The Numbers For 2018

Year #6 without a drink. I didn't do it alone, I couldn't. I've stayed sober because of the help of others and the grace of my Higher Power.

I read 62 books my top 5 were The Sudden Appearance of Hope, The Long Way to a Small Angry Planet, The Minotaur Takes A Cigarette Break, The Anubis Gates, and Paradox Bound.

I saw 82 movies in the theater.

I fired a gun for the first time.

We(Nicole and I) went to 2 author events(Christina Henry and Esther Perel).

We went to 2 Michelin starred restaurants(Topolobampo and Parachute).

We went to 4 weddings.

We went ice skating once.

I went on 3 vacations (Richmond, motorcycle trip around Lake Michigan, New Mexico).

I saw 1 adolescent hero- Broon.

I did 48 shows with Deep Schwa.

I did 47 shows with Sight Unseen.

I did 9 shows with Plane Station.

I did 4 shows with Terrific Six(various mixes of members from my first improv team The Album).

I directed 1 solo show.

I understudied and performed in the play Deerfield Inn once.

I wrote 68 poems, 3 essays, and did 9 readings.

I rode my motorcycle for 6 months.

I went to 1 magic show.

I went to 0 funerals.

I went to 0 plays.

I went to 0 concerts.

I helped celebrate my niece's 2nd birthday.

Nicole and I celebrated our 5th Anniversary.

A full year, a satisfying year, a fast year. I'm grateful for each and every day.

Airport Security

The young couple
in front of us
couldn't restrain
themselves
from kissing
and caressing
when they should
have been
binning
and progressing
their effects
so
I shoved his laptop
down the rollers
and tossed their shoes
to make room for us
and the hundred people
all waiting behind
the couple
didn't even notice
so lost were they
in youth
and hormonal desire.

'Vice' A Review

Vice is a montage heavy biopic about former Vice President Dick Cheney. The film opens on Dick(Christian Bale) getting pulled over for a DUI stop in the 60's, it flashes forward to him as VP getting rushed to a bunker directly after the 9/11 attacks. Flashing back and forth in time with considerable narration, still images, and archival footage the life of the elusive man-behind-the-throne of the W. Bush presidency is investigated and partially elucidated.

Bale, as always, gives every thing he has to the performance. Transforming and channeling Cheney in an astonishing way. Although much of Cheney's internal life, his thoughts and decisions, are still left unclear in the film you get the impression that Bale knows, that's how confident his portrayal is. Amy Adams as Lynne Cheney is also supremely confident, with an incredible scene between the two early on when Lynne calls Dick to the carpet for being a zero. The rest are well cast with Sam Rockwell as W. really shining unfortunately as a result of the fernetic format the actors really aren't given that much time to really act. There is virtually no scene longer than one minute that is not interrupted by narration, hard cuts, or cuts to still images. This creates a feeling of energy and momentum but a considerable amount of depth is lost.

It seems unclear who this film is for. Having lived through the time Cheney was in power myself this contains nothing particularly new. I would hazard a guess the film is meant to energize and educate the younger generation but even if that is the intent it would service the message more to let scenes breath and to let the phenomenal cast do their work. Part of the intent is to seemingly understand the motivations and mindset of Cheney and he is simply not onscreen enough to do that.

The film does succeed exceedingly well in conveying the nature of machinations of power. And confirms that old adage the power corrupts. As an echo and a warning to our current time and administration the film succeeds to a degree but art should not only reflect it should transcend or inspire. Ultimately the film, for all its ambitions and talent, lies relatively flat.

The question isn't how was and is our democracy perverted, at this juncture that is almost immaterial, and unfortunately that seems to be the sole focus of the film. The question is how do we move forward, what does the future hold, what can be done, what can we do. The film does not ask or answer these questions.

Rent It.

Florida Xmas

Spending the holiday down in Florida with Nicole's family. It's the first time I've been out of the Midwest for Xmas. A bit of an adjustment but beautiful weather and nice to spend time with Nicole's parents and sister.

 Saw the sunrise the day after we got here and then went to watch the sunset over the water.

Went on a hike through an abandoned sugar plantation now a state park. The park was totally deserted, the landscape was quiet and stunning but it was pretty eerie.

Santa came on Christmas Eve which was very exciting although he was a little grumpy. We opened presents, relaxed, and watched movies today. We head back tomorrow. It's been a fun, and warm, holiday. Different certainly than my family and our traditions and actual winter but it was really good and about time Nicole and I start splitting our time a bit more equally with our families.

