake Gyllenhaal

Well, we’ve certainly never seen Jake Gyllenhaal like this before. 

Sure, the man is versatile – he’s done action before – but not like this. ‘Road House’ required Jake to get into MMA, transform himself into some type of monster, and still manage to act alongside a dude like Conor McGregor, without getting so lost in the K-Fabe that somebody got hurt. 

This might be the meanest we will ever see Gyllenhaal. Sure he’s played moody psychopaths before but those roles are dark and menacing, whereas Elwood Dalton is a man who suppresses vast amounts of rage. He’s ready to explode at a moment’s notice, yet keeps a cool exterior. His demeanor is one of smug arrogance mixed with dangerous altruism.

When he starts the film he’s the classic antihero of the revisionist western; strolling into town looking to make a quick buck – with little else on his mind. He acts aloof and hopes to avoid taking on anything besides the bare minimum. Gyllenhaal under-acts this perfectly, which proves to be quite the contrast to the verbose characters he normally plays. I’m so used to hearing this man's monologue in movies like ‘NIghtcrawler’ and ‘Donnie Darko’ it was intensely striking to witness him do the “Clint Eastwood thing” and just be. Rather refreshing, honestly.

Playing against type is a powerful tool in the repertoire of an actor…

Thankfully, Jake Gyllenhaal doesn’t need to be told that.

. 

Conor McGregor

His first time in a major acting role, Conor McGregor was superb as “Knox” – the iconic scenery-chewing villain. He was superlative in his theatricality, reminding me of ‘Nicolas Cage’ in his more unrestrained roles. I feel McGregor was also drawing upon great character actors of the past, the likes of Geoffrey Rush or Jeremy Irons. 

From the way he snarled his lines and strutted around on-screen, it was crystal clear this man came to up the stakes and create havoc. IE: memorable villain.

Want the straight truth?

Conor McGregor steals nearly every scene he’s in.

Jessica Williams

I had never seen a film with Williams in it before this one, and I am very pleased to say that her acting is a breath of fresh air, in an industry that sorely needs it. A lot of newcomers in Hollywood seem to fade out before they make it to superstar status – my hope for the ones like Jessica Williams, that is to say the ones that can carry the emotional side of an action film, acting opposite the likes of Hollywood royalty Jake Gyllenhaal, is that they are offered their own property to lead, before they fade into obscurity.

The character she plays is essential to the overall plot structure, since she’s the one who owns the eponymous “Road House” bar that is in need of rescuing. Without her character giving a convincing performance the film would have fallen flat, straight out the gate.

So, good job Mz. Williams – you didn’t ruin the movie!

In fact, you made it a heck of a lot better. 

Thanks.

Billy Magnussen

What an enjoyable but tropey antagonist! I do feel Magnussen might’ve stepped it up a bit too much in the over-acting department – understandably, he wanted to compare to McGregor’s energy, but in the end it doesn’t detract from the overall product much. He provides a nice counterbalance to the muted acting that Gyllenhaal is providing.

Billy Magnussen plays the son of a gangster that is left in-charge of his father’s criminal empire, while his Pah is busy rotting in the clink  or prison, for you uninitiated types.

Daniella Melchior

Ellie, the love interest. 

Daniella Melchior is a more than suitable actress for this role. Her character provides Gyllenhaal’s protagonist some sentimental attachment to the community and some much needed romance. Her portrayal isn’t too heavy-handed and although the chemistry between her and Gyllenhaal seems a little lacking – it really didn’t detract from the film, all things considered. Similar to a Micheal Bay approach, you have two incredibly good-looking people on-screen “going at it” – even if it’s all a bit superficial, it’s still rather enticing.

Melchior hits her mark, delivers her lines, and although there weren’t really many standout moments, I do remember a few of her quips getting a laugh out of me. Most importantly, in the third act, when her life is in danger – I was emotionally invested enough to want Elwood (Gyllenhaal) to save her. I would say that’s an action-movie, love interest’s major responsibility. 

Mission accomplished.

RATING 8/10
A conche-chowder and a rum-runner to go with the Florida Keys.




____________

Sources:

[1]wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourne_(franchise)#:~:text=The%20Bourne%20series%20has%20received,grossed%20over%20US%241.6%20billion.

Want a Great Date Night Movie? ‘Along Came Polly’, Starring Ben Stiller & Jennifer Aniston

Take 1 part milk-toast neurotic (Ben Stiller’s signature character trait)

and mix well with 1 manic-pixie dream girl played by Jennifer Aniston.

The result?

In the end, you get a movie that managed to achieve a level of popularity rarely seen in offbeat romantic comedies. In the early “aughts” (2001-2009) this formula was still fairly fresh, and the way in which John Hamburg directs ‘Along Came Polly’ highlights the importance of character driven comedy over laugh-a-minute antics.

The plot is a traditional one for the genre; a suburban introvert is lovesick and meets a new woman – one that is opposite him in every way; there’s a chance for our main character to grow, and hilarity ensues. 

Simple, yet effective.

 But what ‘Along Came Polly’ does differently than most rom-coms — rather than inserting jokes into the script meant to cause outright laughter, instead the film focuses almost solely on providing a palette cleanser for relationship troubles; delivering a sort of catharsis for lovelorn viewers. I heartily enjoyed the movie ‘Forgetting Sarah Marshall’, and there are some tangential similarities between it and ‘Along Came Polly’ – allowing for useful comparison.

Although the plots differ in a substantial way, both films feature a lead that loses their respective romantic partner’s affection and must contend with being “back on the market” but they’re poorly equipped to do so. Jason Segal plays a much more quirkier version of Ben Stiller’s character in ‘Along Came Polly’ but both possess the uncanny power of  social awkwardness. Ben Stiller plays this role more often than not – Segal on the other hand, is often cast as an aloof and debonair type. But that’s a little beside the point, as far as the character arc goes in both these films, it’s similar in theory but handled entirely differently when it comes to the minutiae. 

