Monday, September 5, 2016

American Crime, season 1

Months ago, I could not stop raving about a show nobody seemed to be familiar with (because it wasn’t on cable), American Crime, specifically season 2. (American Crime is a show with a partially recurring, or “repertory”, cast, but playing different characters in a new storyline each season.) I tried to get everyone to watch it, and basically said it was the best thing I’d ever seen. As far as I know, no one has taken my advice so far. But now that both seasons are on Netflix, not only do YOU have a chance to watch the show, but I also was given a chance to catch season 1, which I had not seen. Obviously, the big question on my mind was, could season 1 be just as amazing and brilliant as season 2 was? Well, I’ll save you the suspense. The short answer is no.

It’s kind of the opposite of how things usually go. People blow their best load on their first effort, and then go into what’s commonly referred to as the “sophomore slump”. In my view, the paradigm that fits this situation is that season 1 was a practice run for the real test of greatness that was season 2.

The biggest problem I had with season 1 is that if you’re not a petty criminal, violent thug, drug dealer, addict, racist bigot, or juvenile delinquent, there were not very many characters to identify with, and though there were multiple interlaced stories throughout, it was hard to care about the outcomes because the people were so inaccessible. As a writing student (perpetually, it would seem), I’m told that I must love my characters because the audience must love them. Series creator John Ridley seemed to have gotten the memo for season 2, but not for season 1. There were exactly two characters in the whole series that I had consistent and genuine compassion for. One was a grieving father, played by Timothy Hutton, whose son had been murdered, and who is trying to reconnect with a family that refuses to forgive him for his shortcomings nearly 20 years earlier. The other is also a father, a Hispanic auto shop owner (Benito Martinez) whose son has fallen in with a bad crowd and who is desperate to save his family.

Everyone else is so consumed with one obsession or another--passions and prejudices, vices and vendettas--that it’s impossible to root for them. At one point, a young woman overdosed on drugs, and I was actually happy that she was dead because her character was so annoying. (To my disappointment, she actually survived the overdose.)

Not that the actors aren’t doing their jobs, and remarkably well. Regina King got an Emmy as a Muslim woman on a crusade to rescue her brother from both a murder rap and a really horrible girlfriend (see last paragraph). Felicity Huffman is in danger of being typecast in the same series because while her characters in each season are quite different, they are both cold and rather unsympathetic. One hopes she will get a warmer character in season 3. Hutton is wonderful and heartbreaking.

This show tends to run the gamut of nearly every social issue you can think of. It’s like writing down all of society’s ills on pieces of paper, putting them into a hat, and mixing them up. Then showrunner Ridley pulls out 10 pieces of paper from the hat, and blends them all into a volatile tapestry that is the story for a season. Season 1 deals with racism against blacks, Hispanics, and whites (yes, I said whites too). It deals with different religions (in this case, Islam and Christianity), and how people of different faiths may approach things differently, but also the same. It deals with drug addiction, immigration issues, gang violence, and even touches briefly on military impropriety. 

And yet, one of the things that makes this show successful is that it manages to highlight these issues without being preachy. The way they do this is to focus on the characters and their stories, which are very believable, even if you don’t get invested in the people because they’re assholes.

[Pseudo-spoiler alert:]

Part of my problem with not liking most of the characters had to do with my own Christian faith, as much as any kind of open-mindedness required of me as a creative, and storyteller. It was disturbing to realize that I rather liked the idea of some of these characters’ suffering. While lamenting how tragic it was that one character (Hutton’s) could not be forgiven no matter how hard he tried to make amends, I found myself not very forgiving of much of the behavior that I saw played out in front of me. “They will deserve what they get,” I found myself saying. But of course, my heart softened as each situation was brought to its resolution, and one character--a young fiancé of Hutton’s surviving son--expresses what I believe to be the heart of the story, a call for love and compassion. But it comes too late for some. And that just pisses me off. 

Sunday, August 21, 2016

Indignation

You could call Logan Lerman Young Reliable if you were so inclined. He is that rare former child actor who has grown up to have a pretty impressive career—a result of hard work, discipline, and right choices. Oh sure, he participates sometimes in your standard Hollywood tripe (the Percy Jackson series) and has fallen flat on his face a couple of times (The Three Musketeers, Noah), but for the most part, you can see Lerman’s name on a project and know that it will likely be something worth seeing. His newest star vehicle, Indignation, is right up there with Stuck in Love and The Perks of Being a Wallflower on my list of favorite movies from the last five years. And many observers would say his portrayal of Marcus Messner in this adaptation of Philip Roth’s novel is his best performance to date. They would probably be right.

Marcus is a slightly different character from the type Lerman usually plays. Oh, he’s smart, sensitive, and vulnerable like the others. But he’s also stubborn, argumentative, and a little bit vain. He’s a curly-haired Jewish boy with a Joisey accent and a sort of brash confidence that doesn’t exist in somebody like Charlie from Wallflower. He’s also an atheist, which makes him even more of a rebel in the 1950’s conservative college environment where this film is set.

The character’s atheism is a major part of this film’s subject matter. It’s an uncomfortable topic for me as a viewer. I am not an atheist, and I don’t always relate very well with atheists. My friendships with atheists are warm and sincere but can also get awkward, much the way that it’s awkward when a gay man brings his boyfriend home to his devout religious family for Christmas, or when a Trump supporter and Clintonite go on a blind date. There are times in this movie when I really do not like this character because of things that he says about his beliefs. They make me mad. But I have a feeling I’m playing right into the filmmakers’ hands.

(The title of this film is tricky in a way. You might think it refers to conservative attitudes that the main character has to face. He gets accused of stuff; he feels like an outcast. Largely, he thinks of himself as a victim. In reality, I think he's the one who feels the greatest sense of indignation towards what he perceives to be persecution...which, in one case, is not incorrect. But then the ball bounces back to me when I see how I respond emotionally to the character's rather passionate rejection of the God that means so much to me. This is a challenging film that does not pander.) 

The screenwriter and director, James Schamus, has a long and impressive resume that is perhaps most notable for being Ang Lee’s right hand man/producer. With writing credits like The Ice Storm and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, it’s not a surprise that he’s written such a powerful adaptation of Roth’s novel, which—admittedly—I have not read. Schamus had directed two shorts before this, but this was his feature directing debut, and if it gets him up on the Oscars stage, I’ll be happy.

