3 Thoughts on The Beekeeper

1. The Stupidity - Oh my God, it's just about the dumbest thing I've seen in ages! The plot follows along with similar type movies like John Wick, The Equalizer, etc., in which the main character has "retired" from some elite assassin group but comes out of retirement to seek justice for personal reasons. But this guy, after retiring from a group called "The Beekeepers" actually becomes a beekeeper. And they call him "The Beekeeper" as if we're supposed to be terrified of those words multiple times in the movie. I laughed every single time. They explain to us (the dumb audience) multiple times that beekeepers protect the hive and sometimes that means they have to kill the queen if she has produced bad bees, so if you didn't see where that story was going, then maybe go back to school? I don't know, it's just so fucking stupid. But the even stupider part is the actual story that revolves around tech bros scamming old people. Seriously, that's what the movie is about. 

2. The Stath - I rate this film 2.5 stars, but if Jason Statham was not the star of this, I think it would be considered unwatchable. Statham is excellent. He's got the line between serious action star and comedic charm down to a fucking science. The fight scenes are spectacular and highly entertaining - I particularly love the one towards the end when you can feel the exhaustion between them but they still keep going. But, when he's not onscreen, this movie is fucking dire. I like Josh Hutcherson, but what the fuck was he doing here?? His "tech bro" persona is hopefully the worst acting I'll see all year. And Emmy Raver-Lampman??? Perhaps the least believable FBI agent I've ever seen in my life. She tries so hard to come off as this badass, FBI savant, and it's just so wildly performed. The dialogue between her and her partner is supposed to be funny, I think, but man, it's just so awful. I like her in The Umbrella Academy, but this role did her no favors. Also, not sure why she gets to wear ripped, tight, skinny jeans to work while everyone else is in professional FBI clothes? But the scene that takes the cake in ridiculousness is when the "new" beekeeper appears to kill Statham. They describe the character as basically unhinged, and then this little tiny woman with crazy hair appears. TO KILL JASON STATHAM. She's, like, me sized. I'm talking tiny. It's HILARIOUS. Anyway, there's also legitimate actors in this too, like Jeremy Irons and Minnie Driver (but I think Driver's role must have been cut down? I can't imagine she would take this role for those tiny scenes?). 

3. The Experience - You guys! I haven't been to the movie theater in over a year!!! 15 months to be exact (to see Don't Worry Darling). In 2020, one of my goals for the year was to get back into seeing movies in the theater (it suffered since I moved to my current house), but then, well, you can guess how that went since we suffered a WORLDWIDE PANDEMIC! I was nervous to make that my goal, again, for this year, but I really do want to make it a habit again - even if it's just once a month. Other than some personal life changes, I also just stopped making theaters a priority because other people were ruining it for me, but then once the pandemic hit - and everything became so available via streaming, it seems a little pointless and like waste of money. I already pay so much for all these streaming services, I might as well wait until the film I want to see appears on one of these services at no additional cost, right? It usually takes no longer than, like, 6 months, and I am a very patient person. Anyway, even though this movie was terrible, I'm glad I saw it in a theater. I appreciate things a little more, especially the sound design during the fight scenes. I think that's usually the biggest thing I notice when I see movies in a theater - the sound. But, even though I saw this in a fairly empty theater during a Thursday matinee, I still had to listen to two different couples chit-chatting through the whole thing. Also, when it ended, one of the women asked her partner "I don't understand, why was he a beekeeper?", so I guess, yeah, people are fucking dumb. 

Oscar Nominations: The Good, The Bad, and The Snubbed

The Good 

- Some incredible films spread throughout the categories - Anatomy of a Fall, May December, Past Lives, Oppenheimer! It's been an incredible year! I haven't seen a few of the nominees yet (American Fiction, Poor Things), but overall I don't have too many complaints. 

- I think it's wild that so many Oscar pundits didn't have Annette Bening and/or Jodie Foster as nominees. They seem to be the "villains" of the nominees this year, but they both give incredible award-worthy performances in Nyad and they are well-loved by their fellow actors and audiences. OF COURSE they were going to be nominated, I don't care how many pre-cursers they missed (but both got in SAG nominations, which is usually the most telling for the acting categories) - if you didn't have them in your predictions, I'm going to assume you have no idea what you're talking about. 

- There are a lot of proposed "snubs" that I totally agree with: Leo DiCaprio, Margot Robbie, Greta Lee. Sorry, these were not the best performances of the year. 

- How random is it that El Conde got in for Cinematography and absolutely nothing else??? So wild, but I love it!

- Society of the Snow is SO GOOD (thoughts coming soon)! I would love for it to win International Feature, but I think that's going to The Zone of Interest since it's nominated for Picture too (no complaints - I haven't seen it yet, and from what I've read, I'm going to love it) 

- Some categories that I think Barbie should have succeeded in and did (and should win) - Costume (how is it even a competition at this point?). And Production Design. 

The Bad

- Excuse me, but Barbie over Killers of the Flower Moon for Adapted Screenplay is hilarious to me. I didn't love Killers (thoughts will be posted soon), but it's an incredibly difficult source to adapt from. I get that a lot of people love Barbie, but objectively it's a really dumb movie! Entertaining but dumb. 

- And while we're talking about Barbie, I do love a bit of chaos when it comes to nominations, but America Ferrera??? Because of that one monologue? Excuse me, that one stupid monologue??  It's so fucking stupid it made my brain hurt. And Ryan Gosling? These are not award-worthy performances! 

- The whole Supporting Actress category is the most unexpected, which I appreciate, but - the actual nominees are wild to me. Again, America, but also...Emily Blunt - she gets completely lost in the film surrounded by better performances. And, the favored to win - Da'Vine Joy Randolph with one of the most horrendous Boston accents put on film. I do love Danielle Brooks, though (I haven't seen The Color Purple yet, but I think I have to root for her by default?? Jodie has enough awards for now).

- Well, I guess I'll say it - Lily Gladstone is extremely one-note in Killers of the Flower Moon (again, thoughts will be posted soon). I think this is a case of everyone jumping on a bandwagon and Hollywood wanting to pat themselves on the back for nominating a Native American (finally!!). I know it's extremely uncool to say among film twitter (which is why I'm not really a part of the community, I just follow along), but she did nothing for me in that film. 

- While I really loved Past Lives, how does it get in Best Picture with only ONE other nomination?? I'm happy for the Screenplay nom (the one nomination I would have chosen for it, as well. Although I could see a case for Lead & Supporting Actor), but if it misses every other category then it shouldn't be in Best Picture. Obvi. 

- Maestro is a bad movie. It's well-made, sure. But the acting (from both Bradley Cooper & Carey Mulligan) is atrocious. And the story is boring and pointless. I hated it. The fact that it's nominated in any category shows you just how important the whole "campaigning" process is. I hope it walks away from the ceremony with zip. 

The Snubbed 

- Charles Melton is incredible in May December, as is Natalie Portman. Overall, May December didn't perform as well as I would have wanted (Yay for the Screenplay nomination), but I think I expected that. I know a lot were rooting for Melton, but the good news is that he got a ton of buzz for this performance and I'm sure we'll see a lot more from him in the future. 