‘Along Came Polly’ chooses to steer away from the easy jokes and works on developing the characters so that the humour arises from everyday drama that most folks are all too familiar with. Sure, there aren’t as many knee-slappers from Jonah Hill and Russel Brand, yet Phillip Seymour Hoffman offers a Jack Black-esque performance (more constrained, due to the film)  that will leave you feeling like you are his close personal friend. It’s excellently achieved immersion, that’s for sure.

The romance between Jennifer Aniston and Ben Stiller comes off as highly authentic and they have a tremendous amount of chemistry on-screen.

This was Aniston’s big ticket film post her run on ‘Friends’ — NBC’s flagship series for a decade straight. Mind you, the actress received her start in film; appearing in such movies as ‘Leprechaun’, ‘Bruce Almighty’, and ‘Office Space’, so it’s unsurprising that her first big role after her time on cable television would be such a success. Aniston plays Polly with a zest for life coupled with total and utter detachment. There are some early moments in the picture that paint Aniston’s character as a bit ignorant or uncaring; as the film proceeds it becomes clear that she just uses aloofness as a defense mechanism, never allowing herself to become truly intimate with someone.

This is highlighted by the fact that she doesn’t generally date men for a long time, choosing to avoid commitment at all costs. 

After the second act, we start to get a fuller picture of why Polly is so emotionally distant, but it isn’t until the climax that we are treated to the following exchange:

• Reuben Feffer: You don't know what it was like for me growing up. I had a mother who made me afraid of everything!

• Polly Prince: Well, big deal, Reuben, my dad had a whole second family!

• Reuben Feffer: What?

• Polly Prince: Yeah, on Long Island. He had a wife, and kids, and a golden retriever!

Quotes taken from: IMDb.com [1]

Perhaps, this is an opportune time to segue to Ben Stiller’s character, the protagonist of the story. 

Reuben Feffer is a man that has lived his whole life in apprehension.

He avoids most risky situations; worries constantly about contracting a deadly pathogen from bar-room mixed nuts and tries his best to adhere to societal pressures. He has an especially bad case of IBS, and his wife has recently ran off with a scuba instructor who is more well endowed than he.

This character could be played for cheap laughs, however, Ben Stiller’s expert ability to embody a “one-note” character and fully flesh out emotional tendencies for the viewer, allows Reuben to become a living breathing person in ‘Along Came Polly’ one that you feel for, are annoyed with at times, and ultimately empathize with fully and completely.

And that’s important. 

We need more comedies with depth.

Okay, go read another article on welldonemovies.com or feel free to give ‘Along Came Polly’ a watch – what an early-2000s gem of a rom-com!

8.5 / 10

Some type of “ethnic” food obviously… (movie quote)

Nowadays it’s a bit more polite to say “international cuisine”.

Sources:

[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343135/quotes/

'Pinewood Studios', Canada's (Mostly) Unknown Motion Picture “Mill”

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED BY:

Lee Fenton

There is a studio that isn’t really that known to the public, and it’s responsible for housing the productions of some major motion pictures. It isn’t a production company in itself, no, rather it is just a space for established film studios to rent out – enabling them to utilize Toronto’s largest modernized film production facility.

 I know. It’s a tad confusing, isn’t it?

Well, to simplify things – here’s a quote from Wikipedia: “A film studio (also known as movie studio or simply studio) is a major entertainment company that makes films. They may have their own privately owned studio facility or facilities; however, most firms in the entertainment industry have never owned their own studios, but have rented space from other companies. The day-to-day filming operations are generally handled by their production company subsidiary.” [1]

So, there are tangible film studio spaces, and then there are business entities that are referred to as ‘studios’ as well, in common parlance. 

But that is all beside the point, we’re here to talk about ‘Pinewood Studios’ and its contributions to the industry.

Located on Commissioner St. in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Pinewood Studios (previously known as FilmPort) is the biggest facility of its kind, in all of the country. The complex is named for its parent company Pinewood Group, located in the United Kingdom. Funnily, the company in Canada was not originally owned by its namesake. However, in 2019, Pinewood Group sold its stake in Pinewood Studios Atlanta, instead choosing to bet on the horse it had been eyeing for years – Pinewood Studios Toronto. There had already been a business strategy put in place by the UK company to refer bigger budget projects to the burgeoning Canadian studio. In the end it paid off, since by May of 2023, the acquisition had gone through. 

Pinewood Studios Toronto is the only movie studio in Canada that is capable of housing blockbuster sized productions.

Here’s a few films (and TV shows) that were produced at  ‘Pinewood Studios’,

see if you recognize any of them:

- Shazam!

- Star Trek: Discovery

- Kick–Ass 2

-Total Recall (2012)

-The Thing (2011)

-Suicide Squad

-It: Chapter Two

-Casino Jack

-Scott Pilgrim vs. The World

-Pacific Rim

-It (2017)

-Crimson Peak

Interestingly enough, ‘Netflix’ doesn’t F around when it comes to the space that it negotiates at ‘Pinewood’, here check this out:

“At Pinewood Toronto Studios, Netflix has a long term lease on four soundstages and adjacent offices for around 84,580 square feet of production space.” [2] -HollywoodReporter.com

So, next time you’re watching an American production – better check that “made in Canada’ tag at the back.

_______________________

Sources: 

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_studio

[2] www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/pinewood-group-acquires-toronto-mega-studio-1235479172/

If you would like to learn more about Pinewood Studios Toronto, and its vast contributions to the film industry, proving a space and community for industry heads – copy & paste the link below!

PINEWOOD TORONTO STUDIOS

THE PERFECT BASE FOR PRODUCTIONS

https://pinewoodgroup.com/studios/pinewood-toronto-studios

25 Surprising Facts about Sidney Sweeney — America’s Newest Sweetheart and Co-star of the Much Maligned ‘Madame Web’.

Article Written & Compiled by: Harold A. Martin

Title by: Lee Fenton

1. Sidney Sweeney was born on September 12, 1997 in Spokane, Washington.

2. She began her acting career at a young age, appearing in commercials and short films.

3. Sweeney made her television debut in 2009 on the series "Heroes".

4. She gained recognition for her role as Emaline Addario in the Netflix series "Everything Sucks!" in 2018.

5. Sweeney has also appeared in popular TV shows such as "The Handmaid's Tale," "Sharp Objects," and "Euphoria."

6. In 2019, she starred in the horror film "Countdown."

7. Sidney Sweeney has a strong presence on social media, with over 2 million followers on Instagram.

8. She used to be known for her distinctive red hair and freckles. However, lately Sidney has been most commonly seen rocking a full mane of blonde hair.

