Spy Novel TV

“Jack Ryan”  —  (Seasons 1 – 4) (2018, 2019, 2022, and 2023)
Today’s review is for the four season / 30 episode Amazon Prime video series “Jack Ryan” starring:  John Krasinski as Dr. Jack Ryan (main character / hero / CIA analyst), Wendell Pierce as James Greer (Jack’s senior agent / friend), Abbie Cornish as Dr. Cathy Mueller (Jack’s love interest), Michael Kelly as Mike November (a recurring role / field agent who can do a little of everything) and Michael Peña as Domingo Chavez (a former Navy SEAL and a senior CIA operative).  The series is an action / drama / spy thriller which (to my mind) tries to impress everyone with the need for and effectiveness of the Central Intelligence Agency.  There have been numerous public relations shows (movies and TV) for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) over the decades and this series tries to do positive PR for the CIA.  It mostly succeeds.
There are (to date) four seasons:
Season 1 (eight episodes):  Islamic terrorists want to release nerve gas to kill the President and several members of the Cabinet.  Curiously, the goal doesn’t seem to be to cripple the U.S., just to continue the disruption of the country with the goal of keeping terror in our hearts.
Season 2 (eight episodes):  Jack (Greer and November) are in the middle of political warfare in a corrupt Venezuela to determine their Presidential election.  Of course, the CIA is on the side of the noble female and against the reelection of the corrupt current President.  The U.S. interest is in a mineral which Venezuela has recently discovered and a plot by a U.S. Senator to profit off of the discovery.
Season 3 (eight episodes):  Jack stops a plot to re-create the former Soviet Union by detonating an untraceable tactical nuclear bomb in a former Soviet country.
Season 4 (six episodes):  Jack, newly promoted to the CIA’s acting deputy director (for internal affairs), must stop a Mexican drug cartel joining up with an international terrorist organization trying to release biological weapons in Texas.  It is never really explained why either a cartel or a terrorist organization want to do this.  The impression is that it’s only for the money.
Running time is from 40-64 minutes of 30 episodes, so you’re looking at a 25+ hour commitment for viewing all episodes and seasons.
So, is the series any good?  The acting?  The drama?  The action?  And, do I recommend your investing your time watching it?  The short answers are all:  it’s an okay series and, if you like this genre, you’ll like the series.
Background:  I have been a big fan of Tom Clancy (the character’s creator and novels author) for many years.  I’ve read several of his books and seen most of the theatrical adaptations over the decades, so I’m very familiar with the title character.  I own and have seen the other five movies, although I’ve not viewed any of them recently.  I have also read several of Clancy’s other “series” / works.  Generally, his works are very detailed and specific in how military technology is actually used (and intended for use) and therefore his writing style is action / drama oriented and translates well to cinema.  It is rarely ever original, though.  (IMHO)  That is not a criticism of his work, after all, a murder mystery is a murder mystery is a murder mystery…  It’s the fleshing out of the characters and the clues which make the difference for us as readers or viewers.  The bottom line is you know what you’re going to get when you start one (book or movie) and the question is really:  does it deliver.
The series (all four years) is entertaining and does deliver within those limits.  It delivers reasonably good character and story development.  The action(s) is reasonably paced with “something” happening in every other episode and alternates between character development and action.  Note:  the action is “entertaining”;  it is not “realistic”.  As for the show itself, I (personally) felt all / each of the four years were too long (too many episodes) and they could have all been shortened to the 3 to 4 hour length (each) and been just as entertaining.  In fact, the first three seasons (eight episodes each) were mostly sub-hour episodes and the fourth season was six episodes of mostly full-hour episodes.  But, then (I guess), the “series” would have been just LONG movies and not a true episodic TV series.  The running theme in the series is that our enemies are foreign and domestic.  Each of the seasons turns on someone high in the U.S. government betraying us (the country) for profit.
Of all the characters and scenes in the series, I found Michael Peña as Domingo Chavez was my favorite.  The Ryan character is consistently played as a “Boy Scout” / good-guy who does things for the “right” reasons.  (Mostly BORING.)  Chavez is NOT.  He is a stone cold assassin type killer.  Not a murderer (for no reason);  but a weapon, you point at the enemy when you want to get the job done and who defines himself by his relentlessness.  My favorite scene in all four seasons is:  the good guys have broken into the bad guys lair, taken him prisoner and retrieved the triggering device(s).  They are about to leave (leaving the bad guy alive) when the bad guy calls out to them (roughly – not a direct quote):  “You can’t do this!  Not to me!  I will track you down and kill you and your families!”  Chavez turns and shoots him in the head.  Everyone else looks at Chavez, but he doesn’t even shrug.  A completely missed opportunity in the dialogue was Chavez should have quipped:  “YOU won’t,” in a classic 007 / James Bond style response.
Final recommendation:  moderate to strong.  To quote Abraham Lincoln:  “For people who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like.”  I did – but like I said, a bit too long.  I imagine the series would have been better viewing spaced out instead of binged in three sittings as I did it.  The series has apparently concluded as the lead actor (Krasinski) was only contracted for four years.  The concluding scene leaves a perfect opening for a spin-off “team” series, but I think they will need a new center piece if Krasinski doesn’t return.
.
On This Day In:
2022	This Is A Time…
2021	Feeling Younger
	In It  (In The Mood)
2020	One Person
2019	More Likely Unsinging
	What’s At Stake…
2018	But What Are You DOING About November?
	Or His Elected Position
2017	Some Good
2016	Edges
	Sums
2015	I Hope Not
2014	Study The Means Of Expressing Yourself
2013	That Stubborn Thing
2012	Like Mike
2011	Flawless Or Candid
2010	Browning…

Read Full Post »