- I do think that Greta Gerwig should have been nominated! As stupid as the movie is, it's INCREDIBLY made - and you can tell that Gerwig put so much thought and detail into every single moment. She also made the highest grossing film of the year! As a female director with a female lead about being female! I'm not always a fan, but I give credit where it's due, and she is DUE. 

- Again, I love the chaos of the Supporting Actress category, but I would have loved if Rachel McAdams made it in (especially if you compare her mini-monologue to Ferrera's. McAdams made me cry IN PUBLIC!). And if they wanted chaos why not pick Pattie LuPone for Beau is Afraid?? 

- How does a film like Asteroid City get snubbed for Production Design??? I think Barbie should win, but this should have at least garnered a nomination, surely?? 

- There are A LOT of incredible performances that were never part of the Oscar conversations this year like Florence Pugh for A Good Person, Joaquin Phoenix for Beau is Afraid, Gael Garcia Bernal for Cassandro, Taron Egerton for Tetris, Mia Goth for Infinity Pool. I could go on and on, which just goes to show how much of a game this whole thing is. 

Thoughts on 5 New TV Shows

1. Bodies - This is a cool idea for a television show, but I don't think the overall product worked for me. I went into it fairly blind - just a recommendation from someone on twitter that I usually trust with tv stuff. The first episode is a dull, but I love how it ended with going into the future. That definitely peaked my interest. However, overall, I found the rest of the series dull, as well, and also hard to follow. It definitely picks up by the 4th episode - once the whole story is exposed and the audience can finally follow along, but not enough for me. The only timelines I was interested in were the present day and future ones. Both the other past tense ones are booooorrrring. I didn't realize that it was a DC comics story (it's credited at the end as "originally published by DC comics"). I feel like they could have done so much more to make this interesting. It definitely would have benefited from being shorter, too. It could have been a really cool, sci-fi, time travel miniseries with 6 episodes. It's weird because usually shows from the UK are better at keeping the stories concise (at least from what I've been exposed to). For the most part, the acting is okay, but the actor who plays the child version of Elias is really bad, and also hinders my enjoyment of the series. 

2. A Murder at the End of the World - There are elements of this miniseries that are at complete opposites of the spectrum for me. I LOVE Brit Marling so much - she is probably among my favorite current tv/screen writers (along with her writing partner Zal Batmanglij). She has a way of writing sci-fi or spiritual elements that are so grounded in reality and depth of characters. I will watch any and every single thing that she does. However, Emma Corrin and Harris Dickinson are two of my least favorite actors of the "next" generation. Just pure charisma vacuums (and unfortunately Dickinson is one of those actors who is suddenly in everything and everyone loves him. I don't understand!). Corrin is supposed to be like a Gen Z Sherlock Holmes and it just doesn't work at all. And also, there is a 6 year timeline and in the past timelines they are supposed to be a teenager and they definitely look 30. And Dickinson with that haircut?? Is that supposed to be a Gen Z haircut? UGH, anyway. So, as expected, this series definitely has its ups and downs. The first episode is hard to get through - I knew exactly who was going to die, so waiting until the end to expose it is really stupid. The series quickly grows into Glass Onion set in Iceland. It also becomes GLARINGLY obvious who the killer is. Also, *spoilers ahead* the whole twist of the abusive relationship isn't handled very well, in my opinion. But, the setting is absolutely stunning. Iceland is so beautiful - I went there in 2019 and I can't wait to go back! They are obviously in a more secluded atmosphere, but I think the design of this building in the middle of all that snow sets up for a great locale. There's also some haunting music that creates a nice creepy atmosphere. The supporting cast are strong - Marling, Clive Owen, Alice Braga etc. Overall, though, I found most of it really dumb. They clearly don't know how motels work, as they just take over a room of someone who has checked out as if that's a clever way to get a free room (??). They would come clean the room after someone has checked out so they can charge any additional fees right away if necessary. And they would have it on record that they checked out so when they go and ask for a key, the receptionist would have seen that they were lying. It's SO ridiculously dumb, and yet Corrin's character is like "OMG you're so smart" (or whatever Gen Z say nowadays). They're, like, advanced computer hackers and they show that by hacking into garage door openers - but I think that's like hacking 101 (my husband can literally open every garage on our street. He can also hack key fobs and he's certainly not, like, a master hacker or anything. Also, here's a tip because I think it's crazy that people can hack into these things so easily - make sure the door from your garage into your house is *just* as secure as your front door and also don't hit the lock button you your key fob more than once. Sometimes you think you forgot or something so you hit it multiple times, but apparently that's when it becomes easy to hack. Also, generally people are good - my husband can do these things but he doesn't because he's not a psychopath). And, another minor complaint, but the pink color in Corrin's hair kept changing in saturation. Obviously, they didn't film the scenes in order so her hair goes back and forth between being super pink and faded pink, but that's an easy thing to fix (and the script supervisor should have pointed this out???). Some episodes are very boring, too. I fell asleep for a lot of episode 5 and I don't feel like I missed anything, which is kind of a problem. Definitely my least favorite thing that Marling has ever done. 

3. Echo - I'm glad that they do a little recap of Echo's introduction in Hawkeye, because honestly I barely remember it! But some important stuff does happen! I've only watched the first two episodes so far, but I'M IN! It's good! I think Alaqua Cox is brilliant in this role - and I fully believe that she can kick everyone's ass. I read criticism of this character as being the epitome of "woke" - like "oh COME ON she's a Native American AND she's deaf AND she's an amputee", but the thing is...SHE IS! This person exists in our world - a Native American deaf amputee and she's KILLING it in this role! So...what's the problem?! I actually didn't realize that she actually is missing a leg in real life until I started writing this post - and that just makes me love her more. Because actors talk about how rigorous it is to train for fight scenes like this and can you even imagine doing all this training with one leg??? What an inspiration! I love her! Anyway, I'm hopeful that the rest of the series is as strong as the first two episodes. I like that they changed their strategy and kept this as a short 5 episode series and released them all at once. I know some are saying that it's an admission of defeat, but I don't think that was the case? I saw this heavily advertised and it's setting up for bringing back a well-loved character, Daredevil. I don't think they were trying to push it under the rug, I think they're just trying to figure out what's working and what's not. They clearly need to re-strategize. Also, Vincent D'Onofrio as Kingpin, is perhaps my favorite Marvel villain of all, so I'm excited that he's back. He's genuinely terrifying. Anyway, this is also a disappointing reminder for me that I have yet to conquer sign language. I'm going to try again this year! Also, the burn of Anthropologie is hilarious (something like "you can get your ethnically ambiguous Navajo rug at Anthropologie") because it's true! I was just looking on our website (I work for them) and there is currently a dress that is sooo Native American inspired that I feel like it's cultural appropriation. Sometimes our buyers don't know where that invisible line is and it's troublesome. 