Not to be Logan-centric because I am a long-time fan, there are many great performances in this film. One of the most interesting is playwright Tracy Letts (author of the very dark Bug and Killer Joe) as the Dean of the school where Marcus attends. The two characters duke it out in a war of words in a very atypically long scene that lasts over 15 minutes. (This is almost unheard of in cinema.) It’s in this scene where I get mad at Marcus, but Letts’ character is totally cool, even though his philosophy is more like my own. He seems to care about the welfare of his much agitated student, who is too self-absorbed to realize it.

Then there’s the girl that Marcus falls for, a troubled ex-psychiatric patient who is also a student at the school. She is played with disarming intensity by Sarah Gadon.

This is a movie about identity, and how we define ourselves as we mature, and how those parameters that we set for ourselves affect our choices and life outcomes. To say more would be getting into spoiler territory, and I want too much for people to see this to give spoilers. Suffice to say that you really end up caring very much for the people on the screen, in spite of their flaws (which, in Marcus’ case, is not his beliefs, but his stubbornness, which leads him to reckless choices). You want them to thrive and to be happy. And it’s really not too much of a spoiler to say, as you’re watching this film, you know better than to expect that. 

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Star Trek: Beyond.......(what?)


Note: There may be spoilers here, but I gotta be honest. It doesn’t really matter. 

Of the various controversies surrounding the latest Star Trek film, the earliest one I recall hearing about was that it was too action-packed, and not cerebral enough. And one of the people associated with it (I don’t remember who, maybe Chris Pine) said that modern audiences couldn’t handle a Trek that was more about ideas than explosions. Well, I have to say that this new film fell short for me for that very reason. I like stories about characters and relationships. You can do that in an action movie. (Don’t believe me? There’s plenty of proof, even in the majority of Star Trek movies to date, including the first two from the “Kelvin timeline.”)

It’s not that the new film is completely devoid of ideas. It’s got kind of a tepid message about globalism vs nationalism (which, in an era of space travel might be called something else, perhaps planetarianism vs universalism?), but this is a very old trope that the Roddenberry religion has peddled since before Bones ever uttered the lines, “He’s dead, Jim.” And while I appreciate many aspects of the Star Trek universe, I’ve never really bought into this concept that one day, all nations (or planets) will get along. In fact, I think it’s a dangerous philosophy. That’s right, I think Gene--the "Great Bird of the Universe"--was naïve and delusional in his politics, but it’s a fiction, and so I can go along with it.

Another great debate that seems patently absurd once you see the movie is whether they should have made Sulu gay in the Kelvin timeline. Listen, folks, let me break it down for you: There is one shot in the movie that lasts about a second in which Sulu hugs his husband. There is one shot of a photograph of his daughter sitting on his control panel in the bridge of the ship. The truth is, if you didn’t hear from the media that “Sulu is now gay!” you would not even notice. I’m serious. It would not even register. It is a total non-issue.

As usual, Pavel Chekov had the least to do among the crew of 7, a constant complaint of mine. And of all the lines they could have lifted from the original series, they picked one of his silliest, the one about Scotch being invented by a little old Russian lady.

One welcome addition was Sofia Boutella, as the scrappy alien, Jaylah. She was both tough and sympathetic, and I wouldn’t mind seeing more of her in future installments. Idris Elba, who has earned the unique honor of starring as Roland in the much-anticipated film adaptation of Stephen King’s The Dark Tower, is somewhat wasted as a rather bland villain, even more bland than Nero from the first Abrams Trek. Oh, in the end, they decided to impart some humanity on him (literally) and maybe a hint of regret, but it doesn’t have any real payoff.

Perhaps the biggest surprise is that Simon Pegg didn’t write a better script. With his background of witty adventures, including Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, I figured he would inject some new life into what was clearly going to be a slump, now that Abrams switched from Trek to Wars. But all he could manage to do was selfishly write in more screen time for his Scotty. (Not that I’m complaining about that; I like Scotty.)

If you love action above all else, you may like this movie. For me, there were so many long action sequences, my eyes started to glaze over and my mind wandered, and by the end, I just had to pee so bad I missed the lovely closing credits sequence which are always so good. They save a space station, but you never really get to know the station or the people on it, so why do you really care? These giant vessels fill the screen to the point where you’re not even sure what you’re looking at. The whole thing has kind of a dark cast to it. I’m not sure if it’s because of the 3-D component. (We don’t see live action films in 3-D, generally—a waste of money.) And the sound quality was poor, at least in our theatre. Oh sure, Scotty and Chekov may have thick accents, but you can usually understand them okay. Not here.

And why couldn’t they start the closing credits sequence with “in loving memory of Leonard Nimoy and Anton Yelchin?” I realize there doesn’t seem to be a precedent for that in Star Trek movies, but maybe there should be. But at the end of the day (which is what watching this movie kind of feels like, a whole day), people aren’t what matter anyway. It’s the franchise, now 50 years old, always reciting that silly speech at the end, but never really boldly going anywhere new at all. 

Saturday, July 2, 2016

On Anton Yelchin



Two weeks ago, one of my favorite actors died in a way that could have come straight from a horror sequel like Christine 2 or Final Destination 12, a freak accident that could well have been an auto malfunction or simple driver negligence. Either way, when I heard about it, my first thought was, At least it wasn’t drugs, as it so often is. And then I grieved, and then felt guilty for it because the depth of my feeling for this was greater than my sorrowful ruminations on the Orlando tragedy only a week before. And I thought how celebrity is a funny thing because when you admire somebody and his work, you can come to feel like you know him, even though you don’t. And certainly for a theatre and film guy like myself, you fantasize about working with your idols someday. It doesn’t help when you have a bit of crush for them. So like a friend who has to speak at the funeral, I find myself having to do something to celebrate this actor that I admired, and to talk a little bit about his work. I haven’t seen everything; he’s got 65 acting credits on IMDb, and he was only 27 years old. But I wanted to cover the stuff I have seen, the good, the bad, and the ugly.



Hearts in Atlantis (2001)


This adaptation of Stephen King’s novella, Low Men in Yellow Coats, adapted by William Goldman and directed by Scott Hicks, is a charming and affecting coming-of-age drama, less fantasy than King’s story, more cold war reflection, with the bonus of the always-wonderful Anthony Hopkins as the centerpiece, or one of the centerpieces anyway. The other would be Anton, in his first performance I had ever seen. And I really wasn’t crazy about this casting. I had a different kind of Bobby Garfield in my head, a little more mature, a little less awkward. Seeing the young Anton Yelchin in this role, I could understand why the other kids picks on the character!  And when he imitates a comic bit from Hopkins in the closing shot (in which he demonstrates to his mom what flatulence is), I found it cringe-worthy. So while I liked the film as a whole, I would not notice Anton again or become a fan until years later when I saw Charlie Bartlett.