I Believe In Believe

Today’s review is for the Apple+ streaming service American created fish-out-of-water / sports comedy-drama series: “Ted Lasso“.  The show stars:  Jason Sudeikis as Ted Lasso, (coach / main character); Hannah Waddingham as Rebecca Welton (team owner);  Jeremy Swift as Leslie Higgins (Director of Football Operations);  Phil Dunster as Jamie Tartt (young star player);  Brett Goldstein as Roy Kent (veteran player, captain and later assistant coach);  Brendan Hunt as Coach Willis Beard (Lasso’s longtime assistant and friend);  Nick Mohammed as Nathan “Nate” Shelley (kit man turned assistant coach);  Juno Temple as Keeley Jones (Tartt’s model girlfriend who becomes the club’s manager of marketing and public relations);  Sarah Niles as Dr. Sharon M. Fieldstone (a sports psychologist);  Anthony Head as Rupert Mannion (Rebecca’s ex-husband, the former owner of AFC Richmond and series villian);  Toheeb Jimoh as Samuel “Sam” Obisanya (a young Nigerian player);  Cristo Fernández as Dani Rojas (a young Mexican player);  Kola Bokinni as Isaac McAdoo (veteran defensive player who becomes team captain after Kent retires);  Billy Harris as Colin Hughes (a young offensive player who comes out as gay);  and,  James Lance as Trent Crimm (a skeptical reporter formerly working for “The Independent”, who writes a book about the club, titled “The Richmond Way“).
The premise of the show is a newly divorced woman (Rebecca Welton) seeks to destroy a British Premier League football (soccer) team (AFC Richmond*) by hiring an incompetent manager (aka:  head coach) because the team is the “only” thing her former husband “truly” loves.  She hires a Division II (college level) national championship (American) football coach to be the new team manager.  The series follows the coach and team through two and a half seasons of play.  In series season one, Richmond are the worst team in the league when Coach Lasso is hired and the team gets relegated (sent down to a lower league) at the end of the season.  In series season two, the team fights to get back up into the main league (the Premier League).  In series season three, having recently returned to the main league, the team is predicted to finish last and get relegated (again).  Instead, they almost win the entire league.  Coach Lasso goes home (back to Kansas) to his family.  The show has thirty-four episodes of gradually increasing duration.  Season one are almost all 30 minute shows. Season two goes from 35 to 45 minute shows. Season three are mostly 60 minutes (or longer) episodes.  So, your total “binge” time is less than 30 full hours.  The series has concluded its three season run and (as of this review) is not being continued / extended / renewed – but there are “rumors” of spin-offs.
So, is this show any good?  How’s the acting?  The comedy?  The drama?  The sports?  And…  is it worth your time to view?  In order:  Yes!  Excellent.  Good.  Ok.  So-so.  Absolutely!!
A little background:  As usual, I’m two or three troughs behind the wave…  I’m not positive I’d ever heard of this series, but my kids have a standing order to point me in the direction of anything (entertainment, books or music) they really enjoy.  This show came recommended to me by my oldest daughter (Rebecca), who said I would “REALLY” enjoy this show.  (I did.)  Shortly after our conversation (the very next day), I started getting YouTube prompts with clips of the show.  How’s that for home privacy?  And, yes, we have a Google listening device in our living room.  I vaguely remembered the NBC sports commercials the character was based on, so I began viewing the videos.  Needless to say:  “Hooked – line and sinker”…
The only problem is (was) I don’t have access to Apple+ TV and I don’t agree with / like paying for extra streaming services.  Since the show had finished it’s production run, I looked around to see if it was available on DVD or as a purchased (-able) series.  It is not currently available as either.  To make a longer story shorter, my son said I can use his access to Apple if I want to.  I asked what made him say that as it wasn’t part of our conversation.  He replied he didn’t know.  It just popped into his head.  I mentioned Bec recommending “Lasso” and he said he’s watched it with his wife and he likes it and she loves it.  That was good enough for me…
Is the show any good?  Well, it had a tremendous review with 20-ish Emmy nominations after its first season and a similar number (total) for next latter two.  I believe it sits at about 35-ish for nominations and has won a good number of those awards including best show, best actor and best supporting actor.  Many of the nominations were for the writing as well as the acting.
But, is the show a comedy, a drama or a sports show?  It’s a bit of “all of the above”.  It’s funny.  It’s a tear jerker.  It has some exciting sports moments.  Mainly though, it’s a show about leadership and trying to live life in a positive way and sharing that positivity with others.  Ted tends to talk too much;  to explain too much;  to babble too much;  to care too much;  and, ultimately, to live life in service to helping every other person around him be better versions of themselves.  He does this with “curiosity, not judgement”.  And, humor.  …Down home, Kansas / mid-West American, Mark Twain-ish humor – mostly self-deprecating and anecdotal stories.
To my tastes, the show doesn’t have enough humor to be a “true” comedy.  It has way too much “relationship” drama to be a sports show.  And, it doesn’t really have much in the way of “footie” (that’s soccer to my U.S. readers).  The show was fortunate enough to find young actors who also were fairly good players, but it also used a lot of camera angles to not actually show you the actor “in frame” – only ball and lower legs / feet.  There is virtually no explanation of soccer rules, tactics or strategy.  For non-sports folks, that’ll seem to be a blessing.  For actual “football” fans, it’s probably a missed opportunity to really draw them in.  From my experience, Brits LOVE to explain everything and anything about footie to us “Yanks”.  They have a deep love for their game and they want to believe that if we only understood it a little bit better, we (Americans) will love it, too.
Two notes about words and language:
1) in doing a little research for this review, I read some reviews by Brits who said the language was “wrong” (for them) – for example a reporter reminds Ted that soccer has “ties”, when a “real” British reporter would have said “draws”.  My reaction was entirely the opposite.  That’s EXACTLY how many Brits spoke to me when I lived in Liverpool.  They would say:  “Ta, that means thanks to you Yanks”.  Or “Put that in the trunk.  We call it a boot over here.”  They would even say “normal” words to each other and then pause, turn to me, and restate what they said in “American”.  It almost always made me chuckle because I guess I looked like I didn’t understand them.  As my British father-in-law used to tell me:  “You’re not a green as you are cabbage lookin’.”  And, …
2)  Yes, a non-trivial portion of the male population uses “F#ck” in their sentences.  Very few women spoke that way (around me), but quite a few men would (if there were no females around).  One guy I knew used it practically every second or third word in speaking – and he didn’t care who was around (male, female, boss or children).  He wasn’t particularly poorly educated.  He simply didn’t feel he should have to adjust his behavior for other people.  He was quite happy with who he was and how he spoke.  I don’t know if he spoke that way around his mum or nan, though.
Final recommendation:  Very highly recommended!!  With the possible exception of those who would be put off by the frequent swearing and the implied sex, I think this is a very enjoyable series.  And I loved that someone is reading a BOOK in almost every single episode.  That (modelling examples in entertainment) is how we share the enjoyment of / love of books with others!
*AFC Richmond – The international football (soccer) governing body is called “Association Football Club”.  Interestingly, American teams are normally called “FC” and not “SC” for Soccer Club.
.
On This Day In:
2022	My Interesting Life
2021	Saving Democracy And A Voting Rights Act
	Just Chillin’ (Breezin’)
2020	Two Hours From Now
	Criminal Incompetence, Criminal Indifference Or Both
2019	Slow Wisdom
	It Is A Start…
2018	Young, Fun And Playing Well
2017	Earning Your Blessings
2016	A Suggestion… (All We Need Is Love)
	Capable Of Being
2015	Looking For The Needles In The Haystacks
2014	The Definition Of A Gentleman
2013	Thar She Blows (Not)!
2012	Naturally
2011	Been Here, Done That
	Remember
2010	Timeless Classics

Read Full Post »

And Still More Pride (1980)

Pride And Prejudice    —     BBC TV series review (1980)
Starring David Rintoul as Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy and Elizabeth Garvie as Elizabeth “Lizzy” Bennet, this is the five episode (4-1/2 hour) BBC version which can be purchased on DVD.  Because I enjoyed my recent viewing of the 1940 version, I went looking for this version to add it to my watchlist for viewing and / or potential purchase.  Lo and behold, this version is currently (as of June 2023) available as a playlist on YouTube for free.  Although the YouTube playlist version is patchy – 60-plus mostly 3-to-5 minute videos – the transitions between episodes are fairly smooth.  Most only re-show the final few second or two of the previous video before continuing afresh.  While “smooth”, I was left with the feeling I’d not seen the entire series because, in a number of the videos, there was a near simultaneous change in scene.  My reaction was: “I think they’ve edited something out or put the episodes in the playlist in the wrong order.”  (So much for my comments of the playlist editing.)
The story is essentially:  small village with landowner family of five female daughters is thrown in a tizzy over the arrival of a very “suitable” bachelor.  Even better, the bachelor comes with a friend, who is also a very suitable bachelor (Darcy).  Lizzy takes an immediate dislike to Mr. Darcy while the oldest sister (Jane) falls madly in love with the first bachelor (Mr. Bingly).  Blah, blah, blah, happy ending.  The book – and its movie adaptations – is supposed to be a romantic-comedy / drama.  Like the book, this adaptation is more romantic than comedic.  There are no “ha-ha” laugh scenes, at all.  It’s mostly sarcasm in the dialogue which is, to me, amusing, but not “funny”.  Anyway, I thoroughly enjoyed this version of P&P in terms of casting and adherence to the original book.  I am a big fan of this book (subject material) and, because I’m so familiar with the story, I’m always looking forward to my favorite parts being portrayed in / with varying interpretations.  As mentioned in my 1940 version review from earlier this week (ok, it was yesterday), I read the original novel (and reviewed it) by Jane Austen back in 2018.
Both Garvie and Rintoul are very good in their lead roles individually, and, to me, demonstrated just enough chemistry to make the story believable, while not trying to bring our current societal standards to the 19th century (the book was published in 1813 AD) where they would have been inappropriate.  Rintoul’s portrayal differs from Olivier’s by playing the role of an English landed-lord with a graceful gentlemanliness, which came across (to me) as effeminate by when done by Olivier.  This portrayal is much closer to the “no grace at all, stiff but manly-man” portrayal of Matthew Macfadyen in the 2005 movie which introduced me to P&P.  A third main point and definite positive for me was the return to character (vis-à-vis the 1940 version) of Darcy’s aunt who refuses to accept the marriage of Darcy to Lizzy for reasons of societal class difference and because the aunt believes Darcy to be “given / promised” to her own daughter since childhood.  The aunt appears as the haughty unredeemable character, which I believe she was meant to be in the original book.
Final recommendation:  Strong to very strong.  This is a very arguably the best interpretation of the book I’ve seen to date.  Rintoul is more manly than Olivier yet still more proud / refined than Macfadyen.  Garvie is not as photogenic as Keira Knightley (2005), but far more so than Greer (1940) or Jennifer Ehle (1995).  Two more thoughts which are probably only of significance to me:  the costumes (women’ dresses) are far better (more appropriate) than the 1940’s verson.  They don’t appear “US civil war era” Southern Bell, like the 1940 movie, but nor do they appear as simple / sturdy as the 2005 movie.  The 1940’s version runs 112 minutes (1 hr 52 min), this 1990 version runs at 265 minutes (4-1/2 hrs), the 1995 runs at 506 minutes (8hrs 26 min) and the 2005 version runs at 129 minutes (2hrs 9min).  Should the run length / duration matter?  I would hope the quality of each version would make them comparable, but, on reflection, it’s probably not so and I am actually comparing apples to oranges.  And, finally, I still think I need to sit down and binge these and some of the other versions (“Bride” and “Zombies”), not to do more head-to-head comparison reviews, just to enjoy them again.  I will almost certainly purchase this version if it ever comes close to my price point and if it is available in a standard US viewing format.
.
On This Day In:
2022	Taking The Chance To Improvise
2021	A Bit Like Politics
	How About Tonight? (I’d Really Like To See You Tonight)
2020	Independent Isolation
2019	This Pilgrim Has Had A (Mostly) Happy Road
2018	And Men, Too
2017	Damned If You Do
2016	A Storm Over The Horizon
2015	What About Today?
2014	Idiot, n.
2013	Temporary Reality
2012	The Great Objective
2011	Read A Book