9. Sweeney has been praised for her versatile acting skills and ability to portray complex characters.

10. She has received several award nominations for her performances, including a Critics' Choice Television Award nomination for Best Supporting Actress in a Drama Series.

11. Sidney Sweeney is an advocate for mental health awareness and often uses her platform to raise awareness about mental health issues.

12. She is passionate about animal rights and frequently advocates for animal welfare causes.

13. Sweeney is an avid reader and enjoys sharing book recommendations with her fans.

14. Sidney Sweeney attended Saint George’s School in Spokane, where she excelled in athletics.

15. Sidney Sweeney is also a talented photographer and shares her work on Instagram.

16. She has a love for travel and often documents her adventures on social media.

17. Sweeney is a supporter of LGBTQ+ rights and frequently speaks out in support of the community.

18. She has worked with several charitable organizations, including the Trevor Project and the Humane Society.

19. Sidney Sweeney is a skilled dancer and has trained in various styles of dance.

20. She is fluent in Spanish and often incorporates the language into her social media posts.

21. Sweeney is a fan of classic films and often references them in interviews.

22. She has expressed interest in pursuing roles that challenge her as an actress and push her out of her comfort zone.

23. Sidney Sweeney has been praised for her fashion sense and often attends red carpet events wearing designer gowns.

24. She is close friends with many of her co-stars and frequently posts photos with them online.

25. Sidney Sweeny is 26 years old and was born on Sept 12th, 1997.

Spend Some Time in Lynx River — A ‘North of 60’ Review

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED BY:

Lee Fenton

‘North of 60’

is a desideratum, when it comes to fictional depictions of what life is like for white and indigenous people residing in the truly remote regions of Canada.

The television series debuted in 1992, created by Barbara Samuels and Wayne Grisby for the CBC; (Canadian Broadcasting Network) it was later syndicated worldwide. The show is based on the fictional town of “Lynx River” – located in the Delcho Region of the Northwest Territories. ‘North of 60’ tackles serious subject matter, as well as the ins-and-outs of everyday life in Lynx River. 

The series is the opposite of pretentious; capturing the authenticity of its characters, in a way that only a few daytime dramas manage. Without the use of flashy shooting techniques, or over the top conflicts/villains — this show intrigues because the world is well crafted, beloved by the actors, and all those involved; which is evident from the care put into creating this dramatic enterprise. 

Although, ‘North of 60’ seems quiet on the surface – once you become invested in the character development and earnest dialogue, the show is almost as riveting as the best episodes of CSI, Better Call Saul, or the Sopranos.

Was that hyperbole? 

Nahhh… 

‘North of 60’ is good. It’s really good.

Main Cast:

-Tina Keeper as RCMP Officer Michelle Kenidi. 

She is the heart and soul of the series and Tina Keeper gives us many standout moments in the six season run of the show. She is a Cree actress from Canada. (Main Protagonist/Lead)

-J. Oliver as RCMP Officer Eric Olsen, Michelle Kenidi’s Partner. He is separated from his wife, and his family only visits Lynx River on occasion. (Co-lead) 

-Tracey Cook as the nurse, and therapist – the only health professional of Lynx River, Sarah Birkett.

-Dakota House as Trevor “Teevee” Tenia, the town hooligan who provides a look into the lives of at-risk teens in rural areas.

-Tom Jackson as Peter Kenidi, the brother to Michelle and the current band chief of Lynx River. His concern is for the community and his family.

-Albert Golo as Gordon Tootoosis, an ex-band chief and bootlegger.

-Andy Olsen as Robbie Bowen, Eric’s teenage son. 

In season 2, Andy provides conflict in the form of him acquiring bigoted points of view from his step-father, causing Eric to have to tackle his son’s racist ideas about Indigenous people.

-Lubomir Mykytiuk as Gary Kisilenko, a Canadian-Ukrainian man who owns the local store/motel. His main goal is earning a dollar but he is kind-natured, overall.

-Tina Louise Bomberry  as Rosie Deela, server at the motel restaurant and employee of Gerry. Struggles with alcoholism.

To see the full cast of talented actors, visit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_of_60#List_of_characters

Themes:

‘North of 60’ was evidently written with its themes in mind, providing the much needed cohesion that a show craves, and more often than not – is stubbornly overlooked. The themes of family, community, and cultural integration are not just apparent but make up the under-pinning of the character conflict and drama — that unfolds. In less capable hands,  the show would amount to a soap-opera, with some sitcom elements – something akin to ‘Degrassi’, a CW property, or some other YA media. 

Instead, we end up with an ultra-compelling drama that will continue to capture hearts and imaginations for generations. 

As far as Canadian media goes…

North of 60’ is a breath of fresh (arctic) air.

______________

Rating:

8.5/10

Eat some bacon and maple doughnuts.

A Brief Word on Dune 1984 -- An Adaptation Gone Awry.

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED BY:

Lee Fenton

Well, this isn’t the Denis Villenieuve one.

No, long before the French-Canadian visionary decided to grace us with his reimagining of the renowned sci-fi classic, David Lynch attempted the challenging feat of adapting Frank Herbert's ‘Dune’.

And when I say attempted, what I really mean is -- failed miserably.

David Lynch's version had some constraints due to the tech of the time - however, plenty of other motion pictures of the 80s that featured futuristic settings, managed to succeed where ‘Dune’ failed, suggesting that this film has more systemic flaws than just special FX or believability of setting.

The characters are written poorly, dialogue is atrocious, and for some reason there's narration — in the form of inner monologues from the main character, Paul Atredies. It's throughout the entire film. I hate this choice. Show don’t tell — is something David Lynch usually excels at — his visual motifs produce a meta-narrarive, in of themselves, at least most of his work, has that element . Not ‘Dune’.