House of D (2004)


I bought this DVD shortly after Robin Williams died (I grieved big time for him as well), and the fact that it had Anton in it was a bonus. As it turns out, I really don’t like Williams very much in this film (too much face mugging), but Anton’s work was a pretty big step forward from Hearts in Atlantis. Written and directed by David Duchovny, it’s another period coming-of-age story, this time set in New York, where Anton’s character goes to a somewhat oppressive religious school, is best friends with a mentally disabled janitor (Williams), seeks relationship advice from a mysterious female black inmate, and has to cope with the loss of his father and the encroaching madness of his mother. It’s a lot for a young boy to handle, but Anton manages to deftly portray the broad spectrum of his quirky childhood with a mix of humor and pathos.



Fierce People (2005)


Yet another period coming-of-age story where Anton has dysfunctional parents. This time, while his dad is studying tribes in South America, his addict mom moves into the estate of an extremely wealthy, older man, played by Donald Sutherland, where Anton’s character runs afoul of the old man’s privileged grandson (Chris Evans), while at the same time finding a girl to crush on (Kristin Stewart) and another father figure (or perhaps, more accurately, grandfather figure). The strange thing about this film is the tonal shift that takes place in the third act, from quirky comedy to dramatic suspense. You really do feel like you’re watching two different movies here.



Alpha Dog (2006)


Though I haven’t seen all of Anton’s films, I would be willing to bet that this one is the most tragic. Inspired by a true story, he plays a kid who is kidnapped by a gang of thugs to get revenge on his brother. Zack does not really realize the gravity of his situation; he’s so unhappy at home, and he’s actually eager to win the approval and acceptance of these gang-bangers. But his trust and appreciation is very sadly misplaced. This film, which features another favorite actor of mine, Emile Hirsch, as well as Justin Timberlake, and the best (unrecognizable) performance I’ve ever seen from Sharon Stone, is what I call a “kick in the gut” movie. This is what it does to you. And if you’re like me, you’ll be thankful for it.



Charlie Bartlett (2007)


This film has been compared to a number of high school comedies, from Rushmore to Farris Beuller’s Day Off, but the one it reminds me of the most is Pump Up the Volume, a film for which I’ve always had a great deal of affection. Yelchin plays a spoiled, wealthy trouble-maker who gets kicked out of every private prep school, only to end up finding his niche in public school, which seemed to be the last place he would belong. Seems pretty cliché so far, but then it branches off into its own territory, and Charlie Bartlett becomes the kid you actually wish you knew in school. So enamored was I with the charming, funny, yet sweet title character that I had to look up the actor who played him, and I was shocked that he was that kid I didn’t like so much in Hearts in Atlantis. Here was a young actor who seemed completely uninhibited, willing to do almost anything on camera and make a total fool of himself, and look good doing it. There is a little bit of screwball content in Charlie Bartlett, and it doesn’t quite get the subject of psychotropic drugs right, but what I love is the sweet earnestness of the character and how accepting he is of everyone (even a stern, sad sack, alcoholic principle, played by Robert Downey Jr.), showing that it’s possible for people to be good to one another, even in a vicious place like high school.



New York, I Love You (2008)


A fun collection of 10 short films by different directors with the common theme, which is expressed in the movie’s title: a love of the big apple. In Anton’s segment, directed by Brett Ratner, he plays a high school kid who was dumped on the day of his prom. But his boss at the pharmacy has a surprise for him, which will make this prom night one to remember. I dare not say anything more, except that it’s a charming and funny piece of an overall delightful film.



Middle of Nowhere (2008)


More teen angst and dysfunctional parents here. Anton plays another privileged kid who doesn’t appreciate what he’s got, so he rebels, and is sent off to live with…an uncle? (That part was somewhat unclear.) He starts working at a crappy urban water park, where he meets a girl he likes named Grace, who is extremely unhappy with her mom (Susan Sarandon, who always plays bad mothers) for blowing all the family money on a modeling career for her younger sister, which the sister doesn’t even want. Anton’s character, Dorian, agrees to let Grace help him sell pot to make money to pay for college—her ticket out of her unhappy life. At some point, he also gets the gumption to find his birth mother and ask why she gave him up. This is fairly melodramatic, Lifetime movie-type material, but if you are a Yelchin fan, you’ll enjoy it for that reason alone.



Star Trek films (2009-2016)


I’m combining all the Trek films in this section because when it comes to the character of Pavel Chekov, it’s all pretty much the same. In the original Star Trek series and films, Chekov always had the smallest of the 7 “lead” roles. And the same thing is true here. Did this make me sad? Did it make me mad? Well, yes, to be honest, I hoped for more. But it was delightful seeing Anton in his bundle-of-rabid-energy mode (ala Charlie Bartlett) and that beautiful native Russian accent. Some would say the accent was over the top, but in paying homage to Walter Koenig’s performance in the original, it was necessary. And I’m guessing it was a lot of fun for Anton, who was born in Russia, to ham that up a little.



Terminator Salvation (2009)


I avoided this one for a long time. In fact, I only saw it this week for the first (and probably last) time. Part of the problem was some of the publicity surrounding it. There was Christian Bale’s meltdown in which he screamed at the cinematographer on set. Then there was the bashing of Terminator 3 among the cast, including Bale and even (gasp) Anton. The earlier film wasn’t great by any means, but it had one of my all-time favorite actors, Nick Stahl, who did a noble job with less than stellar material. I just read that Bale blamed the failure of Salvation on its director, McG. Why can’t people just be nice and supportive of each other’s work? But it was difficult all these years never watching it because Anton played my favorite character in the series, the one occupied in the first film by the incomparable Michael Biehn, who is another actor that I love. What would Anton do with this character? I only just found out. The trouble with this installment of the franchise is that all the human drama is drowned out by endless action sequences. And while its predecessors had their share of such sequences, they managed to at least make you care about the outcome of what you were watching.



Like Crazy (2011)


Possibly the most critically acclaimed film of Anton’s career, this Sundance prize winner was the story of young love and forced separation, due to the kind of dumb mistakes that people make when they’re young. She (Anna, played by Felicity Jones) overstays her student Visa, and can’t come back. Jacob (Anton) has a great career here and doesn’t want to move to Britain, and they both wander in and out of each other’s lives, in and out of love, trying to make it work, hooking up with other people only to break their hearts to return to their first love. It’s a statement to the honesty of this film that the most sympathetic and heartbreaking character is neither of the leads, but the “other woman” played by Jennifer Lawrence.  Her pain of being rejected in palpable, and somehow more affecting than most similar scenes I’ve seen in movies. She is truly amazing. One interesting note about this film that I only recently found out is that much of the scene work was improvised. The filmmaker had a rough outline of the events that were to take place, but the actors had a huge level of freedom and responsibility to not only flesh out their characters but to come up with their own dialogue and actions.