4. Monarch: Legacy of Monsters - I like this show a lot and am hopeful that it gets picked up for another season (I think there's a strong chance. Apple + tends to give their shows a chance and it's fairly well-received). I think the only criticism I read is that there's not enough of the "monsters" fighting, but I like that it's more about the humans only because they did such an incredible job with the casting of this series. First, casting father and son duo, Kurt and Wyatt Russell, as the same character but different timelines is a GENIUS move. Second, I love Kiersey Clemons - I've been a big fan ever since Dope (an incredible film, please watch if you haven't). Third, Holy shit, Anna Sawai is fucking GORGEOUS! And she leads the show really strongly. I think they do a good job with balancing the two different timelines and merging them towards the end. It's all very entertaining, moves quickly, introduces some great twists with certain characters and plots, and has some great visuals. It definitely could have been a solid 8 episodes instead of 10, but other than that I don't really have any negative criticism. The end is fabulous, too, with the glance at King Kong. I thought they would introduce him sooner, but I like that they ended it as sort of a cliffhanger (forcing Apple's hand for a second season, really). 

5. The Curse - I don't know how to properly describe this show, but I think the closest is that it's like Atlanta but it's about white, wealthy, entitled people. The storylines are not even close to being similar, but, like the feel of it is the same - the absurdity, the satire, the uncomfortable moments. In other words, it's absolutely brilliant. It touches on everything from white guilt and the white savior syndrome to gentrification to the ethical dilemma and boundaries of documentaries. I think it's important to note the location is the site of The Manhattan Project. I don't remember if it's quoted in Oppenheimer, but a very famous quote is "A day will come when men and women will curse the name Los Alamos". The fact that they used this location and produced a show in which a white man is more literally "cursed" by a local child is no accident. The show focuses on a couple starring in an HGTV style home renovation type series - in which they build "passive" homes. However, in building these homes, they are relocating the native people. They try to "apologize" for this by creating jobs for the local people and feature their "plight" so-to-speak on the show. I think the more interesting part of this show is that I do believe that these are two people who genuinely are trying to be "good" people. They are just incredibly misguided and the way they expect gratitude and praise from this community that they are taking from is incredible insight into a whole lot of people more interested in being known for good deeds than doing the good deeds themselves. It's performative activism to the 100th degree. And Emma Stone gives the performance of a lifetime - I'm not even being hyperbolic. It's incredible. The best she's ever been (and she's great in everything!). I hope she gets the Emmy for it (crazy that she was already nominated for a Golden Globe for it...under the Drama category, but I think it's going to perform much better with the Emmys because it's getting more and more of a following). She's an actress I can definitely see getting an EGOT in her future (she can sing, too, right??? I think so. How do we get her a Grammy? That's going to be the challenge. She can read an audiobook or something, I'm sure). I admit, I don't really know much about Nathan Fielder. I saw a lot of people hype up his show (I think it was called Nathan for You? Something like that), but I had no interest. But now I might give another one of his projects a chance. Him and Bennie Safdie have incredible comedic chemistry together. I fully thought that episode 8 was the finale - and was even fully satisfied with the ending, only to realize that there were two more episodes yet to air (score!! The first time I felt happy that a series was longer than I expected!). And let me tell you, that finale is one for the ages. It's completely unexpected, hilarious, dark, surreal, and haunting. And that Rachael Ray cameo - with her just completely destroying the idea of a "passive" home is just brilliant. 

4 Thoughts on The Emmys

1. The Host - I don't know much about Anthony Anderson - I've never seen Blackish, but I think I've seen some things with him in it and I don't mind him. I don't think he's, like, hilarious or anything, but certainly not as bad as some of the previous Emmy hosts have been. I think he had a good sense of what his job was - and that is to celebrate television. This is the best way to stay "safe" with an overly critical audience, while also still being entertaining. I think that having his mom as the playoff band is actually really funny "you can't ignore my momma". The bit got a bit awkward when she actually started telling people to wrap it up, but overall it addressed the subject in a lighthearted manner (and realistically, the winners can't just talk forever! They have to keep the show moving!). I also laughed at him in the AHS latex bodysuit. Overall, I think he did an excellent job - he didn't tell any offensive jokes, kept it simple, and shared his love of television and its stars! That's how you do it. 

2. The Show - It's super weird to air the Emmys in January, after The Golden Globes. A postponement due to the writer's strike, caused shows from 2022 to win awards in 2024. Like, The Bear wins are for season 1! Even though they've already won GGs for season 2! But other than that, Wow. What a great show! One of the best awards shows in recent memory. I hope everyone behind these things takes extensive notes and continues to do The Emmys exactly like this going forward. I do think that building those replicated sets is a little much for how little screentime they actually had. I almost would have preferred less sets with the cast reunions having more time (they give out multiple awards and banter in between). But kudos to the production team for pulling all that off! I loved seeing all the cast reunions too - Martin, Ally McBeal, All in the Family, Cheers  - LOVE IT. I also liked that they gave time for shows that feel like legacies even though they are still going like Grey's Anatomy and It's Always Sunny. And they invited television LEGENDS to present (like Carol Burnett, Joan Collins, Marla Gibbs, etc.). The show started off super emotional with Christina Applegate being the first presenter. She did a fantastic job of trying to keep it funny and lighthearted ("body not by Ozempic"), but, sorry, we're all still going to be devastated with her MS diagnosis and we ARE going to clap for every single thing she says and does! Then the In Memoriam section KILLED ME. I was thinking the whole time, it's weird they are celebrating all these tv shows with no mention of Friends, but I think it would just be too soon for any of the cast members right now. And then when they started the In Memoriam, I knew they were going to end it with Matthew Perry, but I didn't expect them to change the song to the Friends theme *cries forever*. It's insane at how many tv legends we've lost in the last 15 months (Andre Braugher, Angela Lansbury, Suzanne Somers, Kirstie Alley, Norman Lear, Bob Barker, Paul Reubans, Leslie Jordan, Alan Arkin, Lance Riddick...the list just keeps going!). 

3. The Winners - Elton John is in the EGOT club!!!! That's probably my favorite thing that happened at this years Emmys. I wish he was there to accept it! My other favorite win is probably Niecy Nash-Betts. While Dahmer felt like it came out a million years ago, her performance has stuck with me. And I love that she shouted out all the "black and brown women who go unheard and over-policed" and that she also said "I wanna thank...me!" because she should be extremely proud of herself. She's been constantly told that she should stay in her lane (comedy) but she persisted and she gave a performance of a lifetime. I'm happy for the other winners - everyone from Succession and The Bear, all super talented, but it did make for a boring list of winners. Kieran has been my favorite among the cast since the first season, so I'm happy that he overtook his co-workers for the final season. I don't think Beef should have won so many awards. I would be fine with Steven Yeun, but that's it (but obviously I wanted Taron to win that. However, Yeun does give a fantastic performance I can't deny that. I think Taron's role was far more complicated, and he's just consistently snubbed. It would have been a nice surprise win). And Dominique Fishback should have won over Ali. The biggest miss, though, as far as the wins - is not giving Rhea Seehorn the award this year. Better Call Saul hasn't won a single Emmy and that is egregious! I thought for sure they would see the error of their ways and give it to Seehorn. I'm glad that Paul Walter Hauser won because he was incredible in Black Bird - his speech was weird with the slam poetry, but it was perfectly him (also, WHY wasn't Taron there?? I feel like he knew he wasn't going to win, but it's not like him to not support his co-stars? PWH was the favorite to win and has won a lot of the precursors. What's more important than THE EMMYS, Taron? THE EMMYS IN WHICH YOU ARE A NOMINEE?? His next project isn't filming until March. WHAT THE FUCK?! I'm kidding, though, he probably has a good reason. I hope everything is ok!). 