Read Full Post »

A Series Of Observations

Today’s TV series review is for the seven season / 151 episodes / 115 hours total viewing time, drama / crime-police / mystery series: “The Mentalist“.  The show stars Simon Baker as Patrick Jane (the Mentalist) and Robin Tunney as Agent Teresa Lisbon (his long suffering boss / side-kick”Watson”).  There are three other “main” supporting characters:  Kimball Cho (played by Tim Kang), Wayne Rigsby (played by Owain Yeoman) and Grace Van Pelt (played by Amanda Righetti).  The series originally aired between 2008 and 2015.  I viewed / “streamed” the series over several weeks in 3-to-4 episode chunks.  Some spoilers follow, so if you are intending to watch this series, do so before continuing this review…
The basic premise is that a “reformed” con-man / fake psychic (Jane) assists law enforcement (the California Bureau of Investigation [CBI]) with solving crimes (mostly murders).  Because the CBI is a state law enforcement unit, the crime is generally on California state property or CBI involvement is “requested” by someone with sufficient political influence to warrant the notice of the CA State Attorney General.  Sometimes this aspect is a REAL stretch…  and then has to be narratively explained away by dialogue.
The main character – Jane – has highly developed observational skill, exceptional memory skill and high intelligence which combined with his years as a con-man / magician / fake psychic allow him to “solve” each case in intuitive (sometimes illegal) ways – much to the discomfort of the supporting cast (professional law enforcement officers).  Jane becomes involved with CBI after recovering from a nervous breakdown following the brutal murder of his wife and daughter by a serial killer (“Red John”).  Red John’s modus operandi is “generally” a rape, disembowelment and then throat slitting of his (mostly female) victims.  Red John is a cult leader type criminal, generally following the “Dr. Moriarty” character type from the Sherlock Holmes genre.  Lisbon is Watson to Jane’s Sherlock.
The series has two over-arching series themes:  the developing romantic relationship between Jane and Lisbon and the developing friendship(s) between Jane and the rest of the law enforcement supporting characters.  Within this there are also three main seasonal story arcs:  seasons one through three are single episode murder mysteries developing the two main arcs.  Seasons four, five and half of season six are devoted to both episodic crimes and the hunt for Red John.  Red John is revealed (and killed) and then the last half a season six and all of season seven is Jane assisting in various FBI cases.  Season seven is an abbreviated season of only twelve episodes.  All of the other seasons are twenty-one plus episodes. Most of the series is based in Sacramento.  Post-Red John, the series moves from CBI to FBI and is then based from Austin, Texas.
So, is this series any good?  Has it stood the test of time?  How is the acting?  Is the show realistic for leadership, psychology or law enforcement?  And, finally, is it worth investing 115 hours of your life?  In order:  yes, mostly, poor to excellent, more often than not, so-so, “I sure hope not”, and yes.
More specifically, overall, this is a VERY good series.  It is as predictable as any police procedural:  crime, investigation, resolution.  It is mostly predictable for character development – but at a surprisingly / interesting slow pace and then – bang – your in rapids, and then – back to slow pace.  The series ends “happily” from a romantic perspective it is well rapped up – the two main couples wed.  So, bottom line, the good-guys win and live happily-ever-after.
Test of time / acting / theme portrayals:  As a police procedural – I hope not.  As a romantic drama, yes.  As a “Sherlock Holmes” genre, so-so.  In practically every episode, some person’s rights are either ignored or aggressively violated.  This is morally acceptable because the team is putting very bad people (mostly men) behind bars (or killing them).  No matter how honorable the character starts in their role, they are always corrupted by Jane and the concept of acting for “the greater good”.  On the romantic side, a big part of every drama is how long can you maintain the sexual tension between the main characters.  Although obvious from the first episode, both main relationship arcs are well developed.  As a super-sleuth / Holmes procedure series, the show has problems, but it (the show) still works because of the believability of the actors in their slowly developed / multi-layered character portrayals.  The portrayals of most of the bad-guys are mostly flat and one dimensional, but there are notable exceptions.  As the series progresses most of the other (non-super-genius) characters say:  “This is what Jane would (would not) have us do…”  For me personally, I found the various depictions of leadership styles / personalities to be one of the most interesting aspects of the series.  The whole gamut of leadership from criminal to sainted is represented and the strengths and weaknesses of the various styles is examined, critiqued and accepted or rejected.
Investment:  I feel there has been an on-going transformation in home entertainment happening over the course of my lifetime.  The progress is roughly equivalent to that of written literature.  In writing we have daily comics, short stories and comic books, short-moderate-long books (texts and novels), books series and encyclopedias.  In TV, the corresponding genre would be animated / cartoon shorts (multiple stories in a half-hour show), episodic stories (half-hour to hour long shows), movie length (90 minutes to mini-series [sub-30 hours of total viewing time]), and seasonal arcs (episodic, but with 3-5 minutes devoted to long-term character / story development), and then generational shows / series.  I consider “generational” series to be any series over 15 years / seasons – so, most day-time soap operas and multi-series franchises (“I Love Lucy“, “The Simpsons“, “StarTrek“, “Law & Order“, “NCIS“, etc).  I (personally) do NOT consider game shows to be “generational” series, even though many have gone well beyond 20 seasons, because they are normally not re-watched after the initial viewing.  Although, there is now some give on this characteristic, too, as you can “watch” some of the prior episodes (on TV-history channels).  The point of the “re-run” (though) is to view the contestants (famous personalities from yesteryear) and not viewing the contests, themselves.  At any rate, I would put a seven seasons series in the “War & Peace” – lengthy story grouping, but not in the generational level group.
Final recommendation:  This is a moderate to strong recommendation for an initial viewing (see caution later), a low to moderate for re-viewing in its entirety and a strong to highly for individual episodes (if you develop a favorite character or mini-story arc during your initial viewing).  For me, 100-plus hours is almost certainly too long to spend re-watching the entire series. I purchased my “series-bundle copy” on steep discount ($30 as I recall), at which price this a bargain for entertainment value – even if only viewed once – $.25 per hour or $.20 per episode.  One note of caution:  there is the occasional swear word used at least once per season and there are repeated scenes of victims injuries (almost one per episode), so this is not appropriate for viewers under 12 years of age.
.
On This Day In:
2022	And Longer To Stay That Way
	A General Guideline For Voting In The 2022 Mid-Terms
	A Series Of Observations
2021	Press On
	Mama Said There’d Be Days Like This (Love Yourself)
2020	AMA
	Still Shiny (Sunshine On My Shoulders)
2019	Things That Go Bump In The Night
	Hoping I’m Careful
2018	I Must Be Truly Wise
2017	My Sensei
2016	The Worst Sin
2015	Rules Of Thumb
2014	A Prayer
	Orange October (IX) – Giants Lose Game 2 In Bullpen Collapse
2013	Complacent Reality
2012	Two-minute Sex
	Just Staring, Why?
2011	A World Of Difference