Although, you do get some of his patented ability to make the viewer feel uncomfortable, through absurdist imagery. I mention the influence that ‘Dune (1984)’, may have had on another director's work — in my review and analysis of the film ‘12 Monkeys’ by Terry Gilliam. Most likely — Gilliam also drew from the more esoteric works by Lynch, such as; ‘Lost Highway’, ‘Twin Peaks’, and ‘Mulhollund Drive’.

While watching ‘Dune (1984)’, a thought crept into my headspace. Why, oh why, am I so aware that I’m watching a movie? Was this the filmmakers intention…

Some directors (Wes Anderson for example) dispense with realism in lieu of creating a piece that resembles cinematic stagecraft. That is to say — Wes Anderson films are something more akin to a vibrant stage-production. When it comes to Dune ‘(1984)’, I feel this aesthetic was only partially achieved.

So, what are we left with?

Simple: uninspired and unexciting theatre. Complete with, archtypes for characters, sets that awkwardly lack volume, over-the-top performances, and writing that aged like rancid milk.

I originally watched this version of Dune in the early 2000s. It was garbage then — and it hasn’t improved in the years since.

Improving this abomination would be a miracle worthy of Mau'dib, himself.

________________________

Rating: 2.5/10

3 oz of water recycled from your stillsuit. Yum.

PS: Man, I can’t wait to see Villenieuve's ‘Dune 2'.

Written & Edited by: Lee Fenton

Portrait of a Man Consumed by his Passions — ‘Raging Bull’ Scorsese’s Biopic about Professional Fighter ‘Jake LaMotta’

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED BY:

Lee Fenton

RAGING BULL

a film Directed by Martin Scorsese.

From the splendid opening theme:
the Intermezzo from Mascagni’s “Cavalleria Rusticana”, we are told by the filmmaker that this picture is one of weight and meaning.

Scorsese utilizes slow-motion shots of Jake LaMotta shadow-boxing to emphasize the amount of training
involved in professional fighting, and perhaps, by extension the amount of sacrifice in the craft of filmmaking itself. I don’t believe it’s a huge leap to assume that at least a portion of the characteristics of La Motta may have spoken to Scorsese. Films that feature tough men, with deep character flaws — seem to be his cinematic stomping ground, after-all.

Reasons Why 'Raging Bull' Might Be Scorsese's Most Endearing Film.

-Unfiltered Scorsese, early in his career --- unrefined yet more raw -- works out to benefit the piece as a whole.

-interludes have a dreamlike veneer,  mesmerizing visuals.

-The fighting in the ring reflects LaMotta's mercurial nature.

-Dialogue is more realistic than any other Scorsese film.

-Robert de Niro gives a performance that embodies unbridled rage and disillusionment.

-The scenes of domestic violence bring a grotesque tone to parts of the film, contrasting the serene interludes and moments of ebullience in the picture.

-Since 'Raging Bull is a depiction of real life events, La Motta's behaviour towards his wife is emotionally exhausting to witness, while being essential to the overall narrative. I feel Scorsese handled this subject matter as tastefully as he could, emphasizing the obscenity of what was taking place.

- As Joey LaMotta (Jake's younger brother) Joe Pesci's energy is contained, highlighting his ability for providing an interesting delivery of everyday dialogue allowing the viewer to really lose themselves in the going-on’s of these two Italian-American men . It's a glimpse into a bygone era through the lens of Pesci's exchanges with de Niro, and the two form a highly believable pair of brothers --- the intensity of family drama embodying their on-screen relationship.

- The misogyny of La Motta is dealt with in a way — that it's very apparent it is a character flaw and rarely highlighted as a positive. This is something that Martin Scorsese veered away from in his later projects, choosing to take less of a moral stance and allow the moviegoers to come to their own ethical conclusions.

See below quote —- which outlines the criticism surrounding, 'Wolf of Wallstreet'

upon its release, for context:

In a new GQ feature that partnered Scorsese with Dune actor Timothée Chalamet, the director was asked about his penchant for refusing to tell the audience how to feel about characters, and he brought up the 2014 film.

“In the case of The Wolf of Wall Street, for example, I only learned the other day from an interviewer who said, ‘You’re not aware of the war [over] Wolf of Wall Street?,” Scorsese said. “So I said, ‘What are you talking about.’ They said, ‘Well, there was a big screening at Paramount of the picture, for the critics in New York.’ Apparently, I was told this, there were two camps: One camp that loved the picture and the other camp that was furious, saying I didn’t take a moral stand on Jordan Belfort. And one of the critics from the other group that liked the picture said, ‘Do you really need Martin Scorsese to tell you that that’s wrong?’ You really need him to tell you that’s wrong? He knows it’s wrong.” [1] -Hollywoodreporter.com

Sources:

[1] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/martin-scorsese-wolf-of-wall-street-criticism-1235623815/

‘Beneath the Planet of the Apes’ is an avant-garde redux of the original Sci-fi epic, ‘Planet of the Apes’.

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED BY:

Lee Fenton

‘Beneath the Planet of the Apes’ is an avant-garde redux of the original Sci-fi epic, Planet of the Apes —- the sequel received a mixed reception upon its release and has never gained the notoriety (and success) of the first film. To some, ‘Beneath the Planet of the Apes’ is a competent retread of the first film, lacking some creative vision but ultimately accomplishing what it sets out to do. However, others have criticized the film for beginning a downward trend of the series and adding little of worth to the overall lore of the Planet of the Apes franchise. 

It’s my opinion – that the positives of this motion picture far outweigh the overall negatives. I’m aware that I might be in the minority with this assertion but if you keep reading long enough to fully understand my points, my promise is – it’ll be well worth your time. 

Not only do I feel that this film received much harsher criticism than it deserved; as far as science fiction goes — ‘Beneath the Planet of the Apes’ is a work of highart.

 Please, let me explain:

.