4. The Fashion - The clear winner of best dressed is Ayo Edebiri. That dress is fucking perfect and it fit her like a glove. It's simple, but the shape gives it a modernity. She looked glamourous but still comfortable and really cool. Other looks I loved: Camila Morrone - HOLY SMOKES! Just gorgeous (and again, simple but glamourous). Rachel Brosnahan - that deep wine color with her pale skin is STUNNING (I wish her hair were different though). The worst dresses weren't even that bad, which is nice, most were just boring. Quinta Brunson's dress is a pretty color, but those wrinkles??? And it looks like it's supposed to be that way, too. EW. Sorry, I hate wrinkles (I literally steam every single thing I wear). Merritt Wever and Kirsten Dunst both looked like they were going to work at Ann Taylor instead of The Emmys. And Suki Waterhouse - eeeek. I love pregnant women in fancy gowns, but this was awful with the bow below her belly and the open sides? I can't look directly at it! Also, it's weird that Ellen Pompeo and Kathryn Hahn were practically wearing the same thing (stylists are supposed to prevent that!) and one of them looks a million times better than the other - goes to show you how important fit and styling are! 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. Anatomy of a Fall - *some spoilers ahead* I tried to go into this with minimal expectations, because people talked it up SO MUCH, and sometimes that makes for a disappointing experience. I'm pleased to say that it is excellent. A few notes shy of a masterpiece. First, and foremost, I love that we don't get a definitive answer about what actually happened to the husband. I was sort of expecting it to end with a scene that explained everything, but it doesn't, so we are left to determine for ourselves. Second, the acting is spectacular (for the most part...). Sandra Huller deserves all the praise that she is receiving. I also think the man that played the prosecutor (or whatever the French version is called) makes the whole movie. He literally made me question everything and almost had me convinced that she did it! His sassy attitude is just very entertaining too (his response to "Is Stephen King a serial killer" is "Well, did his wife turn up dead under uncertain circumstances?" LOL). Third, for a French courtroom drama that is over 2 hours, it moves very quickly (although, it could have been shorter, for sure). I love that the dialogue opens up discussions about marriage and relationships, jealousy, and also how perspective is not reality. I think it's a little ridiculous that this case seems to hinge on the memory/perspective of their son - who is also BLIND. I feel like his whole testimony would be thrown out because it's clear that he's suffering from trauma (and that fucks with your head). It's interesting how every moment of their marriage is dissected, though, and it could easily be translated into a multitude of meanings. We don't really see their marriage before the death - just a small scene in which she is clearly annoyed with her husband. And how often are women annoyed with their husbands?? My husband and I get along swimmingly, but I'm annoyed with him multiple times a day. And Fourth, that might be the greatest performance from a dog that I've ever seen? How did they get the dog to do that? It's also a very cute dog - the type of dog I would love to have (I think it's a border collie?). So, do you guys want to know my theory on what happened? I simply think that he fell. The ledge is tall, so they make it seem like that is unlikely. But if he heard a noise or was looking at something he could have leaned over the ledge and then lost his balance. The other two options - murder or suicide - just don't fit. I don't think she has any motive to kill her husband and that fight seems like a normal relationship fight (except that it turns violent - and that shouldn't be normal, but it is for a lot of relationships). And I don't think she would traumatize her child like that - if she did murder him, she surely would not want her son to find the body. And as far as a possible suicide? Who would jump off of a two story house to commit suicide? There's a high probability of survival (and just some broken bones) from that fall. Plus, the testimony at the end from the kid, talking about how his dad was preparing him for death? I think he was actually, literally, talking about the dog? You need to prepare your kids for animal deaths as it's often their first experience with death. It's wild that they all are like "oh yeah, he was suicidal". And, yes, it seems he was suicidal, with taking a bunch of pills one time, but also...people like him often do things like that for attention. I mean, you should always take it seriously, but I think he was just being a dramatic, jealous, little bitch because his wife was successful and he couldn't handle it properly. Anyway, that's my take. Also, I love that they use the instrumental version of 50 Cent's "P.I.M.P" because it is so hilarious and I'll never be able to listen to that song without thinking of this movie ever again. Okay, so do you also want to know why I don't think this film is a masterpiece? It's a minority opinion, for sure, because I've mostly read praise, but I think the kid is God-awful. I think they definitely should have hired an actual blind person for this because his pretending to be blind was SO BAD and distracting. It really ruined an otherwise perfect film, for me. 

2. Good Grief - This was a bit disappointing for me. I love Dan Levy so much, but I felt like this movie was missing something. Actually missing a lot (including a point?). It's very similar to Spoiler Alert in a way, except that movie had the husband die a slow death, and this is very suddenly in the beginning. But the story is the same - grieving for someone you loved but had a complicated relationship with. I like some things about it - like that it's more about his relationship with his two best friends, but I never really get a sense of love between these friends? It's like they are just 3 people stuck together. There's no connection, comradery, honesty among them, and I find that weird. Ruth Negga is the CLEAR highlight - acting circles around everyone else, but also has the most interesting storyline. She also knows how to command the screen. I can't believe they cast Luke Evans in such a small role, though. I expected him to be shown in flashbacks or something? But, nope. Emma Corrin is in it, too, in a blink-or-you'll-miss-it part. I think my biggest gripe with the film is that these just don't feel like real people and the situation doesn't feel grounded in reality, either. First, who would let their husband know that they found someone else via a card? Nobody, that's who. And second, how did you not see the hundreds of thousands of dollars missing because of this whole other life he has? They are clearly wealthy, but not so wealthy that he wouldn't notice that much money missing. Third, not in a million years would they let this rando guy stay in the apartment with them??? If they felt bad for him or whatever, they could just pay for him to stay somewhere else (again, they clearly have money). My other big gripe is the way art is used in the story. There are two major references to Monet for really no reason other than some of the movie taking place in Paris - the poster is a copy of a Monet painting with the characters inserted into it (thanks, I hate it! Apparently it was a specialty poster posted on Instagram to promote the movie and not the official poster, but still...) and then there is an important scene that takes place at the Orangerie Museum (that has Monet's work in that oval/circular room. I would love to see that in person. I went to Paris once a long time ago and I hated it, so it's at the bottom of my list for a revisit, but if I ever go this is my number one place I want to see). But, the part I really hate is that the main character is an "artist" who...uses a projector to project images on a screen and then draws over that (i.e CHEATING). I had an art teacher in high school who tried to teach us this as a way to draw and I complained, dropped the class, and they let me take an independent study with a different art teacher instead. But they still let him teach that way!! It's basically tracing. A literal 4 year old can fucking trace. And art is supposed to be an interpretation of what you see/feel not "hey let me trace this exact image onto my canvas". It just makes me so angry! Anyway, this movie also feels like it's 3 hours long and it's only 100 minutes. And there's a karaoke scene that will make your ears bleed. 