Read Full Post »

Grr-Argghh

[Yes, this is another looonnnggg post!  You’ve been warned…    —    kmab]
Background:
Today’s review(s) are for a TV series and movie based on a science-fiction / western style premise.  The show is titled:  “Firefly” (2002).  The movie is titled:  “Serenity” (2005).  Both star:  Nathan Fillion as Captain Malcolm ‘Mal’ Reynolds, Gina Torres as Zoë Washburne (second in command / wife), Alan Tudyk as Hoban ‘Wash’ Washburne (ship’s pilot / husband), Morena Baccarin as Inara Serra (a liscensed “companion”), Adam Baldwin as Jayne Cobb (soldier / weapons expert), Jewel Staite as Kaylee Frye (ship’s engineer / mechanic), Sean Maher as Dr. Simon Tam (ship’s doctor / brother), Summer Glau as River Tam (telepath / enhanced warrior / sister), Ron Glass as Shepherd Derrial Book (ship’s preacher / retired government agent), with Chiwetel Ejiofor (a government “operative”) and David Krumholtz (a futuristic hacker) appearing in the movie (but not in the series).
The basic story-line for both the series and the movie is the same:  Earth has become uninhabitable, so humanity has colonized a new solar system (in the TV series it’s continuously referred to as a new galaxy).  The setting is roughly 500 years in the future.  The planets and moons in the new system have been “Terra-formed” so they support human life.  The planets / moons nearest the sun (the closest together) form an “Alliance” government.  The outer planets revolted and the war ended with the rebels losing.  ‘Mal’ Reynolds was a sergeant in the rebel army and after the war he purchases a spaceship so he is “mostly” beyond the reach of any government.  The ship / crew take any job they can to stay afloat in space.  The ship is an unarmed transport vessel:  “Firefly” class.  (It looks vaguely like an Earth firefly bug who’s rear-end glows.)  The crew is armed with small caliber personal firearms (and some small explosives).
The series runs 14 episodes with the pilot being the longest at roughly 90 minutes and the remaining “hourly” episodes running about 42-45 minutes.
I remember watching a couple of episodes during the original run (back in 2005-6), but I never caught them all before it was cancelled and pulled from broadcast.  A work friend picked up the DVD’s when they came out and as he knew I was a “Trekkie”, he loaned them to me.  I thoroughly enjoyed the series and he said they also had a movie – which he loaned me, too.  I made a mental note to pick up both and I have.  (Side note:  the series DVD’s come with “extras” which your streaming service may or may not include with the series purchase.)
Anyway, I just finished watching both (again).
“Firefly”  —  TV series review
If you’ve ever spent ANY time watching American western TV series from the 50s / 60s, the formula is pretty standard.  Weekly episode of the crew doing their transporting of goods around space with occasional petty larceny thrown in.  Like all of the better series, there is an on-going / over-arching story-line to allow for the personal growth of each of the characters.  There is also a surprising amount of well written dialog and humor in the series (and the movie).
The TV series was never a broadcast hit (and as I recall was re-slotted for live sporting events, which almost always hurts a new show’s numbers).  The series was cancelled but has achieved a cult following over the last 20 years.  There was initial talk of restarting the series, but it was reformatted into a movie instead.
Final recommendation:  very highly recommended!!  I have thoroughly enjoyed watching this series (and movie) several times over the years.  Come for the action and special effects and get hooked on the characters and story arcs.  One caution:  There are multiple instances of drinking, swearing and the occasional sex scene (although you never “really” see anything but sweaty arms and backs).
“Serenity”  —  movie review
This is a follow-up to the TV series and takes up shortly after the last episode.  The “preacher” and the “companion” have left the ship and the government / Alliance is still trying to recover River Tam.  Chiwetel Ejiofor is the government “operative” sent to bring her back.  He is “licenced-to-kill” and he does – repeatedly – to achieve the objective.
River Tam knows something the Alliance wants kept secret and they are willing to do most anything to get her back / silence her.  The movie is a long series of chases and fights.
Now, both the movie and the TV series are simple entertainment…  They are “Sci-Fi’d” westerns with enough action to keep you entertained and enough plot / character dialog – development to keep you interested.  That’s it…  Don’t expect anything to make sense (scientifically).  Just get your popcorn and get ready to be entertained (not educated).
By the way, the movie doesn’t explain it very well (the series does), so I will:  “Serenity” is the name of the ship – a Firefly-class transport vessel.  The name comes from the famous final battle in the revolt which both ‘Mal’ and Zoë fought in:  “the Battle of Serenity Valley“.
Another point:  in both the series and the movie, it sounds like the cast are speaking some form of Chinese.  They are not.  Some of the individual words are, but much of it is made up to get around the (rating agencies) censorship of cursing / cussing in broadcast TV.
Final recommendation:  (Again) Very Highly recommended!  The movie can stand on it’s own, but you’ll enjoy it more if you watch the full TV series first.  A last note:  the movie was not a BOMB!  It did make back its production cost – but just barely.  The fan base for both versions continues to grow (slowly), and there is “some” talk of Disney doing a re-boot for their streaming service.  Disney bought out FOX movies and now has rights to the IP (“intellectual property”).  Obviously, the original cast are all too old to reappear in their roles (20 years flies by!)
.
On This Day In:
2023	Aim Above
2022	Grr-Argghh
	Long Past Time For A “Thorough-going Reappraisal”
2021	Facing Life
	70’s Sunshine Sound (Keep It Comin’ Love)
2020	#IncompetentTrump And His Pandemic Briefings
	#IncompetentTrump
2019	I Hope So
2018	Painted Into
2017	Prayers, Miracles And Lottery Tickets
	Roman View
2016	Dignity And Grace
2015	Is It Warm Enough For You
2014	What The Right STILL Wants
2013	Embrace Serendipity
2012	Your Order, Please
2011	Well Enough Anyway

Read Full Post »

Big And Bad (In A Good Way)