You and I (2011)


A couple of lesbian teenagers in Russia meet online and bond over the music of a faux-lesbian band called T.a.t.U. and their dreams of fame, fortune, and modeling. Anton plays a sleazy rich guy who promises to hook one of them up with a famous fashion photographer, but when she refuses to sleep with him, he becomes less than supportive. One girl ends up in jail, and the other ends up drug addicted and on the street. But it all ends happily enough when the manager of T.a.t.U. discovers the girls’ YouTube video and saves them from prison, drugs, homelessness, and obscurity. The band T.a.t.U. really did exist, but I hear they were not actually lesbians. This movie plays like one of those tacky pop star promo films, with a bit of Lifetime movie cautionary tale thrown in. Not much Anton here; his picture on the cover is deceptive. He does, however, get to use his Russian Chekov accent again!



The Beaver (2011)


Jodie Foster directed this highly unusual film starring Mel Gibson as an extremely depressed man named Walter who suffers a mental break after failing to commit suicide. In that act, he happened to be holding a beaver hand puppet (which he had found in a dumpster earlier that night) in his right hand, and suddenly Walter’s fractured personality is channeled into The Beaver, a tough-talking life coach with an Australian accent who’s determined to help Walter get his life back together. His wife (Foster) and resentful son Porter (Anton) can only talk to the Beaver; Walter’s not available for comment. While Walter’s life actually does find stability, his family life falls apart ever further than it had before the breakdown. Porter has a troubled romance with classmate Norah, who hides tragic secrets from her past. Another great performance from Jennifer Lawrence here. I love this movie. It is absurd in the way that Walter uses the Beaver to cope with his broken psyche, and it’s also hilarious, and it’s also very poignant in the way it deals with the effects of mental illness, and the love that can hold a family together. Of all the movies Anton has been in, I think this one most closely resembles the type of thing that I would write myself.



Fright Night (2011)


This is his worst movie. Well, I know I haven’t seen them all, but I’m pretty sure. There was no reason for this remake of the 1985 film with Roddy McDowell as the old horror movie star and Chris Sarandon as the evil vampire. Anton filled William Ragsdale’s shoes okay as Charley Brewster, but Christopher Mintz-Plasse was no substitute for Stephen Geoffrey’s wild, wacky, but ultimately tragic Evil Ed character. Even the likes of Colin Farrell and David Tennant couldn’t save this cheap knock-off. You don’t care about any of the characters. Where in the original, they seemed like real (if eccentric) people, here they just serve the plot. The friendship between Charley and Ed is downplayed, as is the homoerotic subtext surrounding Ed’s character. Everything that made the original interesting and fun to watch was absent here.



Odd Thomas (2013)


A long-time fan of Dean Koontz, and a big fan of his Odd Thomas book series, I can’t tell you how excited I was that Anton was chosen to play the main character, a young fry cook who could see the dead and whose mission it was to help resolve their problems, which, in many cases, involved solving and preventing murders. For some reason, Koontz—who is in his 70s—has a knack for writing a really strong voice for young people, a voice filled with wit, intelligence, and a solid sense of morality. All of these things Odd uses to fulfill his duty, his purpose for being on the planet. Anton was perfect for this role, and the only disappointment was that it was not commercially successful.Well, and also the fact that Anton would not live to star in sequels, although it's doubtful that there would have been any in spite of seven successful books, some better than others. This film is enhanced significantly by the casting of Willem Dafoe as Chief Wyatt Porter. And like the book, this movie will leave you in tears by the end. Koontz is often a powerful writer, and Stephen Sommers' faithful adaptation checks all the boxes to make this movie work on the same level. It is one of the only adaptations of Koontz's work that has ever met his approval. 



Rudderless (2013)


Sam (Billy Crudup) loses his son to an act of school gun violence. The son was a musician, and his dad hears his son’s compositions for the first time, and decides to learn them and perform them live. He passes them off as his own, and attracts a young man who wants to join his band: Quentin, played by Anton. If Sam was somewhat of an absent father to his son, maybe he has another chance in Quentin, who seems to be lonely, shy, and somewhat awkward. A nice little indie film, perhaps a bit slow in pacing. One of several films that portray Anton as a musician of one kind or another, and indeed he did play guitar and piano, and wrote and performed in a band.



5 to 7 (2014)


Anton plays an aspiring writer who meets an attractive woman one day on her smoke break. She offers him an ongoing fling, but it must be between the hours of 5 to 7 each day. After that, you see, her husband comes home. Well, it all becomes emotionally complicated, as you can easily predict, and at least one person’s heart gets broken. I love to watch Anton in a romantic role, but this harkens back too much to the territory of Like Crazy.



Dying of the Light (2014)


Nick Cage plays a dying CIA agent, out for revenge against some mofo who tortured him years ago. Anton plays a fellow agent, in one of his only roles that I found a little hard to swallow. He’s a good guy, and loyal to a fault. Cage’s character is obsessive and deteriorating, and his mission is fraught with danger, but the young protégé will follow, even unto death. This is actually a more thoughtful film than it sounds. Cage has more humanity in it than you would think. Some of the violence is unnecessary and gratuitous, but the film has heart that you don’t expect.



Broken Horses (2015)


In an isolated desert town close to the Mexican border, two brothers share a special bond. One of them (Jacob, the adult version played by Anton) is a smart musical prodigy, destined to get out of this shit town. The other (Buddy, the adult version played by Chris Marquette, in a performance that actually outshines Yelchin) is mentally disabled and winds up being brainwashed by the head of the town mob (Vincent D’Onofrio), following the death of the boys’ father, and recruited to do his dirty bidding. Of course, Jacob is oblivious to all this while he’s gone. One day he comes back and learns the truth, throwing a wrench into the empire that D’Onofrio has built. Part family drama, part suspense, part action film, this stylish thriller is a cut above almost everything that you can find for free On Demand because it never got good distribution for some stupid reason. I repeat, Marquette steals the show here.



