"THE GREAT SPEEDUP"

Check out this article in Mother Jones. It summarizes pretty well some things I and others have been saying and writing about for the past several years.

EASY A

I'd heard good things about this flick when it came out last year, but didn't get a chance to see it until tonight on cable. The good things are true.

It's a high school situation comedy that hits a lot of the familiar tropes (as they say nowadays) and yet is original enough and well acted and scripted enough to satisfy. At least this viewer.

It stars Emma Stone, who proved how great her acting chops are in smaller roles in comedies like THE HOUSE BUNNY, THE ROCKER and SUPERBAD.

This time she gets to play the lead in a role not too far from Lindsay Lohan's in MEAN GIRLS (the standard even EASY A  cannot match for high school comedies with female leads). She has always reminded me a little of Lohan too. What they used to call when I was a kid, "the poor man's version"—as in B movie stars meant to evoke A move stars, like Lisbeth Scott was "the poor man's Lauren Bacall."

It's partly a treat to watch because there's such a great cast, with Amanda Bynes—who proved herself the carol Burnett of kids' comedy and one of the originators of that trend on cable TV back when my thirteen-year-old was little and watched her show and later did her own versions of high school and college comedies—as one of the comic foils among the students and Thomas Haden Church, Lisa Kudrow and Malcolm McDowell as the foils among the high school staff.

The real treat is the always amazing (for my taste anyway) Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci as Stone's character's parents. In fact the few scenes they have with her are worth watching the movie for. Had me definitely laughing out loud.

Like a lot of high school comedies in recent years (10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU, CLUELESS et. al.) it riffs on a classic (in this case THE SCARLET LETTER), more like turns it on its head to make a similar point. But there are enough complications to keep the narrative moving briskly and make room for the comic bits, especially with the parents.

The writing isn't up to the standard set by Tina Fey in MEAN GIRLS, but it's good enough for light entertainment. I was thoroughly entertained.

CENK UYGUR [AND A BRIEF RANT AGAINST GOOGLE'S NEW SYSTEM]

My new favorite TV personality. My friend Terence Winch told me about Cenk Uygur years ago and his internet show "The Young Turks." And my friend RJ Eskow has appeared many times on "The Young Turks" and I've seen a few of those appearances when Eskow posted them on his blog.

But since Uygur became a regular every weeknight on MSNBC, he's been kicking major butt. He's incredibly smart and can summarize political situations really well and succinctly, and he's so honest it's refreshing as anything I've seen on TV.

Rachel Maddow does a great job, and Olberman has and does again at times, and a lot of other "news" personalities on MSNBC expose a lot of truths we don't get anywhere else, except sometimes on Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show"—but there it's in the service of comedy and exposing the hypocrisy and foolishness of so many politicians and TV personalities, etc.

Uygur just seems to be after the truth that isn't being addressed and getting to it the quickest and clearest way possible. He credits guests who have different perspectives when they make a good point and he bats away their bs when it's apparent.

He's a Turkish-American too, so he has some insights into the Middle East that most of the talking heads on TV don't, and he comes across as a no jive no pretension Jersey boy. Check him out on MSNBC or on the net if you haven't already.

[PS: I'd offer a clip here from the show I caught tonight but it's not available, and trying to get a recent one was too difficult for this technodyslexic. I don't know about anybody else, but Google has been a major pain for me since they changed the way they do their listings. In case you haven't heard or don't know, they now second guess what they think you'd want to see on any list of the topic you google, and everyone gets a different list now, based on what they think you dig, I guess from your history. But I looked up "photos of 1940s female Hollywood movie stars" recently and in the first ten there was Jennifer Aniston and she kept popping up again and again and she's someone I have never googled nor would I for any reason I can think of and she has nothing to do with 1940s Hollywood, but then neither did over half the images that popped up, and probably a third of them were men as well, including one of those guys from the TWILIGHT movies I haven't seen and have no interest in but know about because of the media's obsession with the "celebrities" of the moment. Google didn't do any better on MSNBC and Uygur either, but you can find "The Young Turks" on Youtube and some old MSNBC appearances. Maybe it's just me, but the internet has become a more insidious and a lot less user friendly, more like corporate friendly.]

JANE GREER & CYD CHARRISE

Busy couple of days, but I managed to catch some films on TCM as my reward. One is an old favorite, which Alec Baldwin and Robert Osborne, the hosts of TCM's "Essentials" cited as the best film noir: OUT OF THE PAST.