 The brilliance of this film is this: ‘‘Beneath the Planet of the Apes’ is both highly derivative and subverts your expectations.

If you think about it – shouldn’t those two attributes be mutually exclusive? 

In the retelling of a story, since the dawn of time, humans have faced the challenges of reworking an already existing story into something wholly new and unrecognizable. Indeed, this is how new stories are commonly made, through homages to the past and influences from other legends, fables, and tales. Like with music, the idea is not to create something entirely new but to arrange the notes in a way that is predictable yet experimental. 

So when it comes to reboots, remixes or the more lofty sounding ‘redux’, humans have been producing those things for as long as story writing has existed – say about 4000 years ago? 

(The Epic of Gilgamesh was written sometime from 2100 BC - 1200 BC)

So, when people accuse a studio of being creatively bankrupt for producing yet another reboot, what they’re really saying is that’s the worst retelling of a story I’ve ever seen!

 In fact, if done well, reboots can reinvigorate a film property and allow a new generation to enjoy the story that was so iconic for their parents, older siblings, and or grandparents. The requirement of a good retelling is that it subverts your expectations. 

Here’s a list of ways that “Beneath the Planet of the Apes’

achieves this:

• Kills off the main character of the last film within the first few minutes. Well he really “goes missing” but for all extents and purposes he’s gone. It would be cheap and lackluster if they killed him off-screen, but this film goes all in on the subversion of expectations and lets you get used to Taylor and Nova living a fairly happy life together. Then “bam!” Taylor is gone and you’re left wondering who the main focus of the film is. The director took a chance in doing this, since it definitely contributes to the feeling of confusion and viewer dissonance this film tends to elicit.

• Although the true main character of the film is almost a carbon copy of Taylor (Chartlton Heston) from the first film, Brent (James Franciscus) is an emotional wreck in comparison to his predecessor. He’s wild and unpredictable, and doesn’t offer the stoic performance that Heston did. This helps to convey the chaotic feeling of the film, provoking the feeling that the viewer has no idea what will happen next.

• The first half of the picture is a predictable retread of the first film. About halfway through it takes a right turn, introducing a group of mutant humans that have been surviving in the post-apocalyptic New York subway tunnels. This is a clear departure from the established canon, and creates more viewer dissonance. I’ve heard many people complain about this aspect of the film, claiming that it undoes a lot of the narrative from the first. While in actuality, it allows for a deviation from the expected conflict between man and ape. It shows us that although the apes have become dictatorial — perhaps humans were always the true threat. These mutant underground dwellers have chosen to worship a nuclear bomb, and in the final moments of the film it is their world destroying weapon that’s activated by Dr. Zeus, against Taylor’s wishes and pleas. I almost forgot to mention — Charlton Heston returns in the final 20mins of the film. It’s a bit of fan service but I’m alright with it, overall. Helps to tie a neat little bow on the whole adventure.

• The grandest subversion of all is this, NOT ONE character survives the end of ‘Beneath the Planet Apes’. It’s quite the choice – one that has angered fans for years since. It’s not the ending that most filmmakers would’ve chosen, but Ted Post had the gall to go through with it. And you know what? 

It works.

Still makes me cry every time I see it, and it manages to compare (not outdo) the ending of the original – which is not an easy task. I don’t see it as a shot at the original but a way to finish the (potential) duology with some gravitas and weight. Yes, it did have the ‘Last Jedi’ effect of limiting the trajectory of the franchise, yet like with Rian Johnson’s Star Wars film – it’s hard to blame a filmmaker for putting their vision for a film above the overall arc of the series.

In closing, please give ‘Beneath the Planet of the Apes’ a chance. 

It’s not the best of the series but it’s still much, much better than ‘Battle for the Planet of the Apes’. 

I hope that’s a ringing endorsement.

Rating: 7.5/10

A bowl of healthy fruit, mangos, pineapple, 

and papaya.

Written & Edited by: Lee Fenton

A Number of Reasons Why Captain Kirk is (Objectively) the WORST Star Trek Captain of All Time.

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED BY:

Lee Fenton

Captain James T. Kirk of the Starship Enterprise. 

I love the guy, yet there’s always been something nagging at the back of my mind about the eternal debate of who is the superior captain – Kirk or Picard?

And it’s this: 

Kirk realistically has no chance in this contest. 

Sure, he’s an awesome action hero, with hugely attractive qualities; generally speaking — he saves the day and manages to do it with a full head of hair and with the swagger and air of a protagonist who’s impervious to hardship. But this question isn’t about “the best sci-fi action hero”, no, it’s a question of who is the best “Starfleet Captain”. 

Or at least that’s how I’ve always heard it phrased when argued in the annals of fansite message boards and the everdreaded… youtube comment section. Kik vs Picard. A question as old as time itself. And I’m here today to settle it, once and for all. 

List of Reasons Why Kirk Is Inadequate at His Job (being Captain of a Federation Starship).

1. He’s always getting into fistfights, even though it’s the future and y’know he’s a starship captain. His contemporaries tend to use their mental faculties to solve problems, relying more on diplomacy and outwitting their opponent. Yes, Kirk does this as well – but he also likes to punch the crap out of his enemies when all other avenues have failed. See Kirk kick the crap out of an unsuspecting Gorn in Season 1 Ep.18 for an example of this.

 His brand of improvisation and ‘Magyver’ like tactics have allowed him out of a sticky situation on more than one occasion, but they don’t really align with Federation principles. He often breaks rules, and it could be argued that he has easily disobeyed his Starfleet training more than any of the other captains in Star Trek canon.

Here’s a quote that proves my point:

“Spock cites Kirk as having "violated 234 Starfleet regulations during his tenure," which actually seems like a somewhat small figure, given Kirk made a career out of hot-headed disobedience. Spoke adds that Kirk, "disobeyed direct orders 19 times, the Prime Directive several more than that, and was – remarkably – only court-martialed twice." [1] -ScreenRant.com 

(IDW’s Defiant #5 an in-canon Star Trek comic)

I’m all for being a bit of a wildcard — but if it wasn’t for Kirk’s faithful compatriot and first officer, Spock – he would be too loose of a canon, unreliable, and wouldn’t have managed to achieve the level of recognition that he has. The man is unpredictable (which can be an asset, but doesn’t really mesh with Federation values) therefore he is not the best star-fleet captain, no, he’s more like their secret weapon that they use just in case… Y’know, “break glass in case of Klingons, release Kirk”, that sort of thing. 