3. Skinamarink - Okay, so I appreciate what this film attempts to do. But, a big HOWEVER, it's one of the worst films I've seen in a while. If it were like a 20 minute short film experiment, I would have been on board. But to watch this screen with minimal visual elements and barely any understandable dialogue as a full-length feature is just pure torture. I thought it was interesting that I saw mostly bad reviews of this, and then it was picked as the best horror film of the year by a major film outlet. It definitely made me curious about it, and now I understand the disconnect. Because it is extremely experimental and in terms of film, kind of groundbreaking. It reminds me a little of The Blair Witch Project because I hated that movie, but I understand and appreciate the influence it had. I do like that it evokes emotion and a bit of childhood nostalgia - as a kid, "darkness" was filled with the unknown. You would hear little noises and stare into the void until you've convinced yourself that something is there. Shapes and images start to form, but were never really there. The vibe in the beginning is just *excellent*. But then, it goes on like that - absolutely nothing happens. It's so hard to even pay attention to because the screen is mostly black and there's no dialogue, just quiet child-like whispers. It's not scary at all (unless, as an adult, you're still afraid of the dark???). Some stuff disappears and weird things happen, but that's it! I didn't think I would see a worse film than Cocaine Bear in 2023, but leave it to me to watch the worst film of the year mere days before the new year. 

4. Love at First Sight - *some spoilers* This is a perfectly cute romcom. The leads have great chemistry, it has a layered story, and some funny moments. I think it could have done completely without the "storyteller" gimmick, although I do like Jameela Jamil. It's just awkward having her play all these different characters at different points in the story (although using the same actor for every minor speaking role certainly saves money!). I love Ben Hardy and I think Haley Lu Richardson is adorable (I love her big, curly hair too! Movie stars don't have hair like this anymore - it's just her and Margaret Qualley! Everyone else's hair is straight, straight, straight!), and like I said they have chemistry galore, which is essential for a story like this. I do feel their instant connection. I don't think Hardy plays a believable 22 year old though?? He's clearly in his 30s and looks it (not an insult, he's hot!). It's clear that there's going to be a "twist" and I thought it was going to be that they were going to the same wedding or something (maybe he was related to her new step-mom or something like that), but I quickly realized that he was going to his mom's funeral after he mentions her being sick (there's still a nice little twist with this, though). Some of it is a little stupid, though. Not to be pedantic or anything, but if you've already checked into your flight and gone through security - they'll hold the plane for you for a few minutes and announce your name incessantly (this happened to me once and when I finally got on the plane everyone clapped! So embarrassing). Plus, flights to London are like 7 hours at most? They are acting like they are on an 18 hour flight! And why would she plan a flight for the SAME DAY as the wedding you have to go to? Nobody would do that. It's just bad planning. But, again, it's cute so I'll forgive the dumb plot points. I do like the line about how "You're more likely to die on the ride home from the airport" because I say this all the time. Car accidents are so common (especially in New Jersey), I don't understand how anyone who drives (especially in New Jersey) is scared of doing things like flying? When I was telling people about going on a volcano helicopter tour (which I finally did last year and I LOVED it! I'm obsessed), everyone said "but helicopters are so dangerous" and I was like "uh...I drive on the Garden State Parkway every day, why would I be scared of a helicopter?". It just doesn't make sense. Also, that cover of "I Wanna Dance with Somebody" is stunning! Oh and I love that Dexter Fletcher is in this! I adore him. I sometimes forget that he started as an actor. 

5. Gran Turismo - I'm sure this is shocking to everyone, but I don't follow car racing. I saw a commercial for this when my husband and I were watching tv and it seemed to peak his interest. I always get excited if he wants to watch a movie, because he rarely does, but then he sadly declined but then proceeded to tell me the entire story. I'll watch anything, really, especially anything with Orlando Bloom (I know he's a terrible actor, but he's pretty!). What my husband failed to tell me is that this was about the driver that killed a spectator a few years back! Which I actually did know about! It was a huge news story and I remember watching the video of it and being horrified (how are the people allowed to be that close to the race cars, though?).  I googled about the real-life incident while watching this, and apparently people are upset with how it is portrayed here because it's used as a motivating factor (and they messed with the timeline), but stuff like that happens a lot in stories based on true events to increase the melodrama. Anyway, that part was more interesting to me than anything else. It sort of felt like it was trying to be Kingsman with the whole "we are recruiting you into an elite group of people" except that the elite group are just people who can drive cars really fast (instead of, you know, saving the world). Car racing may be the dumbest sport (sorry, not sorry), but I admit, it would be pretty overwhelming to be on that track having never raced an actual car before. I don't think I like the main actor (he was also in Saltburn and I kind of ignored his performance because I couldn't decide if I liked him or not), I can still be swayed I think, but there's something off about him. I like David Harbour here, though. And I like that he's actually a good coach and not a complete asshole. They make him seem like he's going to be that cliched asshole in the beginning but he's more realistic in his approach - like during the first race he's got low expectations and he's just hoping for him to complete the race safely. I think the whole dad part could have been done better - did it really take that long for his dad to express his pride for his son's success? The whole storyline disappears and then reappears to, again, add melodrama. Otherwise, it's a slick movie - very well-made, moves quickly, and has that appealing underdog thing going for it. 

4 Thoughts on The Golden Globes

1. The Host - Wow. Spectacularly bad host. One of the worst in history. I had never even heard of Jo Koy before this - I saw a few people comment that his stand-up is funny, so I'm not sure what happened here. He seemed to realize that it wasn't going well and defensively started blaming the writers and commenting that he didn't write all the jokes, which is just rude?! In a year in which we saw one of the biggest writer's strikes in history, you're going to burn your writers? I can't even really think of any joke that stood out? Maybe the one about Keoghan's penis? But also, making the actors in the audience extremely uncomfortable is not a good look (I feel like only Ricky does that well). You know you did a bad job when Jared Leto upstages you as actually being funny (he pokes fun at himself and method acting). He kind of disappeared from the rest of the show after the monologue, which was a smart choice. 

2. The Show - Luckily, the show wasn't as bad as the opening monologue. Some awkward moments, for sure, but the presenters were mostly funny. The show moved quickly, the speeches were lovely, and everyone seemed to be having a good time. The best bits included The Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse cast doing a bit where the studio execs wrote their banter "I am relatable", Will Ferrell and Kristen Wiig proving once again that they should be hosting these things with their silly little jazzy dance, and Keri Russell and Ray Romano telling the "truth". My favorite presenter pairing though was Andra Day and Jon Batiste - they just looked like they were having a ton of fun and their little Mario Brothers music bit made me laugh. Some of the presenter bits didn't work (pairing Kevin Costner with America Ferrara - poor America, she really tried to keep it going), but overall I think there were more good than bad. Most of the speeches seemed really genuine - my favorite is probably Kieran Culkin, first with his "nightmare" declaration (winning an award and having to stand up in front of everyone with millions of people watching is definitely a nightmare to me, too), and then his continuation of being really happy that he won "suck it Pedro, sorry!" made me giggle. I also liked Ayo's speech because she seemed so nervous that her voice was shaking. She's just the best - so sweet and genuine, and thanking her agent's and publicist's ASSISTANTS is the right call ("the people who actually answer my emails"). But perhaps the best part is Jennifer Lawrence mouthing "If I don't win, I'm leaving" as her name was being announced as a nominee. I wish more people had fun with these things, but some just take it so seriously. Also, the Suits reunion!! I loved their little joke about waiting "so long for your show to get recognition". I, for one, watched Suits from the very beginning (I'm a trendsetter, what can I say). 