The Driftless Area (2015)


The title refers to an area of land in the Middle of Nowhere, a place where the glaciers stopped moving so many eons ago and left random patches of mountain in their eventual wake. (Something like that…although I took geology in school, I never understood it all that well.) A strange ghost story of sorts, Anton plays a young man who is actually kind of adrift himself, with nothing really going on in his life, until he falls in a well and is rescued by a beautiful young woman…who happened to have died in a fire a while back. Pierre falls for the woman rather quickly, and there are some nice romantic and sexy moments. An old man played by Frank Langella informs her that Pierre is the guy who is meant to bring retribution on the man who started the fire, and these events are set in motion with nothing able to stop it. This all sounds pretty heavy, but the characters themselves—especially the villains—are treated with a rather light touch and a slightly warped sense of humor. They are imbeciles, and you really don’t want them to meet a dark fate, because they barely seem to have any understanding of how life works, much less right and wrong. This movie is a little bit like Fierce People, in that it has wild shifts in mood, and, as an audience, it can be hard to know how you’re supposed to respond to it.



Green Room (2015)


I saw this filmed-in-Oregon horror flick with my friend James. It’s one of the only Yelchin films I’ve seen on the big screen (the others are the Star Treks, Like Crazy, and maybe Hearts in Atlantis). I remember there was a screening a few week prior at the Hollywood Theatre, and I didn’t know if Anton would be there. I kind of wanted to go if he was, but I stayed home. I don’t know if he was around. Apparently, it was shot around Astoria. Patrick Stewart played the head of some scary neo-Nazis who are bent on killing Yelchin’s punk band because they witnessed a murder. Most everyone in the movie dies. I wish that this had not been the final release before Anton’s death. Apart from his music ability, which was real, this role could have been played by a thousand other actors. It wasn’t a great note to end on, but there is comfort in the fact that his career and life really did not end on this. There are a number of films that are in post-production, a handful of more chances to see this unique talent and his ever eclectic project choices.

So I hope this blog entry got some readers, and that some of you will check out some of these films. Most of them are worth seeing. Anton Yelchin wasn’t just another hot young leading man type. In fact, one you could argue that he wasn’t all that conventionally handsome. And he often excelled at roles that were not the traditional hero or romantic lead. He loved telling an interesting story and creating complex characters. He was an actor and an artist, in the truest sense.





Sunday, June 5, 2016

Flashback: Forever Plaid



This entry is part two in my series of reflections about plays that I have directed, talking about choices I made and things I learned.

In the blistering heat of mid-summer one weekend in 2009, both my parents and I had a nasty stomach flu. Day and night, we lay around the living room—the coolest place in the old non-air-conditioned house—with all the fans on, trying to sleep through as much of it as we could. Man, it was awful. One afternoon, the phone rang. It was HART Theatre out in Hillsboro. I had responded to a notice from them looking for directors for their upcoming season of plays. I was given the second show of the season, Forever Plaid. That phone call turned an otherwise abysmal day of suffering into an abysmal day of suffering with a silver lining. I had been away from theatre since 2001, having gotten a “real” job in retail which, for six years, sucked out my energy and ambition for all creative endeavors. When I quit my job in ’08 and was subsequently unable to find another one (or get back the one I quit which is something I actually wanted), I was at loose ends, flailing in life, directionless, and hopeless. I had no idea that this play—which I really didn’t know much about—would end up being a whole new beginning for me. But that afternoon, I was certainly grateful for something to come into my life.

The first meeting I had at HART was with the two co-artistic directors, Carrie Boatwright and Paula Richmond, along with all the other directors for the season. We all had a notebook full of rules and procedures, and the whole thing—while surely expedient for the ADs—seemed a bit awkward to me. I learned we had to make actors sign in and out of rehearsal, and that no nepotism was allowed. (Gee whiz, what kinda place was this? I did get passed their nepotism rule though; my dad was a huge part of this play, being the voice of the introduction, as well as stage manager.) But it was all right. I was happy to have something to sink my teeth into.

Forever Plaid by Stuart Ross is a musical about a boy band…not the kind of boy band you have now, but the kind they had in the 60s. Not rock and roll, but something of a more barbershop variety. I was completely unfamiliar with this type of music, so I had some research to do. I checked out a bunch of albums from the library of vocal groups from the era. A lot of it was quite dull, but there was some really catchy stuff as well. To this day, I listen to a lot of it that I put on the preshow playlist,  including “Istanbul (Not Constantinople)” by the Four Lads, “Italian Street Song” by the Hi-Lo’s and “I Like it Like That” by the Crew Cuts.  I researched old Ed Sullivan Show clips on YouTube to get a sense of some of the entertainment that was popular, both for context, and because there was a whole scene dedicated to emulating an episode of that show.  By the time auditions came around, I still felt woefully unprepared in terms of my familiarity with the period, but I thought I could fake it well enough.

I had only directed one musical in the past…and that show had been an unmitigated disaster (in spite of having some good people involved)!  And regarding this, I didn’t fake it; I was very honest about what I would need to make this thing fly. And fortunately for me, I had an amazing vocal director (Alice Dalrymple) and choreographer (Kate Jahnson) already lined up to do the essential things that I knew I couldn’t do. Like most musicals, Plaid is mostly song and dance, and so the success of this show was mostly theirs, and of course the performers who did such an awesome job.

That last point about performers was a minor miracle though. We had very, very few auditions. All four of the characters were young men, and I think we had six auditioning for us. Three of them were former students of Alice’s, and that’s why they were there. They were cast, not for that reason, but because they were the best singers. And then we just happened to have a guy show up who could sing a bass part. In the end, it was so easy…so little to choose from, yet the perfect cast. There did happen to be one actor I wanted to cast because I had seen him rock an amazing performance in a production of Dog Sees God, and I knew that he was an up-and-coming star in the Portland theatre scene. (I was right too; everybody now knows who this person is.)  But I had to defer to Alice’s expertise in putting the right group of vocalists together, and I don’t regret it at all. (As for this other actor I wanted to cast, I’m quite sure we’ll work together some day.)

Preliminary rehearsals took place a few blocks from the theater in the Pythian building (which I affectionately called the Python). It’s sort of a lodge, like Elks or Masons or Odd Fellows. It’s got that sort of ancient, dark, dank, and haunted feeling about it. You climb up a narrow flight of stairs (which had a broken track along the side for one of those chairs you can ride up and down, like that mean lady from Gremlins had, which was sabotaged and sped her up super fast before tossing her ass out the window) and go through a few rooms that seem to have no purpose, and into a giant carpeted hall with weird shaped wooden tables and podiums all over the place. You feel like you should be wearing a robe and a funny hat, in preparation for some bizarre ritual.

Kate had told me that not every song would require a lot of choreography, so she was going to primarily focus on the ones that were big dance numbers, leaving me to come up with the small flourishes of movement that the rest of the songs required. This terrified me. I mean, terrified. And with good reason. The first song we worked on was “Three Coins in a Fountain”, and I’m thinking to myself, Okay, how can I visually express this? So I had them slowly raise their arms in unison with three fingers indicated to show that, indeed, they meant three coins and not four or five. It was a little embarrassing, but I was surprised by some of the things that I came up with, of course with some help from the cast and even my dad who came up with a smart movement during “Moments to Remember” where they all took pictures of their loved ones from wallets and passed them around.