Okay, I think I’ve sufficiently made my point.

1. He never wanted to be a starship captain in the first place! Okay, well that’s only true in an alternate timeline, but he does try to shirk his responsibilities in Star Trek: Generations and remain in the Nexus, living in a virtual construct of his happiest moments. 

Mind you, who wouldn’t? 

1. He’s too busy looking for a one-night stand to be a focused and diligent leader.

Yes, obviously every starfleet captain gets some nookie during their tenure as commander, yet – it seems blatantly apparent that James Tyberius Kirk registers highest on the thirst-o-meter, managing to snag a date every other episode of TOS. Now it’s well known that Gene Roddenberry’s vision for the future was still mired in misogyny, as well as a more positive 60s sexual liberation movement; informing the writing (also casting & wardrobe, risqué attire being the norm for extras) and also the direction of the character. This is neither here nor there, my statement stands – James T. Kirk is too much of a ‘poon-hound’ to be entirely dedicated to his job.

He lacks the commitment and resoluteness to be the best Star Trek captain. 

1. He never encountered the Borg.

I could honestly leave it there, and I think the statement stands for itself. Instead, let's talk about the ‘Shatnerverse’. 

Before I go on, this question seems tantamount to the whole discussion, what is my view on Canadian actor William Shatner? Well, in short – I think he's a huge part of Hollywood history and one of the most important figures in Science Fiction TV of the last half of a century. I also love the character Captain Kirk, he’s unequivocally one of the most magnetic and easy to root for heroes that will ever grace Prime Time television.

 This article is all in good fun, and the next one I write is going to be about William Shatner & his contributions. Also, someone else at WDM(c) is going to write a counter to this essay, arguing for Kirk being the best captain, so in the end it’s just an interesting topic to write about! 

Hope I don’t get hate-mail over this.

Alright, now that that’s taken care of – back to the ‘Shatnerverse’ and the time that James Kirk fought the Borg. That’s right, there’s a book written by William Shatner, (technically canon) and it details an epic adventure in which Kirk manages to basically one-up everyone in the ‘The Next Generation’ cast and save their buttocks from a Borg invasion.

An excerpt from the book ‘The Return’ 

by William Shatner:

“He is able to defeat Worf in a bat'leth fight handily, seemingly without breaking a sweat.  Riker, while being pursued by Kirk, describes Kirk's phantom-like supernatural ability to easily get the drop on him.  Finally, at the end of the novel, even Kirk's enemies play up his amazing god-like abilities. Just like the Klingons in Star Trek V, the Romulans in The Return are so awed and amazed by Kirk's abilities, they can't help but mention just how awesome he is at every turn.  "Kirk must be on that ship!"  "Why do you think that?"  "How else can they so easily defeat us?"  Seriously?  Also, over the years since "The Best of Both Worlds," Starfleet has been contending with the Borg and barely escaping destruction at every turn.  Well, no more!  Enter Kirk!  Silly 24th century, can't even deal with a galactic menace. Guess Kirk will clean that up for them, too!” [2]- Quotes from a review of ‘The Return’ by Dan Gunther - www.TrekLit.com

So in closing I will state this, yes, James T. Kirk is quite possibly the most heroic and daring individual in the Star Trek universe; his ability to think outside the box and mentally outmaneuver his opponents is bar none — but when it comes to being a Federation captain, he doesn’t like to follow the General Orders and Regulations and has violated more than 234 Starfleet Regulations. William Shatner defined the series and is easily the biggest sci-fi star of the 60s. Kirk is one of the coolest characters in pop culture history (like Clint Eastwood in space but with a better set of hair!) but that’s not what the debate has been out for all these decades.

So, is Kirk the Best Starfleet captain?

No.

Not by a long shot.

(Want to know which Starfleet captain does rank as the greatest of all time?

Stay tuned for the next article, coming out within the week.)

_________________________

1. Starfleet Command General Orders and Regulations were a series of guidelines used to instruct members of Starfleet on the proper etiquette and policy in a situation that required consultation for a resolution. These protocols were the foundation of Starfleet and the responsibility of its officers to uphold and protect, ranging from all manners of duty, such as interstellar diplomacy to punctuation of reports. Violations of protocol could have led to being placed on report, a court martial, demotion of rank, or other reprimands. -https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/General_Orders_and_Regulations

Sources: 

[1] https://screenrant.com/idw-star-trek-kirk-broke-so-many-rules/#:~:text=Spoke%20adds%20that%20Kirk%2C%20%22disobeyed,in%20Star%20Trek%3A%20Defiant%20%235

[2]

https://www.treklit.com/2012/01/return

25 Facts about the hit show ‘The X-Files’ starring Gillian Anderson & David Duchovny

Article Written & Edited by: Harold A. Martin

1. "The X-Files" is a popular science fiction television series that aired from 1993 to 2018, captivating audiences with its blend of supernatural phenomena and government conspiracies.

2. The show follows FBI agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully as they investigate unsolved cases known as "X-Files," which involve paranormal and extraterrestrial phenomena.

3. "The X-Files" was created by Chris Carter and became a cultural phenomenon, winning numerous awards and gaining a dedicated fanbase.

4. The iconic tagline of the show is "The truth is out there," reflecting its overarching theme of seeking answers and uncovering hidden truths.

5. David Duchovny portrayed Agent Fox Mulder, a believer in the paranormal, while Gillian Anderson played Agent Dana Scully, a skeptic who provides a scientific perspective.

6. The series popularized the term "shipper," referring to fans who supported a romantic relationship between Mulder and Scully.

7. "The X-Files" introduced memorable recurring characters like the enigmatic Cigarette Smoking Man and the Lone Gunmen, a trio of conspiracy theorists.