3. The Winners - I can't complain too much about the winners chosen, most are deserving. But I do think the Globes played it a little safe. On the television side - The Bear and Succession dominated, which is deserved. I know a lot are upset that The Bear is considered a comedy, but this has been happening for YEARS (I can remember all the way back to when Weeds was nominated as a comedy). Yes, it's weird, but I don't think the Globes care. They also put Emma Stone's performance for The Curse in Drama? It's clearly satire, which is a form of comedy. I'm surprised that Elizabeth Debicki won over Meryl Streep, but I do think her Princess Diana was better than most. I'm not the biggest fan of Beef - it's a good mini-series, but definitely not the best (especially if the new season of Fargo is included!). I do think Steven Yeun deserved his win though. And for the movie side, Cillian, Nolan, RDJ and an Oppenheimer win! I think they'll take the Oscars too. I know a lot of people are rooting for Barbie, but it's just a fun movie - not necessarily awards worthy, and I feel like some people don't understand the difference. It did take home the most ridiculous win for "Cinematic and Blockbuster Achievement" or some shit like that (I do think that award was put there to get Taylor Swift to come to their party. I'm surprised she didn't win it). I'm not the biggest fan of The Holdovers - and the performances, but I do like both Giamatti and Randolph, so it is what it is. I haven't seen Poor Things yet, but Emma deserves every award she gets. 

4. The Fashion - On to the important stuff! My favorite of the night is probably Emma Stone - she just looked stunning. I also really liked Elle Fanning's dress (I just bought a dress with a big bow across the chest like that! I was unsure about it, but I guess it's a trend now), Arianna Greenblatt - LOVE the crisp white shirt with the cummerbund and trousers, and Julia Garner's dress with the weird neckline - it almost looks like suspenders. There were some really bad dresses, too, of course. Kate Beckinsale in the Madonna Halloween costume and Sarah Snook's dress was really unflattering. I was disappointed by Florence's dress - very safe and boring (although it was sheer under the stage lights - the cameraman slowly figuring that out and backing up made me laugh really hard). Gillian Anderson looked like she was wearing a wedding dress, but I'll give her credit for the subtle embroidered vagina design (you have to zoom in on the pictures to see it). The headpiece that Rosamund Pike wore looked ridiculous - it's the Golden Globes, not the funeral of your wealthy husband that you just killed. I love that Margot Robbie continued the Barbie looks, but this is one of my least favorite looks. 

Thoughts on 5 Films

1. The Creator - I liked this way more than I was expecting to - I thought the reviews were fairly mediocre for this and it was considered a flop, so I assumed it was probably bad. However, it's actually very good. It looks spectacular, there is an interesting story - a little thin, but still interesting, and the world that is created is very cool. I'm not the biggest fan of John David Washington - I've seen him in enough now to determine that he just doesn't have the charisma needed to lead films (and certainly nowhere near the screen presence his dad has). If this had a stronger star, it would have probably been among my favorites of '23. He's not terrible in this, but just nothing stands out. Gemma Chan is severely underused. I want her to be a gigantic star, but that Eternals movie really fucked her over (the only one who came out of that unscathed is Barry Keoghan. Obvi, the bigger stars like Jolie and Hayek will be fine, too). I think it's a little obvious how it's all going to play out, and the Vietnam war analogy is kind of shoved in the audience's faces - although the location settings are to be blamed for that. The locations are just *stunning*, though. It's partly filmed in Krabi, which is part of the Phi Phi Islands in Thailand. I went there last January, and it did look exactly like this. Just breathtaking - I can't even describe it. While the imagery automatically induces Vietnam war imagery, I do think the story is trying to say something deeper about our (America & the Western world) reactions - like the multiple wars that happened after 9/11. It just doesn't quite all come togehter. There are a few parts that just don't really make any sense too - like how they throw an ice cream bomb into the apartment, but conveniently don't kill the kid? How did they know that was going to work? And, if they just used the AI translator thingamajiggy more effectively, it would have made all their lives a lot easier. Overall, though, if you like sci-fi, I think you'll dig this. 

2. Rebel Moon - Part 1: A Child of Fire - Obviously, my expectations for this severely lowered after initial reviews, but I still had some hope - Snyder films are often reviewed poorly, even when they are really well-made (I'm thinking specifically of Sucker Punch - which isn't a great movie, but it's still really beautiful and well-made). Unfortunately, the reviews are right on this one. It's basically Rogue One, but if Rogue One was really, really dull and had characters that you didn't give one fuck about. And, I'm really pissed off about the whole "Snyder cut" thing. It made sense with Justice League because there were a lot of unforeseen circumstances that led to a version of the movie that didn't feel like "his". But, what's the excuse for this? Netflix gave him $160 million, but you're saying this isn't the best version of the film? This is as much his vision as any director could hope for and yet, he's saying there's a better version? Why not make the first one the best version? I think it says a lot about his ability to work in a team and within perimeters that might cause compromise. But, that's the whole point of a director - ultimately, it takes an entire team to make a movie (including producers and production companies that have final say), but the director is the one that's supposed to be able to lead the team to the best version of the film. Anyway, I've decided that I'm not going to watch it straight out of principal (and I watch everything!), if it ever even sees the light of day. It's just such bad faith, and sets an awful precedent. And after watching this, I can't imagine anyone else who watched this really wants to see more? I'm even wondering if I want to watch Part 2? (I will, of course). Sofia Boutella deserved stardom from the first Kingsman movie, it's crazy that it took 10 years for someone to put her in a starring role. It's even crazier that Snyder cast her in a role like this at 41 years old! Love it! I've seen nobody talk about it, but it's a huge deal - they could have easily found a younger up-and-coming actress in her 20s. It just sucks that the movie sucks. It's hardly her fault, and most definitely a fault of writing - there's just nothing interesting or original. The dialogue falls very flat - there's no humor, no chemistry among the characters. And, perhaps the worst part, Charlie Hunnam doing a Norther Irish accent because...it's his favorite (LOL). I'm a big fan of Hunnam, but accents are not his strength and someone needs to tell him. 

3. The Holdovers - Uhhhhhh...this movie is okay, I guess?? Certainly not worthy of all this praise, though. It's completely forgettable, Giamatti does his same Giamatti schtick just with an unnecessary lazy eye (which isn't necessarily bad, but it's not award-worthy to play the same character over and over again), and the main kid is one of the worst and most annoying, whiny, brat characters I've encountered in a long time (and he's a terrible actor, my god how are people watching this and thinking it's a good performance?? I actually saw a post today about how "it's incredible that he's never acted before" and first, that's not even true because he's a drama major, and second, he's...not good. I felt like he was too aware of the camera in front of him for every single moment of the film). At one point Giamatti says "you entitled little degenerate" and YES. I have no sympathy for him and I honestly hope he lives a miserable life and never sees happiness (and I don't think that's the intent). Plus, I love Da'Vine Joy Randolph - she was the saving grace of The Idol, and was a stand-out in The Lost City, but the Boston accent is not working for her. It was cringey to watch, and she's very likely going to be nominated for an Oscar (and I think favored to win at this moment), which is so wild to me. The rest of her performance is...fine, but nothing special - there's a moment where I thought "Ohhh..is this it? Is this her big scene that's going to make me understand the praise?", but it's over so quickly that they don't even give her time to breath. I guess it's not surprising because I've always found Alexander Payne films to be over-praised (like Election and Sideways, but I did really love Nebraska. I think my favorite Payne film might be Citizen Ruth, though). It's all just so boring, and very obvious as to why this kid wants to go to Boston so badly. I think there's an attempt at a lesson like "you never know what someone is going through. People who are assholes might be that way because their life sucks", but the lesson should be "Don't be an asshole. Period. Even if you've had a shitty life. Even if you think someone else isn't deserving of their success. Just be nice". 