I had initially intended to attend vocal and dance rehearsals, but after a few, I quickly realized that for the observer who wasn’t participating, it got quite tedious and repetitive. And I realized that I trusted Alice and Kate with what they were doing, so I didn’t need to supervise. I’d have a chance to scrutinize everything later anyway, when we put the pieces together. There may have been a few things that I was dissatisfied with in Kate’s choreography that I may have brought up to be tweaked a bit, but I honestly don’t remember. Mostly I was thrilled beyond measure at the talent and work that both Alice and Kate put in. As director, all I had to do was fill in the pieces in between the numbers. (With a few notable exceptions; for the Ed Sullivan piece, three out of the four actors frantically came on and off the stage several times as various famous acts that appeared on the show, like Señor Wences, Jose Jimenez, and Topo Gigio. This all had to be timed very carefully and blocked in such a way that nobody ran into each other…unless they were supposed to.)  And that was pretty simple to do. I was also able to work with the actors on character analysis a little more than I think you would usually see in a musical like this. I honestly think some directors would not have bothered, but it really added depth and texture to the piece. There was an element of tragedy to this story, and also a lovely portrait of friendship and camaraderie, which was very important to me to capture. I wanted the audience to feel like they knew these characters, apart from the song and dance. And I think they did, thanks to the thoughtful and emotionally open performances of Frank Strauhal, Joe Aicher, Erick Valle, and Leland Redburn.

I don’t remember if Alice was always going to be the accompanist on the show, or if that just happened because we couldn’t find another one. It worked out great though because the relationship was already there between her and the actors, and the piano player is a character in the show, so the familiarity really helped. There is a very amusing moment in the script where Frank introduces the piano player, and he would give her different names on different nights. A couple of the names never made it beyond rehearsal because they caused hysterical laughter which made it hard for the actors to go on with the scene. I regret that audiences never got to hear Alice introduced as Nelly Belly or Blanket Jackson, but it’s probably for the best.

For a long time we were panicking over who was going to be our bass player, another musician who was onstage the whole time. I did know a guy from my former job who played bass, but really didn’t imagine he’d be interested. But I just walked into the store one day and asked him, and he surpassingly said okay. That’s how Chris Ronek and I started what would end up being a fairly frequent creative collaboration over the years; I’ve relied on him not only for his playing, but also composing in other works I’ve done that required original music.  

Forever Plaid is a prop-heavy show, and my dad and I worked with Paula to track down the many, many things the show required: various instruments (maracas, claves, melodica, accordion, hi-hat), puppets, stuffed animals, bamboo sticks, candles, an old school Milk of Magnesia bottle (supplied by my friend Holly Heft), and much more. Many of the items Paula sent out for from another company who had produced the show in the past; most of these props were rather terrible, like the Perry Como cardigan and the fake Plaid albums. We used most of it, but we made our own albums with the help of my friend Michael Stringfield, who also did all the promo shooting for the play. (It was a very good day with the gang, piled up in our van going to various locations like Mt Tabor Park and the Grotto. The guys had their beautiful teal plaid jackets on—which we ordered from another company—and we walked into a Plaid Pantry waiting for someone to comment, but they never did.) The album covers Michael did ranged from classy to campy and hilarious. It was nice getting a comment from Carrie and Paula that we had, in those covers, really captured the essence of this play and its lovable characters.

Another outside talent we had to recruit was Rose Barclay, who showed Leland the art of fire-eating, which was a part of the Sullivan sequence. And on top of that, she gave the guys incredibly authentic period haircuts, which took several hours (glad I also didn’t feel the need to supervise that).

Once rehearsals shifted from the Python to the actual theatre, it was exhilarating to own and occupy that space. I came to love the HART theatre space. I loved the stage, the auditorium, the prop room, the little storage cubby in the lobby, the lobby itself, the kitchen. I loved being there. I felt so alive and at home. In a way, I loved it too much because I wanted to be actively involved in things like lobby decoration, and Carrie and Paula discouraged that. “Just focus on what’s on the stage”, they said, but that’s not the kind of director and creator I am. I ended up going behind their backs and sticking Michael’s art on the lobby walls, and while I got a lecture, they didn’t take it down. The people coming in to see the show were quite fascinated by it.  



The set was fun to conceptualize and to build. I’ve always had a fetish for royal blue and silver, so that was the color palette we used for the backdrops. Four 4x8 flats to make two entrances, in addition to a raised platform with two 4x8 flats as the backdrop, and a beautiful fabric rendering of the title, created by Paula. Behind the platform and off the exits to the sides were the many, many props that were used. There was a lot of coming and going. There was a smoke machine and two bubble machines, one on each side. (Unfortunately, one of the bubble machines—provided by Chris—was quite impressive, putting out a lot of stuff, but we couldn’t find another one like it, and ended up getting a really wimpy one from Party City, and so what was coming from the left side of the stage didn’t match at all what was coming from the right.) There was supposed to be a mirror ball, but our technical director couldn’t get it to work right, so we had to do without.

Prop work and set work became a family project. Dad and I picked up four wooden stools and painted them black; they were an integral part of the show, used mostly during slow numbers. Dad also put together the long-handled plungers that were used in the crowd favorite, “Crazy About You Baby”. My brother Mark was recruited to build the storage area behind the backdrop, so that everything would have a neat place to go. Actually, he also helped build the backdrop. My mother worked on props, like the plaid package that opens for a little Mexican doll to pop out. All in all, I loved the way both family and friends were drawn into this, and I have since longed for that kind of involvement from my creative friends since then, but it’s been mostly elusive.

The unique sense of joy I experienced when doing this show, which has been mostly unsurpassed in my other shows before or since, got the better of me, in that I felt the need to document everything. I decided to make a documentary video about the process, taping bits of vocal warm-ups, interviews with cast and crew, and backstage antics. I hung out backstage a lot, because I just loved the people, and wanted to be in the thick of it. But not everyone was happy with the video or my presence backstage. At least one person was quite uncomfortable with it, and I did not know this until I had already offended the person, and by then it was too late to undo. (Attempts by me to work with this actor again have been unsuccessful.) It was a hard lesson. When you’re a director, you have to have a sense of detachment. You’re not one of the cast. You’re not their “friend”; you’re the director, and it means there are boundaries.