“Reacher”  —  streaming (TV) series:  Season 1 (2022)
This review is for the recently released Amazon Prime video / movie / TV series titled:  “Reacher“.  The series is based on the book series by the same name written by Lee Child (James Dover Grant CBE).  The book series first started getting released in the late 1990’s and comes out about one volume per year – so, yes, there are now about twenty-plus books in the series.  I’ve read the first four and then skipped ahead for one of the books which explained some of the character’s background.  I’ve also seen both of the Tom Cruise movies in which Tom plays the lead.  I’ve done a review of the first (here), but never got around to reviewing the second (which I’ll probably need to re-watch before finally reviewing).
Anyway, the main character – Jack Reacher – is played by actor Alan Ritchson.  This is the first role I’ve seen Ritchson in.  Reacher is a retired Army officer who served in a “special investigations” unit.  Some sort of super JAG / NCIS.  They only worked cases no one else could handle – blah, blah, blah.  Reacher comes from a military family, graduated from West Point (as did his older brother), and served with distinction during his career. Reacher retired as a major;  a rank he regained after being busted back down to captain.  The series history differs from the books as over twenty years has passed since the first novel, so they’ve “re-booted” his life to make him younger for the series.  It’s also possible the character got an early-out / medical discharge as he doesn’t seem old enough to have graduated from the Military Academy and served a full twenty years of service for a “normal” retirement.  In real life, Ritchson is 37 years old, (although he looks younger to me) so I guess it’s possible.  Reacher is an expert with multiple firearms, hand to hand combat and has a photographic memory.  He is also given to sarcasm.
Reacher has no “social-media presence”, no driver’s license, no phone, no permanent address, no ID and no bags.  He has a passport, a couple of hundred dollars in cash and the clothes on his back.  He buys used clothes when he needs to change and tosses what he’s done with.  Reacher likes old-fashioned blues, so he decides to visit the home town of a famous blues musician (which his brother mentioned).  The night before he arrives in the town, the murders start…  Reacher is the only stranger in town and he walked into town on the same road near where the body was found.  He is arrested and off we go…
The series is a thriller / crime / action series loosely based on a bigger than life (6ft 5in) paladin who roams around the country with no ties, just trying to mind his own business and bring a form of “rough” justice to the world when he feels it’s needed.
So:  is the series any good?  Is it true to the books?  Is it better than the (two) movies?  Is the acting / dialogue any good?  Yes, pretty close, so-so and yes.  The season-series is broken down into eight episodes of roughly 50 minutes each, so you’re investing almost 6-7 hours which gives a lot more time to tell the story (book).  The fights are pretty well shot (choreography wise).  Given the lead character’s physical size, most of the fights involve multiple attackers / combatants – again, true to the book.  I found the series marginally better than the two Cruise movies.  I didn’t think the acting was much better, but I found the inter-personal dialogue to be better – particularly the lead’s sarcasm.
The books are good to very good.  Cruise’s two movies were entertaining action movies, but nothing to write home about.  Ritchson simply makes a better Reacher than Cruise does physically (not in acting, though).  Cruise is (maybe) 5ft 7in;  Ritchson is (maybe) 6ft 2in in real life.  Reacher claims to be 6ft 4in in the series.  He’s supposed to be 6ft 5in in the books.  In a funny (strange) way, although height was the biggest complaint about casting Cruise in the movies, it doesn’t seem to be a factor for Ritchson.  The problem remains:  a “BIG” lead requires more than a shorter cast and the sets just don’t deliver / convey the size of the lead character.
Final recommendation:  very good to strong recommendation.  If you are a fan of the books, you will almost certainly enjoy this series more than Cruise’s two movies.  If you are a fan of action / crime-thriller / vigilante genre (again), you will almost certainly enjoy this series.  Note:  There is some profanity and some brief nudity in a few of the episodes.  There is quite a bit of violence / bloody injuries across all of the episodes, but I’d put it closer to “Die Hard” style than to “John Wick” style.  The series is NOT appropriate for young teens or pre-teens (IMHO).
.
On This Day In:
2022	Big And Bad (In A Good Way)
2021	Suggestions…
	Dichotomy
2020	Until November… Then Vote
2019	Start With Health And Friends
	Iterum Vale Tres*
2018	Tweets From The Disrupter-In-Chief
2017	Do We Still Listen To Her Silent Lips?
	Not Now, Not Ever
2016	Why Do You Write/Blog?
2015	Can Your Repeat The Question, Please?
2014	On Faith
2013	My Name Is Charles Stein
2012	Faiths And Sorcery
	Made And Kept Free
2011	Multi-Source Learning

Read Full Post »

In The Morning Hour

Take Me Home, Country Roads
Favorite Line(s):
I hear her voice in the mornin’ hour, she calls me
The radio reminds me of my home far away
Drivin’ down the road, I get a feelin’
That I should’ve been home yesterday, yesterday
.
On This Day In:
2022	Ultimate Response
2021	Going Home
	In The Morning Hour (Take Me Home, Country Roads)
2020	Seeking Wisdom
	Relying On The Old Man (Rich Girl)
2019	More Proof #45 Is Incompetent?
2018	Every Time I Think I’m Falling (All I Am)
2017	Still Testing The Hypothesis
2016	Excessive Weakness In January
2015	That Burns
2014	Hey, I Resemble That Remark… (4!)
2013	Sit, Put, Until…
2012	Lessons For My Son
2011	Reaching The Right Audience
2010	Christmas Trees and Profession of Faith

Read Full Post »

Where Did You Go In Texas?

La Grange
Favorite Line(s):
Rumour spreadin’ ’round
In that Texas town
About that shack outside La Grange
And you know what I’m talkin’ about
Just let me know
If you wanna go
.
On This Day In:
2022	Don’t Miss Your Life
2021	A Message To All The Democrats In Congress
	Where Did You Go In Texas? (La Grange)
2020	Reminds Me Of #LyingDonald
	It’s All Been Rehearsed (Baby I Need Your Lovin’)
2019	The Earth’s Breath
	Family Visit
2018	Forests, Shorelines And Mountain Paths
2017	Reach Down
2016	And Women When You Are 59
2015	Intersections, Explorations And Relationships
2014	[!(±*=)/≠], [!<]
	Orange October (XI) – Giants Win Game 5 (5 To 0)!!!
2013	Hard To Deserve
2012	Cloudy Between Games
	Admiration, n.
2011	One, Two, Three – Blink

Read Full Post »

Sometimes It Only Takes A Smile…

Silly Love Songs
Favorite Line(s):
Love doesn’t come in a minute
Sometimes it doesn’t come at all
I only know that when I’m in it
It isn’t silly,
Love isn’t silly,
Love isn’t silly at all
.
On This Day In:
2022	From Mountain Tops, Seashores And Under The Stars
2021	Learning Stages
	Sometimes It Only Takes A Smile… (Silly Love Songs)
2020	Come Laugh With Me
	Make Life Be Life To Me (Back In The High Life Again)
2019	For Your Consideration…
2018	Brown’s Rules
	Day 23: Fasting Visualized
2017	Still Trying To Make It
2016	One Lucky Man
2015	Food Change ==> Health Change
2014	10 Commandments Of Logical Arguments (Fallacies)
2013	Sociology Of The Future
2012	1010
	There In The Sunshine
2011	Not Enough Time

Read Full Post »

Three Swedish Girls

Today’s review(s) are for the extended / sub-titled version of “The Millennium Series“.  “Millennium” is a six-part television series made in Sweden based on the novels written by Stieg Larsson.  The six parts were combined into three “movies”, each movie consisting of two parts from the series with each part running about 90 minutes for a total of about nine(9) hours.  The English version was released under the name:  “Dragon Tattoo Trilogy:  Extended Edition“.  I watched the sub-titled version, not the one with the dubbed English.
The three “movies” have the corresponding names to the first three novels in the book series.  I understand the book series was originally intended to run to ten books, but the author (Larsson) died unexpectedly.  The “movie” titles are:  “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo“;  “The Girl Who Played with Fire“;  and, “The Girl Who Kicked the Hornets’ Nest“.
The two main characters in all three of the movies are Lisbeth Salander – played by Noomi Rapace, and Mikael Blomkvist – played by Michael Nyqvist. Salander is a twenty-something Goth hacker who works as a “researcher” for a Swedish security firm.  Basically, she’s a private-eye with computer skills.  Blomkvist is “famous” journalist and part owner of a do-gooder “investigative” magazine called “Millennium”.
The first movie (“Dragon Tatto“) has Blomkvist setup to take the fall for a false libel charge.  In between his conviction and his lockup he is hired by a wealthy Swedish capitalist who wants Blomkvist to investigate the disappearance of his niece several decades ago.  He is getting old and just wants to know what happened to her before he dies.
Anyway, Blomkvist enlists Salander’s help and they solve the mystery and Salander saves Blomkvist’s life in the process.  Closing the quality circle, they also prove the libel charge was a setup and the rich guy commits suicide to avoid going to prison himself.
The second movie (“Played with Fire“), has Millennium investigating sex trade in Sweden for the publication of an expose implicating some government (and police) officials.  The reporter and his girl friend are murdered, as is Lisbeth’s “guardian” and Lisbeth is implicated in the deaths of all three.
This time, Blomkvist comes to Lisbeth’s rescue gathering evidence she is innocent.  Basically, some of the men involved in the sex trade are also involved with (and being protected by) the government officials.  The main “bad-guy” turns out to be a Russian spy who flipped to get Swedish government protection.  In turn, the government looked-the-other-way for over three decades of criminal behavior (drugs, sex trafficking, and gun running).  The bad-guy also turns out to be Lisbeth’s father.  In the end, both Lisbeth and her dad are captured by the police.
The third movie (“Hornets’ Nest“), has Lisbeth on trial for the attempted murder of her father and the possible murder of the other three (the journalist, girl friend, and guardian) from the second movie.  The “government” agents seek to kill Lisbeth and her father to silence them both.  They succeed in killing the dad, but not Lisbeth.
Ultimately, Blomkvist convinces some of the police and another secret group in the Swedish “Constitutional Protection Division” of Lisbeth’s innocence and together they gather the evidence to arrest all the baddies.  There is also another issue which gets wrapped up at the end of the movie.
Final recommendation:  High to Very highly recommended with the qualification that all three are rated “R” and there are extremely violent and sexual (nudity) scenes in the first and second movie.  This is not a movie series for prudes or for anyone squeamish about nudity, rape, abuse of authority or violence (depicted) against women.  The “redeeming” factor, if you need that kind of thing, is that all of the bad guys get theirs in the end.  Although some are only shown arrested and disgraced, most have “untimely” deaths.
One cultural note:  this is my first exposure to a Swedish production (TV or movie) and, other than the fact that I do not care for sub-titles, I found it a very entertaining production which reminded me of the first Jason Bourne movie in how the movie “looked” – not quite TV, not quite movie;  just a funky realism look.  The “only” other “Swedish” thing I remember seeing has been the “Wallander” police series.  That series was shot in Sweden, but was actually a BBC production and started Kenneth Branagh in the title role – so I don’t think that counts as “Swedish”.
I have had this version for several weeks and just never got around to watching it.  I then got an offer from Vudu to buy the “English Dubbed” version for $10.  I didn’t even know the version I had wasn’t already dubbed.  I watched the first movie (parts 1 and 2 of the 6-part series) and decided to pick up the dubbed version as well.  I don’t speak Swedish, but I noticed what appeared to be discrepancies between what the actors were saying and what I was reading – at least some of the words sounded a LOT like other English words to me.  Since I’ve invested the extra money, I’ll watch the dubbed versions, but I’ve no idea when (or if) I’ll get around to reviewing them.
.
On This Day In:
2022	Try
2021	20 / 20 History Lessons
	I Waited (The Longest Time)
2020	The Blind Squirrel And The Suppression Of Uncomfortable Ideas
	It’ll Start Getting Cooler. You Just Watch. (Eve Of Destruction)
2019	Future Tools
	Three Swedish Girls
2018	Four Loves
	Favorite Westerns
2017	Faith In Science
2016	What The World Calls
2015	Say What?
2014	Start Today
2013	Fly!!
2012	Greater Love
2011	Before