4. Pain Hustlers - And speaking of bad Boston accents, here comes Chris Evans over-doing his own natural accent. He just leans so hard into it, that it seems fake. It's so weird. This movie also sucks. And it's been done multiple times within the last year (Dopesick, Painkiller, even The Fall of the House of Usher was about bad pharma!). I think too many of these stories are trying to humanize these awful people - I know many of them are a cog in the machine, but also, they are greedy, lying, & scummy so Karma sucks, assholes. This story is based around this woman, who, I guess, can be argued didn't really know what she was getting into. She was a single mom, desperate for any job, just trying to make a name for herself and give her daughter a decent life and someone to look up to. BUT, I'm sorry, if I made $600k in one year - I would call it a day. Just quit and get a normal less-stressful job. Her and her daughter could live so comfortably for like a decade, but instead she gets greedy. And she does admit to that in the end, and also is one of the few people who spoke out in court against big pharma, so kudos to her for owning her mistakes, but she still did deserve to go to prison (people died!). I think the story, isn't a bad one. It's interesting, and it moves really quickly. The major problem is the casting of both main characters. I'm a HUGE fan of Emily Blunt - but she is the least believable poor person I've ever witnessed in my entire life. Her entire persona screams "posh". And Evans just doesn't know what to do with himself after Captain America - just consistently miscast. Plus, he raps in this (it's as bad as you would expect it to be). It also loses the plot a little - because it becomes a faux morality tale about the super rich instead of about a struggling, single mom. And the whole part about her daughter needing surgery is kind of dumb because the math just doesn't add up - no health care system would make you come up with $450k instantly (and refuse to do the surgery if you couldn't come up with the money), instead they would put you on a payment plan (with interest). And with making over $600k in one year, she could definitely afford a payment plan. Or she could also...downgrade her living space and sell the fancy car? *Rolls eyes* One good thing, though, is the girl from Dungeons and Dragons and 65 is in this! I love her! Her name is Chloe Coleman and I expect to see her in a lot more stuff. 

5. Showing Up - A lot of people (film people) seem to love Kelly Reichardt, but I just don't really get it. I haven't rated any of her films above 3 stars (I do remember liking Wendy and Lucy, but I don't remember a thing about it...and Certain Women stayed with me longer than I expected). She really loves Michelle Williams, huh? And maybe that's part of the problem? I like Williams just fine, but some of the praise she gets is a little bit crazy for someone who always seems to be playing Michelle Williams (even when she was Marilyn Monroe she was still, somehow, Michelle Williams). She's in one of my favorite movies - Take This Waltz, and she's definitely given award worthy performances (Fosse/Verdon), but I think she's one of those actresses that will get praise no matter what, for whatever reason (case in point: The Fabelmans). Anyway, she's very bland in this - and in multiple other Reichardt collaborations. I can't really feel anything for this character, because she's just such a pushover and lets people walk all over her. And she's my age. I feel like at this point, you should be able to stick up for yourself (and still be a nice, sympathetic person!), and if you haven't figured that out yet, I just can't feel bad for you. Plus, she doesn't keep extra cat food in her house? She's like "oh sorry, we're out of cat food"...what??? What if there was like a storm or an emergency? You're just going to let your cat starve? I don't really get the whole pigeon storyline, either. Like, she's stuck taking care of a pigeon because she can't speak up for herself and then kind of bonds with it, soooo...okay? Is there a point? It did remind me of this one time at work a pigeon flew into our store and then couldn't figure out how to get out. I am a bit of an animal whisperer so they called me to come help. I literally went up to the pigeon, bent down to it, said "okay, I'm here to help you, follow me". I started walking slowly towards the door and IT FOLLOWED ME. It was so fucking crazy - everyone was in shock, and a customer even confusingly asked "wait...is that YOUR pigeon?" as if it was my pet that got lost. HAHAHAHA! I'll never forget it. They should make a movie about that. Far more interesting than this, that's for sure. 

12 Books I Read in 2023

1. Hamnet, Maggie O'Farrell - I really, really like how O'Farrell writes. I loved I am, I am, I am so much and I plan on reading every single one of her books. This is a completely different genre - as more of a historical fiction, but I can still see the similarities because ultimately it's about how tragedy/PTSD/etc. can effect your whole life. This story imagines how William Shakespeare dealt with the death of his son. A lot of the book doesn't even really focus on Shakespeare, instead his family is the focus - and Shakespeare is off...being Shakespeare. It feels really personal and detailed, and overall a really satisfying read. 

2. Station Eleven, Emily St. John Mandel - Wow. This is such an impressive novel - the post-apocalyptic world that is created, the depth of the characters and relationships, the intensity of the story. I think it's hard to do these stories and still make them feel original, but this was like nothing I've ever read. Definitely has a slight Walking Dead vibe, with the different groups that are encountered, but it still feels different and intense. It's so good and I will definitely be watching the tv series that is based on this especially because it stars Mackenzie Davis (it's been added to the list! The never-ending list!). I like the play on the different timelines so we can see this group "before" the apocalypse and how they are now in this new environment. And I like that they focus on the importance of keeping art/performances/etc in this new world. It gives people a purpose, and I feel like a lot of people forget about that (as proven during the pandemic - during lockdown we all relied on our televisions to keep us company). Again, I would just prefer to die in these types of situations - there comes a point where it's clear that things aren't going to get better so I see no point (I would feel differently if I had children, I think). 

3. White Ivy, Susie Yang - This was a nice, quick, easy read - there's a few twist and turns that aren't expected. I like that it's about the immigrant experience, but it's not the whole story. I also like that it's about a person who is extremely flawed, and not exactly a good person, but the audience doesn't necessarily have to agree with her actions for the story to still be interesting. It's not really a story that is going to stick with me, but I can see this being a really good mini-series. 

4. The Daughters of Sparta, Claire Heywood - Loved it! Again, I am so jealous of these writers who are retelling classic myths and stories, but telling them from different perspectives (women and other side characters). It's just such a good idea - and there is so much to work with. I really wish I did this when I had the idea back in high school (over 20 years ago). This novel did inspire me to start writing (a possible mini-series?) - a modernized version of this story. I really got into it for about 3 weeks with a synopsis, character breakdown, and summary of each act, but then I lost interest, as I often do with writing stuff. I don't have the will-power or discipline for it. Anyway, this is about exactly what the title suggests - the daughters of Sparta, i.e Helen and her sister Klytemnestra. Helen is obviously a bit more famous, and her story is more well-known, but I like that we get a bit of what her perspective is. And I LOVE the whole Klytemnestra part - her story is so interesting and heartbreaking. It's also interesting that it starts way before the Trojan war and continues way after it. 