I also watched THE BAND WAGON, which I thought I'd seen before but except for a couple of the dance numbers between Cyd Charrise and Fred Astaire, I felt like I had never.

What struck me about both these films was the impact their female leads had on me as a kid, whether I was seeing them in first run movies or in repeats on TV: Jane Greer and Cyd Charrise.

These dark haired beauties (at least Greer seemed dark haired in black and white) epitomized a kind of feminine seductiveness coupled with a powerful sense of independence—they never seemed like they weren't ultimately in charge of their own fates—that I think I spent the rest of my life looking for.

It got me thinking about the influence of movies on my generation, and those before mine, when it was our main form of entertainment outside of the radio and eventually TV, but initially only the movies (and in some ways still) could not just charm and delight and engage and even enlighten me, but mold my ideals, particularly when it came to women.

I fell in love with both these women in these movies or scenes from them and many others they were in, and seeing them in these films just had me falling for them all over again, (even as "bad" as Greer's character is in OUT OF THE PAST where she plays a gangster's moll—Charrise plays one only in one dance number in BAND WAGON).

If I ever get around to making a list again, maybe it'll be of the women I've fallen in love with in the movies.

CLARENCE CLEMONS & PETER FALK R.I.P. (A LITTLE LATE)

I never met either of these men, though I was invited backstage at a Bruce Springsteen concert in the 1980s when I was a regular on a short-lived TV show (BERENGER'S) and met Springsteen, who was just as you'd imagine, no "star" attitude, in fact no attitude. He seemed sincere, decent, and a really nice guy.

As for Clemons I love the fact of his being such an important part of Springsteen's band, and what their interracial blend did for the image of "rock'n'roll"—as we used to call it. But the truth is, as much as I admire Springsteen as a songwriter and performer and love some of his songs, I'm not crazy about his sound all the time.

His solo acoustic stuff is mostly great for my taste. But as much as I get where that carnival kind of overdone quality comes from (the boardwalk in Asbury Park when Springsteen and I were kids, me an older one) and appreciate the supposed R&B element Clemons brought to the band (Clemons himself said he preferred "rock'n'roll" to R&B or jazz) and can dig some of their tunes when I hear them, their music never got to me the way say Van Morrison's did.

But despite all the caveats, "the big man" passed too soon and will be missed even by those of us Jersey boys who weren't the avid fans so many here are. He was an institution, almost as much as his "boss" is, and their magic will no linger exist in live shows which I know is heartbreaking for their fans and marks the end of an era for all of us, fans or not.

As for Falk, I appreciated his work in John Cassavette's movies and I liked his role on Columbo the few times I watched him on it. But for my taste his most memorable roles were two cameos basically in two favorite films of mine, THE PRINCESS BRIDE and WINGS OF DESIRE. He was like the icing on the cake in both those flicks, in the former as the framing device, reading to his grandson before bed pretty much as the Columbo character that was his default persona, and as himself, but his artist side, literally, in the latter.

He had a good, successful, full life it would seem, and though he will be missed, how wonderful that he did and we got to share some of it.

EVERYBODY'S MAD AT OBAMA

Well, almost everybody, it seems.

His Afghanistan speech disappointed the generals who want to keep the same level of troops for at least two more years, or increase the number, and those to the left (and some to the right) who want to see an instant pullout of all troops there. Instead Obama called for a gradual pullout but also an end to the kinds of wars we've been fighting there and in Iraq and a future of limited engagements with limited troops focused on actions like the one that killed Bin Laden.

He disappointed me and many on the left with his appointments of Wall Street Republicans to hold the power positions on his economic team, and by not endorsing gay marriage and by not pushing for a "medicare for all" healthcare bill, etc.

He obviously disappoints the rightwing Republicans by wanting to limit some of the power corporations have accrued under the rightwing dominated and rightwing politically activist Supreme Court or for wanting to make corporations pay their fair share in taxes and for wanting to end the tax breaks for the wealthiest, while obviously disappointing leftwing Democrats and others by allowing the tax cuts for the wealthy to go on for a couple of more years and for not limiting the power of corporations enough, etc.

So we're all pretty much in agreement, or most of us, that Obama has not done what a lot of us would like him to do, though what that is depends upon our political perspective and ideology and allegiance and beliefs etc.

Meanwhile, he got the biggest healthcare bill that covers almost everyone and gets rid of the "pre-existing conditions" fiasco since LBJ and did draw down troops in Iraq (cut the level there in half with all "combat troops"—i.e. actively engaged in combat—withdrawn) and is about to in Afghanistan (and I know he's only starting with the ones he added to that war but those were less than the generals wanted) and his financial team did prevent another Great Depression.