Read Full Post »

Basic Training (In Films)

Caution: this is a relatively long post reviewing two movies…  You’ve been warned.
Today’s reviews are re-watches from my childhood:  “Tribes” (1970) and “The D.I.” (1957).  Both are movies about being in Marine Corps Boot Camp.  “The D.I.” was released when I was two years old, so I obviously never saw it on original release, but I remember seeing it in my early teens.  “Tribes” I saw on its original TV broadcast.  I recently discovered / watched both movies on YouTube.
“The D.I.” — movie review
If you’ve ever wondered what “Dragnet” would look like if it were turned into Marine Corps Boot Camp, this is the movie for you.  The movie stars Jack Webb (who also produced and directed the film) as Sergeant Jim Moore who is a Drill Instructor (“D.I.”) at Paris Island.  His job is to turn civilians into Marines and he has a problem in the person of Private Owens (played by Don Dubbins).  Whenever Owens feels he’s under pressure, he quits / gives up.  The company Captain (Lin McCarthy) feels Moore is getting soft and orders Moore to bring Owens around or get rid of him.
There are (of course) side issues:  one – Moore is falling for a shop clerk (Jackie Loughery) named “Annie”, which is wrecking his “tough-guy” Marine self-image;  and, two – Owens’ mother (Monica Lewis) appeals to Moore that she coddled Owens and she lost her husband (in WWII) and her two older sons (in Korea).  She wants Moore to make her son into a Marine or he won’t be able to live with himself.
This movie is shot in black and white and it is fairly dark.  I guess as a nod to realism, the movie has a scene with Moore and Annie which (shockingly) edges very close to date rape.  It doesn’t happen, but I was surprised it was even implied in a movie from that period.  Incidentally, in real life, Loughery married Webb the following year (1958).  Despite this being a “Webb” movie (“Just the facts, Ma’am…”), from the 50’s, it is also a happily ever after ending movie – for the Private / mom and the Sergeant / clerk.  Who woulda guessed?
Final recommendation:  moderate to strong.  Viewed as a “Webb” production, this is a classic.  As a period piece, I would say it’s still pretty much a classic.  This movie was my first introduction to the concept of “Basic Training / Boot Camp”, and I remember it had a fairly strong effect on my impressionable mind.  Don’t get me wrong, this movie is not a cinematic “classic” and it’s really only a fair movie, but, in watching it, it reminded me of the simpler times of my childhood when things did seem more “black-and-white”.
“Tribes” — movie review
“Tribes” is not strictly speaking a “real” movie.  Back in the 1970’s, one of the main TV networks (ABC) used to run what it called the: “ABC Movie of the Week“.  Some of the ninety minute movies were pretty good and some even became TV series in their own right.
“Tribes” is a movie about a free-spirited (that’s “hippie”) individual who joins the Marine Corps and who has to go to (and survive) Boot Camp.  It stars Jan-Michael Vincent as the free-spirited Private Adrian, Darren McGavin as Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Drake, and Earl Holliman as Chief Drill Instructor (and Drake’s boss) Master Sergeant Frank DePayster.
The movie always seemed to me to be a message about the changing times of the 1960’s / 1970’s in America.  You’ve got two straight-arrow Marine lifers, but one has a streak of decency and the other does not.  Ultimately, the leadership abilities of the young recruit pushes not only his platoon to excel, but also to win over the D.I. nominally there to break his individuality and “turn him into” a Marine who will follow orders.
Final recommendation:  strong to highly recommended.  I was very surprised how much of this movie I could recall after nearly 50 years from my first (and only) viewing.  LoL – this movie also introduced me to meditation / alternative states of consciousness and boxers vs briefs.
I am very biased towards this movie as it had a personal effect on me when I was in Basic Training for the Army four years later.  When I was learning to fire the M16, I asked my Drill Sergeant why we used “human” silhouettes instead of “bulls-eye” targets, he replied, “because we want you to learn to shoot at people.”  He went on to explain Fort Ord (where I had my Basic Training) had the highest casualty and injury statistics of any of the training facilities which sent soldiers to Vietnam.  It was determined this was because “West Coast” city boys didn’t shoot at other humans instinctively.  Using silhouettes, trained them to shoot as a reaction instead of pausing to take aim.  Fortunately, I never had to put this to the test…
.
On This Day In:
2022	Ever Feel Like You’re Spitting Into The Wind?
	The Valley Of Death
2021	On Learning To Play Guitar
	When You’re Feeling Small (Bridge Over Troubled Water)
2020	Remember Your Obligation
	Smile And Shuffle (I Wanna Dance With Somebody)
2019	If One Is Lucky Enough
	Basic Training (In Films)
2018	Being President Doesn’t Make You Presidential
	Day 27: 4 Weeks / 55lbs
2017	I’m Seeing It, Too
2016	Personal Decisions
2015	Verbal Fluency
2014	Familiar
2013	Unbending
2012	Simple Sayings
2011	Wupped Again?
2010	3 and 1…
	Musical Notes…
	Doubt Tries…
	Northwest Passages – Evening Two
	The Beierly’s Web Site

Read Full Post »