5. The Punch, Noah Hawley - As expected, I loved this. I've loved Hawley's other books (Before the Fall, The Good Father) too. I think he's one of my favorite modern writers (love his tv projects too - the current season of Fargo is INCREDIBLE). This is told from multiple perspectives of a family dealing with a tragedy, starting with "the punch" being the catalyst for the story (told from a "how did we get here" perspective of multiple people). I think the ending unfolds a little too conveniently - especially for NYC (there are just too many coincidences for it to be realistic), but I like the family dynamic that is established and that they are extremely faulted characters, but I didn't dislike any of them at any point. It comes from a place of understanding. 

6. The Radium Girls: The Dark Story of America's Shining Women, Kate Moore - So fucking depressing - it took me like a whole month to get through it. Just relentlessly depressing. So many women introduced - I understand the thought process, to give every woman that suffered a story, but I kept getting confused as to which one was which and then...guess what? They die a horrible death. When I first took this out to read, my husband saw it and said he might be interested in reading it (he is a science nerd and has a fascination with uranium and things like that). He kept checking in on me to see if I was enjoying it and I said "no, another woman just died because nobody is listening to them". It's interesting to learn about the history of this, and how it led to worker's rights and safer conditions. Also interesting that most of it is focused on Orange, NJ (I live close by). But it's crazy to me that they just let people continue to die, like, a really, really, horrible death - their bones collapsing, organs failing, losing the ability to eat, etc. - with multiple doctors saying that it was due to their work with radium, and we just pretended like they all died of something else. It's obviously because it was mostly women dying - and the work they were doing was helping men in war, so it was almost sacrificial if you think about it. Just awful. 

7. White Teeth, Zadie Smith - I actually did not like this book at all, which I was not expecting, because it is a very highly praised book. I was just so uninterested in most of the story. It's very long and drawn out and it doesn't seem like much happens until about 2/3rds of the story. I do like that it's about generational trauma, and that it attempts to tell someone's "whole story", which includes the lives of their parents, grand parents, children, etc. But there's nothing that I connected with at all. Maybe because I don't really feel connected to any traditions or to my family?  I think certain things that happened to my grandmother, mother, father etc., obviously caused my existence, but they've had no real effect on my life as an adult. I'm my own person. But I know a lot of cultures are very different - and your family stays with you through everything. I can see how others might connect with this, but it just wasn't for me. 

8. Rebecca, Daphne du Maurier - I've seen a few film versions of this story, and it's very strong (and I like how they all have significantly different endings), so I thought I would go to the source. It's an incredibly well-written story, especially for something that became so famous. Sometimes when I'm reading an already known story, I get bored and kind of drift to the good parts, but I was fully enthralled with this - even wondering at one point what was going to happen (LOL!). I feel like the character of Rebecca is fully-formed with this being from her perspective and uses her inner monologue. I have a better understanding of her motives and reasoning than I do with the film versions. 

9. Klara and The Sun, Kazuo Ishiguro - Ooooo I loved this! I was a bit disappointed with the last few Ishiguro novels that I read, but this is the Ishiguro that I LOVE. It's sci-fi, but set in a very deep reality. The world that is created is spectacular, and kept me intrigued for its entirety. There's a whole mystery about how the world came to be like this that is only hinted at, but never fully divulged and I sort of love that. It allows the reader space for imagination, which I think it the ultimate goal of books like these. It's told from the perspective of an AI robot (who also seems to be solar powered? Right? That's why she's so obsessed with the son?). She is programmed to obey her owner, but she's also a little different because she "questions" things - this curiosity leads her to discover a possible way to cure the humans that are dying. There is also a subplot that is equally interesting about robots "taking" over for their humans after they die, but I feel like I've seen similar sci-fi stories about this already (most recently with The Creator, kind of). Overall, though, this is one of my favorite books that I read in 2023, and I just fell in love with Klara. 

10. Molly's Game, Molly Bloom - I thought the movie based on this book was quite good, but Jessica Chastain is incredible in it. I really love Molly's attitude and thought the book would offer more insight into how she got involved in this world. It's really surprising that she uses a lot of real names of big celebrities (Toby Maguire, Leo, Ben Affleck, etc.) because she doesn't say very nice things about most of them (especially Toby. What a fucking immature ASSHOLE fucking loser. I also literally laughed out loud at her describing Leo sitting at the table with his headphones on because there was that whole rumor about how he's so disinterested in everything he's doing that he even has sex with headphones on. I assumed it was just dumb gossip, but now I'm rethinking. It's hilarious, if true.). I think I prefer the movie, only because this book is clearly written by someone who isn't a writer. It felt very amateur, and left little nuance. It's very "this happened, then this happened, then this happened" straightforward, and it rarely dives into anything personal or emotional. Also, Molly has a strong "I'm not like the other girls" vibe that I can't stand and I didn't feel that in the movie. 

11. She Rides Shotgun, Jordan Harper - If you know anything about me, then you might have already guessed that I added this to my reading list as soon as the news broke that Taron Egerton was starring in the film version. It's a good story, and I think it will make a good film, but the writing is a little...simple? I think that's the best word to describe it. It's like an episode of Sons of Anarchy, if Jax went to jail and then killed someone from an opposing gang, then gets out, having a kill order placed on him so all the other gangs are intent on killing him. But it's not Jax. This guy has a daughter so he instantly goes to protect her, and the story starts from there. It's told from both his perspective and his daughter's, which is kind of interesting, but it's just not written very well. Also, I can't really picture Taron in this, and I think with Black Bird, the upcoming Firebug, and that Netflix movie about the plane hijacking that was supposed to be released during Christmas but disappeared from their lineup, he should do something lighter - and preferably a musical, please. 

12. The Stranger, Albert Camus - Well, classics are classics for a reason, and this is a classic. I loved this. Just the story of a full-blown psychopath with no remorse and no...emotion/reasoning. He almost seems like an alien. It sort of reminded me of Under the Skin, except that is about an actual alien trying to live in a human (woman) form. This "stranger" is human, but he's basically wandering through life as a stranger to everyone, even himself. I think it's an interesting story into the human psyche, especially of someone who is a murderer. It's also a very quick, short read. I think I read it in a day. 

Best and Worst Films of 2023

Happy New Year!! Here's my Best & Worst list, from what I've seen so far, of films released in 2023. As always, this is not my final list, which I usually post in July. It's been a good year for films!! I think I've rated more movies 3.5 stars this year, than any other recent year (p.s - 3.5 is very good, to me!). 

Best 

1. May December

2. Oppenheimer

3. Infinity Pool

4. Anatomy of a Fall

5. Beau is Afraid

6. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse

7. Past Lives

8. Tetris

9. Missing

10. Fair Play

Worst

1. Skinamarink 

2. Cocaine Bear

3. Haunted Mansion

4. Ruby Gillman, Teenage Kraken

5. There's Something Wrong with the Children

6. Ghosted

7. 65

8. Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

9. Meg 2: The Trench

10. Rebel Moon - A Child of Fire: Part One

10.5 Pain Hustlers 

I expect that my Best of list will look very different in July since I'm still missing quite a few key movies - such as Poor Things, All of Us Strangers, Killers of the Flower Moon.