8. The show's distinctive opening sequence, featuring eerie music and iconic visuals, became instantly recognizable and set the tone for each episode.

9. "The X-Files" blended standalone "monster-of-the-week" episodes with an overarching mythology that delved into government cover-ups and alien colonization.

10. The series often left viewers with cliffhangers and unresolved mysteries, creating a sense of anticipation and speculation among fans.

11. "The X-Files" spawned two feature films: "The X-Files: Fight the Future" (1998) and "The X-Files: I Want to Believe" (2008).

12. The show's popularity led to a resurgence of interest in paranormal and conspiracy theories during its initial run.

13. "The X-Files" influenced numerous TV shows that followed, such as "Fringe" and "Stranger Things," which also explored supernatural and government conspiracy themes.

14. The character of Agent Mulder was ranked as one of TV Guide's "50 Greatest TV Characters of All Time."

15. "The X-Files" received critical acclaim and won several Golden Globe Awards and Primetime Emmy Awards throughout its run.

16. The series tackled various social and political issues, including government surveillance, genetic experimentation, and the ethics of scientific advancements.

17. "The X-Files" had a dedicated fanbase that organized conventions, fan fiction, and online communities to discuss and analyze the show's episodes.

18. The show's theme song, composed by Mark Snow, became iconic and is often associated with the eerie atmosphere of the series.

19. "The X-Files" explored the concept of trust and betrayal, as Mulder and Scully often faced obstacles from within their own organization.

20. The series featured a mix of horror, suspense, and humor, balancing intense moments with witty banter between the main characters.

21. "The X-Files" had a total of 11 seasons, with a revival in 2016 and 2018, allowing fans to revisit their favorite characters and storylines.

22. The show's popularity led to various spin-offs, including the short-lived series "The Lone Gunmen" and the successful "Millennium," both set in the same universe.

23. "The X-Files" had a significant impact on popular culture, with references and parodies appearing in other TV shows, movies, and even music.

24. The series explored themes of trust, faith, and the search for meaning in a world filled with mysteries and unexplained phenomena.

25. "The X-Files" remains a beloved and influential show, continuing to captivate audiences with its blend of supernatural intrigue and compelling characters.

The Outer Limits - 1995, an Impressive Retelling of a Golden Age Sci-fi Anthology Series.

ARTICLE WRITTEN & EDITED

by: Lee Fenton

A modern remake of a 1960s science fiction anthology series of the same name, ‘The Outer Limits’ debuted in 1995 — created by Leslie Stephens, the show was filmed entirely in Canada. Principal photography occurred in (and around) Vancouver, BC. ‘The Outer Limits’ has been heralded as an achievement in televised Sci-fi and manages #91 on RottenTomatoes.com top 100 sci-fi shows of all time. 

While that rank isn’t incredibly high on the list - it still lets us know that someone recognizes this show had to crawl, before future sci-fi properties could leap and bound into worldwide recognition. ‘The Outer Limits’ was an innovator in the field of television special effects.

Some episodes are much better than others; the quality of storytelling in ‘The Outer Limits’ is a bit “hit or miss”.

A good portion of the effects that the showrunners were instituting in the making of ‘The Outer Limits’ were quite revolutionary for the era, and what is seen as terribly ‘cheesy’ by today’s standards, was cutting edge work in the mid 90s, albeit in some cases the CGI and or prosthetics just didn’t come off as well as they could have.

You see the same sort of thing in the early seasons of ‘ The X-files’ a show that had a shaky start with budgetary restraints affecting the look of the series (also filmed in the greater Vancouver area). But similar to ‘The Outer Limits’ as the series progressed it managed some very unique creature FX and practical effects in general, which made the show not only a pop-culture juggernaut but also the mold for procedural police dramas that borrowed the aesthetic of Chris Carter’s ‘X-files’.

But back to ‘The Outer Limits’ — the show that we’re here to discuss. Although the visuals of the series never reached the levels of Mulder & Skully’s ‘X-files’ badassery, it did allow for another show to improve upon the various monster and alien makeups presented on-screen. The creator of ‘The Outer Limits’ Lesie Stephens also went on to make another hit sci-fi show, ‘Stargate: SG-1’ which was quite the success in the early 2000s — being the flagship series of the Space Network (later renamed Syfy). All in all the Outer Limits is a loving recreation of a classic anthology series and although it features a myriad of lackluster acting; it also manages some really convincing drama at times, and always attempts something visually stunning in it’s special effects and set-construction. 

Does it always work? Well I’ll leave that up to you - the viewer.

Here’s a list of famous actors that appear in episodes of ‘The Outer Limits’ - 1995

-Malcom McDowell

-Mark Hamill

-Beau Bridges

-Doug Jones

-Robert Patrick

-Michael Dorn, 

-Jonathan Frakes, 

-Gates McFadden, 

-Marina Sirtis 

-Brent Spiner

-Levar Burton

-Kirsten Dunst

-Neal Patrick Harris

-Ryan Reynolds

-Will Atherton

-Leslie Ewen

-Roger Cross

-Bill Cobbs

-Kevin Conway

(The Outer Limits)

WDM’s - Rating 7/10

“There is nothing wrong with your television. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are now controlling the transmission.” 

“We control the horizontal and the vertical. We can deluge you with a thousand channels or expand one single image to crystal clarity and beyond. We can shape your vision to anything our imagination can conceive. For the next hour we will control all that you see and hear. You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the deepest inner mind to the outer limits.”

-The Outer Limits Control Voice

 (Beginning Narration in Opening Sequence) [1 -]IMDb.com

Sources:

[1]

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112111/quotes/?item=qt2527354

29 Little Known Facts about the Mega Successful Star of Disney’s ‘The Mandalorian’, Pedro Pascal.

Written, Edited & Compiled by: Lee Fenton

1) Pedro Pascal is a Chilean-American actor who has featured in many starring roles.

2) In the last decade he has become a household name due to the hit TV show ‘The Mandalorian’ and his starring role on the Netflix drama ‘Narcos’. 

-3)His first name is actually José.

4)His astrological sign is Aries.