Another P&P Review

“The Lizzie Bennet Diaries”  (2012 – 2013)  —  YouTube series review
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single viewer in possession of a good internet connection, must be in want of a new adaptation of Pride & Prejudice.
At any rate, as an addict to P&P, I certainly am, “in want” that is…
For about the last year or so, I have fallen into the well which is YouTube.  I am beginning to fear it (my addictions to YouTube and P&P) is like the prison exit in the third episode of the “Batman Trilogy: The Dark Knight Rises”  – you can climb and climb, but eventually you slip and fall back in.
Periodically, YouTube feeds me a morsel of P&P as a temptation to restart my viewing addiction.  And, once again, it succeeded.  Over the weekend, I re-watched the 1995 BBC version of P&P starring Colin Firth.  I have already reviewed this version, but not individually, so I’ll have to add that to my list of things to do (sometime).  Anyway, after coming back to YouTube, they were prompting me to go see a clip from another version (2003 – P&P:  A Latter-Day Comedy) which I have not seen nor was I aware of.  …And, then there was a link to “The Lizzie Bennet Diaries” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KisuGP2lcPs).  Huh?  “What’s that?”, I ask.
My interest piqued, I clicked, and so began another marathon session of P&P.  The series is presented in 100 (yes, one-hundred) vlogs episodes, each running between a few minutes and 8-ish minutes.  (There are also a number of side vlogs, which I have not yet viewed.)  The series is meant to be a multi-media / channel creation with the characters (and actors) also having social media presence on other sites:  FaceBook, Twitter, etc., which serves as an adaptation of the classic romantic novel:  “Pride And Prejudice“, written by Jane Austen.
The series stars Ashley Clements as Elizabeth “Lizzie” Bennet;  Julia Cho as Charlotte Lu (Charlotte Lucas in the book) is Lizzie’s best friend and often the director / editor of her vlog;  Laura Spencer as Jane Bennet, the eldest of the Bennet daughters;  Mary Kate Wiles as Lydia Britney Bennet, the youngest Bennet child (the flirtly one);  Christopher Sean as Bing Lee (Charles Bingley in the book) is a young, wealthy (eligible) Asian-American medical student who has moved into The Netherfield House in the same neighborhood as the Bennets;  Jessica Jade Andres as Caroline Lee (Caroline Bingley in the book) is Bing Lee’s sister;  Maxwell Glick as Ricky Collins (William Collins in the book) is a former classmate of Lizzie and Charlotte’s, who asks that he be addressed only as Mr. Collins;  Daniel Vincent Gordh as William Darcy (Fitzwilliam Darcy in the book);  Wes Aderhold as George Wickham (the cad in the book and adaptations);  Craig Frank as Fitz Williams (Col. Fitzwilliam in the book) is Darcy’s friend and colleague;  and, Allison Paige as Georgiana “Gigi” Darcy (Georgiana Darcy in the book).
Obviously, as a vlog / diary, this version is set in modern times and therefore has many alterations in the details of the story to make it conform to the “PC” standards of our time.  However, never fear, the basic romance / love story is the same:  boy and girl meet, boy and girl seem to dislike each other.  After much travail, love wins out…  Happily ever after.  Blah, blah, blah…  Whatever, right?
Yes.  Pretty much.  But does it work and is it entertaining?  That would be a YES and a certainly!  I thoroughly enjoyed the series and plan to revisit the channel to catch the side lines and other bits which I skipped in order to race through the main story.  It turns out there is a “real” company called Pemberley Digital (http://www.pemberleydigital.com) which exists to adapt classic works into new media format(s).  Who knew?  (By the way, Pemberley is the name of the estate Darcy lives at in the P&P book.)
Final recommendation:  very highly recommended!!  Even with the “modernization”, the series follows quite closely to the original book and the three sisters are actually outstanding actors in their respective roles – with special kudos to Ashley Clements who is outstanding throughout the series and Mary Kate Wiles who really hit it out of the park in the last few episodes.  If you are a P&P fan, you will definitely want to check this out on YouTube.  It is also available on DVD’s, but I’m not sure what extra value you get for your $60.  There must be some great bloopers and behind the scene gags for that price.
LoL, now I want to go find some of the other P&P adaptations which I was not even aware of until I started researching this post.
.
On This Day In:
2023	In Good Company
2022	One World (Our Only Place)…
2021	Move The Heart
	Join Hands (Love Train)
2020	He Broke Even (The Gambler)
	Whoever / Whatever
2019	The Right Anger
	Another P&P Review
2018	Does Fatalism Equal Mental Health?
2017	Choice
2016	Growing Worlds
2015	Change The Tide
	Martyr, n.
2014	You, Too!
2013	Bitter Stand
2012	Lost For Words
2011	On Market Reactions…

Read Full Post »

Iterum Vale Tres*

“Goodbye, Mr. Chips”  (1934©)  —  book review
Like a dog with a fresh bone, sometimes I find it hard to let go…
Over this last weekend, I indulged my OCD and read the short novel “Goodbye, Mr. Chips” (1934©), written by James Hilton.  Amazon says the paperback is seventy pages, but there are eighteen chapters and most seem less than a full page long.  I read the novella in under two hours.  The book is in public domain, so you can download it and read it for free.
The book has a number of adaptations, including movies made in 1939 (a drama) and 1969 (a musical – review here), a TV series from 1984 (BBC) and a TV movie from 2002 (ITV).  More on these later…  (OCD remember).
The author, James Hilton was the son of a school headmaster and he attended a public boarding school.  Note:  a “public” school in England is a “private” school in the U.S. Hilton is said to have based the work on both his father and a master (“teacher / instructor”) at his own school (although it is believed to be mostly based on the teacher at the school he attended).
The main character of the novel and movies, Mr. Chipping, spends the majority of his life (50-plus years) teaching Latin (and Greek) at a single school (Brookfield School) and the book is a reminiscence of his time there.  There are two notable occurrences:  one is the meeting of a best-friend Herr (Max) Staefel, the school’s German language teacher and the second is a chance meeting with a young lady who ultimately becomes his wife.  The “shock” of the wedding is not just the marriage of a “confirmed” bachelor, but that the bride is considerably younger than the groom (on the order of 23 years) AND she is as attractive as he is staid.  The book is unclear how long they are wed (roughly one year to eighteen months) as she passes away in childbirth (on 1 April – “April Fool’s Day”).  Chipping stays long enough at the school that he instructs four generations of one family and, on his deathbed, only his housemaid is aware that he was ever married (over thirty years before the death scene).  This results in the famous lines that it was a shame he never had any sons of his own who might have attended the school.  Chipping’s dying response is that indeed he did, thousands of them – and all boys.
Final recommendation:  very highly recommended!  I would recommend reading this very short book before viewing any of the four adaptations, but I have seen all of them (three of them in the last week) and you won’t be put off by reversing my call.
“Goodbye, Mr. Chips” (1984)  —  TV series review
This version of the novella was on the BBC in six half-hour episodes (roughly three hours run time) and starred Roy Marsden as Chipping and Jill Meager as his wife.  I am fairly certain this is the first version I saw of the adaptations as I have a distinct memory of the cricket scene which appears in the this version.  I believe I saw this version on PBS, and probably first viewed it with my new (British) wife in 1985, the summer after we married.  The series is available on YouTube, which is where I watched it this weekend.
Final recommendation:  strong to highly recommended.  As stated above, this was my first exposure to the “Chips” story, so it has a special place in my heart / memory.  I will add this version is closer to the actual time frame depicted in the book and the first (1939) movie version.  It also is much closer to being an anti-war movie than the book or other adaptations.  Finally, in this version, Katherine (Bridges) Chipping is an unemployed governess living with her aunt in London, as opposed to the stage singer / dancer portrayed in the 1969 musical adaptation.
“Goodbye, Mr. Chips” (2002)  —  TV movie review
Staring Martin Clunes (of Doc Martin fame) as Mr. Chipping and Victoria Hamilton as Katherine (Bridges) Chipping.  This version appeared on ITV and Masterpiece Theater as a two hour “TV movie”.  I watched it on YouTube where it runs as six episodes of approximately 15 min.  This version is not only an anti-war movie, it is also anti-bullying.  It goes out of its way to critique the hazing of new students and bullying of the younger and smaller students by the bigger, older and / or wealthier students.
At first I found it difficult to get past the “Doc Martin” typecast I have for Clunes.  I didn’t care for his aging (special effects / makeup work) as it looked like glued on rubber pieces.  It was more than halfway through, before I could finally see the role and not the actor in the role.  I have a feeling that was as much me as Clunes, though.  Also, the YouTube version I was watching lacked the start of the movie, so I was left wondering if any other parts had been cut out / off.
Final recommendation:  moderate to strong.  If this (YouTube version) is the only version you can find, it is good enough for you grasp and enjoy the movie.  Clunes ends up convincing as Chips and Hamilton is equal to the role of Katherine.  She is not nearly as “young beauty” as Meager or as winning as Clark (in the 1969 musical), but, in her own way, I felt she owned the role – particularly in her telling of the tale of the “sun vs wind wager”.
So, all in all, my reading and three viewings of “Goodbye, Mr. Chips” have been very enjoyable.  Each offered a slightly different aspect of what is considered a “classic” English tale and have hi-lighted (to me) what a true gem the story remains – even eighty years on (and counting).  I look forward to watching the 1939 version as soon as I can find it and to re-watching the others when they eventually become generally available (instead of broken up on YouTube).
* The post title is my weak attempt at a Latin translation of:  “Goodbye Again, Three Times“.
.
On This Day In:
2023	Now And Later
2022	Big And Bad (In A Good Way)
2021	Suggestions…
	Dichotomy (Sharp Dressed Man)
2020	Until November… Then Vote
2019	Start With Health And Friends
	Iterum Vale Tres*
2018	Tweets From The Disrupter-In-Chief
2017	Do We Still Listen To Her Silent Lips?
	Not Now, Not Ever
2016	Why Do You Write/Blog?
2015	Can Your Repeat The Question, Please?
2014	On Faith
2013	My Name Is Charles Stein
2012	Faiths And Sorcery
	Made And Kept Free
2011	Multi-Source Learning