On a happier note, someone got it in their head that we should do a little something extra for the closing matinee audience. We settled upon a performance of “The Lion Sleeps Tonight”. We went to Frank’s place—then in Beaverton—and they rehearsed the song several times and ran lines. That was a lot of fun, and I did tape most of it. When the show was over on that Sunday, they came out, out of character, and performed the song, which the audience seemed to really think was a nice bonus. It added some “sweet” to the always-bittersweet nature of closing.

In the years following, I tried several times to get Plaid Tidings, the holiday sequel of sorts, produced, but was unsuccessful. I really wanted to bring all the same people back, because that was the magic that made our production so good. But eventually it became clear that they were not all interested in doing it again, so I lost interest. Then recently, I got the opportunity to do it at HART (of all places), and even though I knew I couldn’t get all the same people, I was going to have a go at it anyway. But like before, there were very few people who came to audition, this time too few. Things fell through the cracks, and truthfully, I’m okay with it. Forever Plaid was an amazing experience, and I’m not at all sure that that kind of lightning was meant to strike twice.


Sunday, April 17, 2016

Flashback: Minority Status Quo [CCC, 1995]



Today, I begin a new series in which I will discuss shows that I have produced, directed, or written in the past. The purpose is not to revel in nostalgia, but rather talk about the lessons leaned with each production and how those things inform what I do now. These installments will be occasionally tossed in between the regular review segments at irregular intervals. Hopefully, some of you will enjoy going down memory lane with me.

The first play I ever wrote started as bits and pieces of a screenplay I was working on in high school in 1992, which is the year I graduated. That movie script was going to be called The Pioneers (after the name of the OCHS sports team), and it was going to be a topical teenage drama about a lot of different things, from bullying to abortion to being gay and in the closet. Remember, in 1992, some of these things were only just beginning to have a public forum, and there was a lot of politics surrounding such topics, just as there is today, except the details of the struggle differ slightly from back then.

By the time I had taken acting and theatre appreciation classes in college, I had developed a real affection for live theatre. I wanted to write a show that I could produce as a student project as Clackamas Community College where I was getting my transfer degree. I decided to revisit the abandoned Pioneers screenplay and see if I could mine it for some dramatic gold. I'd have to choose just one of the several story lines to focus on. I settled on the story of the closeted gay boy (Martin), and I found a way to work in two of the screenplay's other characters as foils for his self-examination: Zeke Marvel, the outspoken lead singer for a garage band, and Wendy, the leader of the high school Christian club. I asked myself, "What would happen if these three people were locked in a room together and forced to talk for a couple of hours?"

Of course, my problem--which would never actually be resolved--was that there was no good way to force these characters to be together outside of their own will. One early critique of the script went something like: "I cannot make myself believe that these three people would willingly stay in the same room together after hurling insults at each other, having nothing in common, when it would be so easy to just leave." But I did my best to overcome that challenge by setting up a situation where everyone had a reason to want to talk to each other. Martin just needs someone to confide in, and he figures Zeke is the school freak who's got no room to judge anybody. So Martin invites Zeke over. Zeke comes over because he likes to exploit people's dramas for song-writing material. And Wendy comes over, uninvited, because she thinks she can bring the recently-outed Martin to Jesus and ultimately repentance from a sinful lifestyle. So there they are. And they argue. And they fight. And the reconcile. And they have a million reasons for leaving, and a million and one reasons for staying. They hash it out. The text reads a little bit like a political debate between a gay rights activist and a preacher with a little heckling thrown in. It was didactic. But it was such a balanced discussion of the issues, I must say I was pretty pleased with myself by the finished product, which I called Minority Status Quo.



I got the opportunity to direct it as a student project, thanks to newly installed drama chair, David Smith-English, in spring of 1995, which was the last term before I got my Associates Degree. It was an intense whirlwind of a time because I had a LOT going on that term. That was probably one of the busiest times ever for me. I got a mostly great cast, featuring Craig McCarty as Zeke (I had worked with Craig in some projects in acting class the previous year, and he had become a rather big cultural influence in my life, and I think I ended up modeling the character of Zeke partly from the way I saw Craig in my mind) and Jennifer Johnson as Wendy. The central character of Martin was played by Jeffrey Woods, and here's the first lesson I want to talk about from this play. And this is nothing against Woods. He has gone on to become an amazing lighting and set designer, but has mostly left acting behind. He wasn't terrible, but I can see why his strengths were more in technical theatre. I cast him because I simply liked him and wanted to work with him, but his performance as Martin was very low-key and lacked the urgency of the inner turmoil of the character. And I was a new director too, so I didn't know how to draw out a stronger performance. In hindsight, it would have been better for me to look harder for a better match for that character.

Shifting now to some comments on the set, which I think I'm more proud of than anything. The mainstage production at the time was Betty the Yeti. The set for Betty the Yeti was several large mounds of dirt scattered across the small stage. Now, when you're doing a student production, you can usually move some furniture and things from the mainstage to accommodate your needs. You still have to live with the immovable parts of the set (the walls, etc), but it's something you can adjust to pretty easily. Not the case here. We could not move the giant mounds of dirt! So the question became, how do we hide them? Well, fortunately, there was a large area, down center, that had no dirt. I guess it was the primary playing area of Betty. So what we did was took a couple of 2-foot high knee-walls and created a boundary in front of where the dirt began. They were at a 90 degree angle from each other to represent two walls of our set. But because they were only two feet high, we had to do something to suggest the rest of the wall. Of course, this is a high school boy's room, and it's going to want to have posters of favorite bands and movies, etc. But without walls, how do you do it? And I don't remember if it was me or my brilliant lighting/set designer Chris Steffen who came up with this, but we got long narrow strips of 1x4, but the same length as the knee-walls. We attached those to the ceiling and then attached posters through varying lengths of wire to hang down from the boards and create a brilliant wall effect. And because there were two "walls" at a 90 degree angle, it looked very realistic. It didn't matter that there was no tangible wall in between the posters. The posters themselves did the job. (And I want to give a shout out to Chris Steffen, who has gone on to work in all kind of high profile film and TV stuff as a techie.)


I should backtrack a little bit here to talk more about the development process. When you're doing a new work--and especially if the writer and director are the same person--there is a lot of room for flexibility and collaboration and feedback. This process was sometimes challenging (I was thin-skinned and, you know, your works are your babies), but also very productive and rewarding. There were some things that got changed in the process. One my great mentors, the late Barbara Bragg, read an early version of the script, and her response was, "Where's the drama?" In other words, I had plenty of thoughtful and topical content in my dialogue, but none of it was very high stakes. I needed to learn ways to heighten the tension, and also to make it less static. One thing I did was add moments of physical conflict, times when the characters would get so heated that a beverage got tossed in someone's face, a brownie got shoved down someone else's throat, and a role-playing game got out hand and turned into a brawl. One could argue that I over-compensated here, and had more physical stuff than I needed to, but it served the purpose of punctuating the intensity of the conversation.