5)One of his biggest breakout roles was on the hit HBO series ‘Game of Thrones’. He played Oberyn Martell, a much beloved character of the series. 

This is what Collider.com had to say about his character:

“Pedro Pascal's portrayal of Oberyn Martell in Game of Thrones was a standout performance filled with charisma, intrigue, and drama. Oberyn Martell challenged traditional Westerosi beliefs, expressing his attraction to men and embodying a unique form of masculinity.”[1]

6)His mother was a child psychologist. Her name is Verónica Pascal Ureta.

7)He LOVES to read! Here’s a few of his favourite books:

Jane Eyre

Crime and Punishment

Watership Down

The Master and Margarita

One Hundred Years of Solitude

8)At a young age Pedro’s family was forced to flee Chile to the United States.

9)He acted in a ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’ episode, in 1999.

10)Pedro Pascal has won the MTV Movie & TV Award for Best Hero in 2023 for his role in ‘The Last of Us’.

11)Oscar Issac suggested that Pedro Pascal take the role as the eponymous ‘Mandalorian’ Din Djarin.

12)His role in Wonder Woman 1984 is loosely based on former US President Donald Trump.

13)Pedro Pascal’s height is 5ft 10in.

14)He has no children.

15)Pedro Pascal’s biggest pet-peeve is bad manners. 

16)He is 48 years old and his birthday is on April 2nd /1975.

17)Lux Pascal is Pedro Pascal’s sister.

18)His full name is José Pedro Balcemeda Pascal.

-19)Pedro Pascal loved watching films with his father, here’s a quote “I just went to your typical public schools, and my dad would take us to the movies every week, or he'd buy scalped tickets to San Antonio Spurs games.” [2] -IMDb.com

20)He grew-up in San Antonio, Texas and Orange County, California

21)In 2018 he starred alongside Denzel Washington in ‘The Equalizer 2’, which was a commercial success clearing 190m at the box office on an estimated budget of 62 - 70 million.

22)He has an impressive amount of theatre experience (acting & directing) as well, he’s a true thespian!

23)He received tutelage at the Orange County School of the Arts.

24)Pedro Pascal ‘cut his teeth’ on roles in such shows as NYPD Blue, Law and Order Criminal Intent, Touched by an Angel, Downtown, Undressed, and Good vs Evil.

25)The earliest films listed on his filmography are ‘Burning Bridges’ and ‘Window Shopping’ but he is credited as Pedro Balmaceda.

26)His recent role in a major television series has earned him praise from critics and audience members alike, ‘The Last of Us’ which premiered on Jan. 15th / 2023 on HBO is an adaptation of the best-selling video game franchise.

27)He played Matrie D’Paul De Santo in the 2011 film ‘The Adjustment Bureau’.

28)He prefers poker over solitaire. (Well who doesn’t?)

29)He was in one episode of ‘CSI: Crime Scene Investigation’. The name of the episode was Malice in Wonderland.

Sources:

[1]https://collider.com/pedro-pascal-game-of-thrones-oberyn-martell/#:~:text=Pedro%20Pascal's%20portrayal%20of%20Oberyn,a%20unique%20form%20of%20masculinity.

[2]https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0050959/

Truth Seekers (A Short TV Series Review)

Written & Edited By:  Lee Fenton

Truth Seekers:

A nice jaunt into the horror-comedy subgenre from Nick Frost (star and co-showrunner), his previous appearances alongside Simon Pegg have always been a hit with the public. Now he’s going it alone with a new(ish) series from Amazon Prime. I put off watching ‘Truth Seekers’ for some time - and now that I’ve finally given it a chance, I’m delighted to say it’s a highly unique tribute to televised ghost stories, urban tales, and the horror genre as a whole. 

Where it really excels is its expert editing and jump-scares. Nick Frost and Simon Pegg helped to create the show with the director Jim Field Smith - and together they’ve made a very funny and offbeat comedy series that lovingly homages horror classics. 

Most of the jokes hit and deliver that campy humour that Frost is famous for, and anyone who’s a previous fan will have to agree that he’s still very capable of delivering ‘the goods’, when it comes to eliciting laughter. The man seems to subsist wholly off of comedy and his demeanour is so good natured - it’s easy to laugh at his antics, and yet quite hard to be offended by them. 

This is what I consider the perfect comedy mixture - one part ludicrousness - and another part hapless idiot. 

To contrast Frost’s character ‘Gus’, we have Malcom McDowell playing his curmudgeonly father. I have rarely seen McDowell in a comedic role, however, in his later years he has tended to play hamfisted villains that do allow him to ‘chew the scenery’. Comedy involves a lot of theatricality, so it makes sense that McDowell would excel at both. 

His reactions to Nick Frost’s quips are super funny and the two of them going  back and forth; one of the highlights of the series. 

As a longtime fan - I would have to rank this as high in his performances.

 Malcolm McDowell really seems to have the knack for improvisation and ‘riffing’.

I think I’d watch this man do stand-up!

Frost and the rest of the cast deliver on the wacky premise of under equipped and un-prepared ‘Ghost Hunters’ coming into conflict with terrible and fearsome spirits, entities, and monsters. Their hilarious reactions, coupled with a true love of the horror genre - make this show something that almost anybody can and should enjoy.

So what are you waiting for? Go seek some truth.

Rating 8.5/10

(Cancelled after only one season, Truth Seekers is available to watch on Amazon Prime)

Truth Seekers 

Truth Seekers is a 2020 British supernatural comedy horror streaming television series created by Nick Frost, Simon Pegg, James Serafinowicz, and Nat Saunders. The series was directed by Jim Field Smith and stars Nick Frost and Simon Pegg, with Emma D'Arcy, Samson Kayo, Julian Barratt, Susan Wokoma, and Malcolm McDowell in supporting roles.

The first two episodes premiered at the Canneseries Festival, on 10 October 2020, followed by an Amazon Prime Video release on 30 October 2020.

On 11 February 2021, Frost announced via his Instagram page that the show had been cancelled.

[1] -WIKIPEDIA

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_Seekers