Read Full Post »

The Man With A Code

“The Punisher” (2018 – Season 2)  —  series review
Caution:  “some” spoilers in this review.  If you intend to view the series, stop now…  You’ve been warned.  Also, much of this review is the same as / similar to my review of season one.
This is a Marvel Comics Universe “TV” series appearing on NetFlix.  The “Punisher” character was introduced in the (recently cancelled) “DareDevil” series (in season two) – and pretty much took it over – and this review is for the second season of his (the Punisher’s) series.  Basically, (in season 1) the family of a military expert is killed and he takes revenge against the killers.  He leaves one guy, who he promises (“threatens”) to come back for.  Blah, blah, blah.  Segue to season two…  So, now the guy who survived season one escapes from the mental hospital and the Punisher has to finish the job.
Ok, that’s pretty much what I expected from the end of season one…  And, it’s almost what you get in season 2.  The thing about the “Punisher” series is it is NEVER about the dozens of people he kills.  It is ALWAYS about “justice” for the guys behind the violent criminals.  The ones who are actually pulling the strings.  (And in this series, discovery means execution.)  In DareDevil, it was finding out who had his family executed.  In season one, it was about who actually did the executions.  Because that season ended in a non-fatal way, the antagonist could be a returning villain, but they could not be the “main” baddie.  Like season one, a new string-puller has to be introduced:  in this case a husband and wife team who use religion to make themselves wealthy and powerful.  And, then they have a puppet (on a string)…
This season, the series still stars Jon Bernthal as Frank Castle / Punisher, Ben Barnes returns to the second season as Billy Russo (Frank’s wartime friend who was the bad guy in season 1), Amber Rose Revah returns as Dinah Madani (Homeland Security Officer), Corbin Bernsen and Annette O’Toole as Anderson and Eliza Schultz (the “real” bad guys for this season), Josh Stewart plays John Pilgrim (the hyper-violent “religious” puppet of the Schultz’s), Giorgia Whigham plays Amy Bendix (the “innocent” who must be protected by Castle), Jason R. Moore as Curtis Hoyle (the Vet “do-gooder” medic), and Deborah Ann Woll as Karen Page (a carry over from Daredevil).
The season is dark but not as dark as the first season.  Literally.  There just seemed to be a lot more daylight / outdoor scenes.  But the killing is mostly done at night or in darker / indoors lighting.  (I think it’s meant to be a metaphor, but it’s easy to make this type of show more sophisticated than it really is:  always remember, it’s “just” a comic book adaptation.)  The series continues to try to deal with a host of issues, “BIG” philosophical issues, from right and wrong, to innocence, vigilantism, friendship, personal loss, and a rather bizarre attitude that “justice” almost always ends with violence – particularly gun violence.  While the depiction of gun violence is pretty accurate, the depiction of physical recovery remains essentially: “and then a miracle happens.”  There are scars, but recovery (from blows, gun shot wounds, knife cuts and broken bones) is almost instantaneous.  Like I said:  comic book…
Does it work and is it any good?  If you like this kind of thing (same as season one:  explosions, excessive violence, explosions, hand-to-hand combat, lots and lots of guns and gun fire, and did I mention explosions), and I do, then you’ll continue to enjoy this series.  And, I did.  The question was:  is it any good and was it better than season one?  Everything I said about season one remains true:  “As a comic book adaptation, it is very good.  As an action / adventure / who-dun-it, it’s pretty good.  As a realistic portrayal of armed and unarmed combat, uh, it’s a comic book…”
Final recommendation:  moderate to strong.  This season is rated higher than season one because they let the actors act more and kill / maim less (slightly).  In typical Marvel fashion, Billy Russo “almost” becomes a sympathetic character as we are introduced to his childhood and his earlier relationship with Castle.  Again, the series is definitely for mature audiences ONLY.  It feels strange to say (admit) it, but I (again) enjoyed the acting and the story more than I did the violence.  I particularly enjoyed the four part twist at the end of the season.  This was a better season and I hope Marvel and NetFlix give “The Punisher” another season to see where Castle’s wandering takes us.
.
On This Day In:
2023	Almost
2022	A Happy Realization
2021	Is Science Cumulative?
	We’re Aging With Time (Yesterday’s Wine)
2020	Where #45 Is Leading The Republican Party
2019	Your Own Blog Posts
	The Man With A Code
2018	Choose Goodness
2017	Developing Translations
2016	Think Like A Hero
2015	Reductionism
2014	Gravitation, n.
2013	Ups And Downs
2012	Nerd Heard – And Good-Bye
	Your Continuum
2011	Career Tips (Part 2)

Read Full Post »

Dangerous Waistcoats

“Bodyguard”  (2018)  —  TV series review  (BBC and NetFlix)
This review is for the BBC series from last year which was made available world-wide (or at least here in the U.S.) via NetFlix.  The series stars “Game of Thrones” actor (oldest Stark son) Richard Madden as Sergeant David Budd, an Afghanistan war veteran and Protection Command (PCO) bodyguard, Keeley Hawes as The Right Honorable Julia Montague, the Home Secretary, Conservative MP for Thames West (the “subject” person being protected), and, Gina McKee as Commander Anne Sampson, Head of the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Command.  Of course there was a raft of others, but I remembered (finally) McKee as the crippled wife / friend seen in “Notting Hill” (my review of that here).  McKee didn’t get a mention in that review / post, so I’m kinda making up for it with a mention in this post.
Like most BBC series (a “series” on the BBC means one year of shows), this series is relatively short – only six episodes, but each is roughly an hour long.  This means the series is suitable for a single day of binge viewing.  Or, alternatively, you can easily break it up into two viewings – which is what I did.
Because the show is relatively current, I won’t get into a lot of detail as it will ruin the viewing for you.  All I will say is that it is a tense, well acted police drama with a smattering of politics (police, domestic (U.K.) and international) thrown in, as well as some discreetly shown sexual content (male nudity) and action / violence lightly sprinkled in.  The first twenty minutes throws you in the deep end (tension wise) and it’s a roller coaster from there to the end.
Final recommendation:  highly to very highly recommended.  If you’re dying to see Madden’s bum or hear him repeatedly calling his superior female officers (and PC subject) “Mum”, this is your ticket.  I thoroughly enjoyed it and hope there will be additional years (series) to follow.  There has been no announcement as of this date (to my knowledge), but I understand the show was so popular the producers / writers have said if there is a second series, it will run through four.  If this happens, I hope they don’t run the main topic of each year across the break(s).  Please keep the story arc within each single season.  Then if the BBC or NetFlix cancel the remaining years, we viewers won’t be left in the lurch with an incomplete arc.  (Not that anyone ever listens to me…)
.
On This Day In:
2023	Courage To Love
2022	Pass A Voting Rights Act For Democracy’s Sake
2021	Tomorrow President Biden Starts Wrestling
	Good-Bye #45 (The Tears Of A Clown)
2020	The Burden Of Faith
	On To Superbowl LIV (54)!!
2019	Are Your Dogs Barking?
	Dangerous Waistcoats
2018	And 40+ Years Later?
2017	He Is Alone
2016	Compensation
2015	Charlie Redux
2014	The Crux
2013	Erosion And Rechannelling
	Alliance, n.
2012	How Many Thought… (One I Know Of)
	Choices And Decisions
2011	Speed Spoils
	Simply Intended
2010	A Second 4 Hour Jog

Read Full Post »