Speaking of which everyone's complaining about "no job creation" though that's actually a misnomer because jobs have been created and continue to be every month (unlike under Bush/Cheney when millions were being lost every month) just not enough, thanks to the almost total destruction of this country's economy by a Republican administration and Congress, etc.

And I think everyone will agree on the seemingly clueless attempt at bipartisanship called "the Golf Summit" where he and John Boner looked like fat cats on the golf course, even those who were yearning for the good old days when Democratic and Republican leaders got along personally and were able to do what seemed best for the country without the horrible gridlocking partisanship of the past decade or so, etc. but still they don't like it when Obama does just that, or tries to.

But those golf course photos that looked so ridiculous were just shots of Obama doing what he has always done best, as a kid growing up as odd man out in Indonesia and Hawaii or as a student at Harvard or even in the U.S. Senate etc.—adapting to his surroundings and trying to find common ground and the best possible—if often compromising—position.

I admit he seems often to be disengaged from the emotional aspects of the problems dominating the public discourse right now, even sometimes unconcerned. But his actions speak louder than the words he may not be saying or feeling. And for my taste, his actions have mostly been leading the country out from the debacle that was the Bush/Cheney era and into something more in line with the goals I voted for him to try and achieve.

Unlike works of art I love, no politicians, even those I most admire, have ever seemed perfect, or even close. But Obama, even with all his failings, has still proven himself to be better than any alternative I see out there right now.

THE TREE OF LIFE

I'd heard this new film by Terrence Malick was long—too long for some—and confusingly abstract too much of the time. And I can see how some would feel that way. But...

...as frustratingly pretentious and precious (those film student montages and lingering tracking shots etc.) a lot of what Malick does in his films can be—and he does in THE TREE OF LIFE more than ever—in the end, as is often the case with his flicks, though they evoke certain genres or classic film story lines (e.g. THE THIN RED LINE and war movies), they always push the boundaries of those familiar narratives into something never seen before.

THE TREE OF LIFE is a "family drama" about a boy's boyhood traumas and how they continue to haunt him in adulthood. In some ways it's as familiar as THIS BOY'S LIFE et. al. But it's also the story of creation—told in visual sequences that are as powerful and beautiful as anything I've ever seen in a movie—of humankind's struggle with the randomness and cruelty of "fate" amid flashes of hope and glory, beauty and connectedness... I'm gonna end up getting all abstract myself if I don't watch out.

Though there's plenty to criticize—as for me there is in all of Malick's movies, there is also plenty to priase, as in all Malick's movies. Brad Pitt's performance is one of his best yet, and I've always felt he's an underappreciated movie actor (perhaps because he's an overappreciated movie star).

I had trouble buying Sean Penn in a suit in a corporate setting, but his face has become so iconic with all its lived-in ruggedness (the deep lines almost as striking as Beckett's now) its a jarring kind of pleasure just to see it on the big screen (and I didn't always feel this way, finding, for instance, the lingering close ups in films like STATE OF GRACE an unwarranted overindulgence, but age has blessed his quirky features with a Mount Rushmore kind of solidity) (I know, I'm getting carried away to make a point).

But that may be as much attributable to Malick's amazing eye, always the foremost quality in his films, because every actor in it seems iconic, at least on the big screen (and to really dig this film you have to see it on the big screen, at least the first time—I heard an older man telling the kid behind the concession stand on my way out that it was his second time seeing THE TREE OF LIFE and he'd probably come back for a third time to grasp all the nuances he'd missed the first two!).

Jessica Chastain as the mother, Brad Pitt's character's wife, and Hunter McCracken as the oldest son (Penn's character as a boy) are also worth highlighting as not only filmed by Malick in ways that make their screen presences seem iconic too, but also directed in ways that make their performances as unforgettable as great film performances can be.

The second boyhood brother, played by Laramie Eppler gives an amazingly poignant performance, and a cameo bit as the grandmother by Fiona Shaw is memorable as she gives her usual intimidating performance.

All in all there are several reasons why this is a must see movie on the big screen, but don't go for an escape, it's anything but, and don't go for any laughs, those are mostly strained if present at all. Go for the visual impact—in some ways it's more like a very slow stroll through a great museum—for the performances and for the risks Malick takes as a filmmaker.

There's no one else quite like him, and no other film quite like THE TREE OF LIFE.