Another thing I explored was creative movement. I added sort of an expressionist interpretive dance piece where the characters transformed themselves into a lion, a lamb, and a snake. This game helped to bring out the characters' inner prejudices. This was very influential for me, going forward. As a writer, I would continue to explore that kind of experimental aspect, plunked right down in the middle of the ordinary. I also added a celebratory slam dance towards the end of the play when the characters had more or less become simpatico. In the end, these additions may have made the play less realistic, but a lot more interesting to watch.

I learned the value of getting audience feedback. Barbara did something unusual for me with this one. She always made her theatre appreciation class attend and write up the student one acts. She collected a whole bunch of the reviews that students had written and gave them to me to read. It was such a special and rewarding experience because we had an audience of a wide range of different beliefs and philosophies. Some people thought I leaned on the Christian side, others thought I was totally on the gay side, never realizing that both perspectives were from my own life experience. But the really awesome thing is, no matter what people's religious and political leanings were, they loved the play. They thought it was honest and sincere and moving. They did not have to agree with every point of view expressed in order to get something from it.

I've done many productions since that time, but Minority Status Quo will always have a special place in my heart.


Friday, April 15, 2016

Spring television

Don't worry, I'm not going to write an in-depth analysis of every show I watch, but maybe just a brief mention of what I'm watching, and why. And highlight some special ones. A few entries ago, in talking about American Crime, I lamented the fact that we've mostly written off the major networks in favor of the often more challenging, provocative offerings of cable. Then I suggested those generalizations aren't always true. Let's see if that still holds up.

The Family


Just about when American Crime was ending on ABC, The Family was beginning. It is an ensemble drama about an affluent family in Maine whose mom (played by Joan Allen, in a shiver-inducing performance of amazing iceberg frigidity, even in her softest moments) is running for Mayor. Soon her young son Adam gets kidnapped and things are thrown into chaos...but she still wins the mayoral election. Why let a kidnapping stop her? And indeed, the whole family has this same ambitious attitude. Why let the lack of a body stop them from assuming murder and framing the known-pedophile neighbor (played by a surprisingly cast executive producer Andrew McCarthy)? Why continue to look for answers when you can bury your dark secrets in booze, adultery, and repressed self-hating lesbian obsession? 

Okay, I admit this show is a little tawdry. Even the network describes it as "your favorite guilty pleasure." But things take a slight tonal shift when Adam shows up again ten years later. Liam James is nearly unrecognizable from his role in that nostalgic comedy The Way Way Back from a couple years ago. He is also, as it turns out, unrecognizable as the family's lost Adam. Well, who can blame him? He's been stuck in a child molester's forested secret underground dungeon for the last ten years. He's all grown up now, and boy is he dirty! Now his mom is trying to run for Governor, but will this amazing turn of fate cause her to slow down her campaign? Of course not. 

Lots of soap-worthy drama ensues, and many unlikely plot twists. This is not American Crime, folks. But it is fun, in spite of the sideshow dysfunction. Alison Pill delivers what might be the show's strongest performance as a deeply troubled, manipulative, but ultimately dutiful daughter whose primary purpose in life seems to be to "fix things" at whatever cost. Liam James also brings a level of humanity to a family that is otherwise strongly lacking in people to root for. In spite of the sensationalist trappings, The Family is strongest when it focuses on the boy's victim-hood and hopeful recovery. 

As I write this, the show is mid-season. There are surprises that I haven't given away here, and more that I have yet to see. I'll revisit it when it's over. For now, I suggest catching up with it, because it is at least entertaining. 

The Ranch


I never really liked Ashton Kutcher. (Oh sure, he's attractive, and he even is okay in his acting ability, but something about early works like That 70's Show and Dude, Where's My Car? left an indelible impression, and not a positive one.) So why I would set about to watch a ten-episode comedy series on Netflix with him as its main star, I'm not exactly sure. It's probably because the lure of Sam Elliott attracted my parents, and I'm always looking for stuff to watch with them. 

The Ranch is a show about a washed-out football player named Colt (Kutcher) who returns home to live with his crusty, cranky dad, Beau (Elliott) and his uber-heathen brother Rooster (Danny Masterson), where he is subjected to hard ranch work, old flames, familial jealousy, and his own personal demons. By the way, it's a hilarious comedy, complete with distracting laugh track. Two other actors I should mention: Debra Winger as the mom, and Bret Harrison (a Tualatin native who I directed in a play 16 years ago and never tire of reminding people). 

There's really not a whole lot to say about The Ranch, other than the fact that beneath all the insults and depraved humor, there is a tender heart of a family that, in spite of its dysfunction, loves one another...which might be more than you can say for the family of the The Family (above). I suppose if there's one thing I don't really like, it's the Rooster character who is a little too crass and self-absorbed for my taste. I get it--that's what makes him funny. But it's not really my thing. 

Comments on other shows


Blindspot started terrible, but it's gotten better in 2016. The stories, more in depth character development, and the addition of Francois Arnaud to the cast, all contribute to the show's improvement. Major Crimes had a terrible 5-week arc that was tacked on as a season closer; boring and pedantic, I say skip it. Bates Motel had a rocky beginning to its fourth season, but it's gotten better. Norman is a little more crazy, and Norma is a little less so...at least for now. You can't help but root for her marriage to the sheriff. And the romantic union of Emma and Dylan is sweet beyond words, and Max Thieriot retains his status, in my humble estimation, as the most beautiful man on earth (that I'm aware of anyway). Limitless remains one of my favorite shows, also a network show, so less popular. It is funny and innovative, as well as being a nice procedural. I really hope it gets renewed. Bosch Season Two on Amazon Prime is not as engaging nor as accessible as Season One, but actor Titus Welliver makes it well worth the effort. The Real O'Neals is a funny comedy about growing gay in a Catholic household, and it's got the always-wonderful Martha Plimpton and a strong young lead in Noah Galvin. I suppose it may be inevitable to have sacrilegious content when you put Catholicism and homosexuality head to head in a comedy, but I could do without "Slacker Hippy Jesus" popping up in the young protagonist's imagination, an image of Christ that kind of offends my own sensibilities. But no, I'm not lacking in a sense of humor, and that's why I still watch it. I watched the first episode of Game of Silence, which turned out to be a retread of the simple-minded and homophobic film Sleepers, so I won't be watching any more of that.