Sunrise

Before Christ
there was The Sun
our first
and most literal
Higher Power.

We few awake
to witness the dawn
all turn precisely
to where She'll break
tapping into
that primordial compass
which never falters.

'Mary Poppins Returns' A Review

Mary Poppins Returns is a musical family film, a sequel to 1964's Mary Poppins, about the banks children all grown up. The film opens on 1935 London and recent widower Michael Banks(Ben Whishaw) is struggling to raise his three children and is in danger of defaulting on his mortgage. With the help of his sister Jane(Emily Mortimer), the lamplighter Jack(Lin-Manuel Miranda), and most importantly the titular Mary Poppins(Emily Blunt) the Banks family may come through on top and perhaps having learned something.

Blunt gives a fair Julie Andrews impression and imbues the character with a bit more of adventure and power rather than brusk silliness that we may be accustomed. It works but it doesn't exactly capture the nanny-we-wish-we-all had of the original. Miranda also does well but suffers from the same affliction as Blunt just falling short of getting out from the shadow of the original. Both are consummate performers, the choreography, singing, and straight acting is all compelling and done exceedingly well but neither of them takes big enough swings to get a big payoff. Whishaw, with one emotional scene, is by far the stand out bringing in a depth of emotion and vulnerability that exceeds its predecessor. The kids are great, the cast is all fun with a couple surprising cameos, but in following(and delivering) a successful sequel to the classic the actors aren't given, or take, a lot of risks. Satisfying but not particularly memorable.

The narrative on the other hand balances perfectly in paying omaĝe and creating something new. The formula is the same, Mary Poppins swoops in and takes the children on a series of imaginative musical adventures with the help of her dirty but charming sidekick. But the set pieces the songs are all new with nods and winks to the original but without ever sacrificing originality. And the message is delivered just as well if not better than the original. A call for hope and imagination rather than greed and despair powerful stuff.

See It.

'Mortal Engines' A Review

Mortal Engines is a post-apocalyptic steampunk movie based on the novel of the same name. Sometime in the 21st century the 60 Minute War devastates the world, not nuclear fallout but the laser-beam equivalent called MEDUSA. As a result people put wheels on cities which role around the blasted world hunting each other for resources. A thousand years have passed(or more its unclear) and London, one of the most fearsome predator cities, has left the UK to hunt the European continent. Hester Shaw(Hera Hilmar) purposefully gets caught by London in order to attempt to assassinate it's one its leaders who killed her mother Thaddeus Valentine(Hugo Weaving). She fails and is thrown off along with Tom Natsworthy(Robert Sheehan) a historian and wouldbe pilot. The two get tied up with the anti-traction league(a group that has settled on land and opposes the predator cities) and are set to oppose London as it seeks to become the world power. Sound complicated? It's even more convoluted than that!

There is no doubt the cast has talent but unfortunately because of the tone-deaf and nearly incomprehensible script and startling lack of direction all performances flounder save for the two seasoned actors Weaving and Stephen Lang(as the Terminator-esk machine-man Shrike). The accents are inconsistent for each actor as well as with respect to the world-building. There is no effective character development, what is there is loose, lazy, and derivative it amounts to nothing at all. A huge cast is feebly introduced, at the sacrifice of the lead character Hester, and then most of them are abandoned until they are needed to propel the increasingly manufactured plot. There is nothing wrong with casting a majority of unknown talent, Jihae as Anna Fang is an inspired choice, but they don't have the professional chops or experience to weather the thoroughly undercooked production without looking like what they are- exceedingly green.

Two of three criteria(all three is ideal) are needed in order to succeed- character, plot, and world-building. Ex-Machina had character and plot, Dredd had plot and world-building. there is a reason most successful genre movies, the two above included, have a small scale. Because its difficult to achieve without considerably focus. Mortal Engines fails on all criteria because it seems to have a fundamnetal misunderstanding of what makes a good story. Hester is the lead character, full stop, her story is the backbone of the narrative. We are given little context for her character until half the bloated run time has run its course. Not investment is created because we are introduced to ten characters in the first ten minutes and none of them carry any weight. Visually, sure, the movie at least has some original design- the cities, the airships, the cloths- but it is all glitzy CGI with no credible context in which to put them(uncompelling characters and a lethargic plot).

Despite all its numerous faults the "world-building" is perhaps the biggest. Genre fiction or film  is difficult and world-building is one of those most mercurial skills and traits of it. We can have dragons and magic, we can have zombies and vampires, we can have whole tractor cities that seemingly run on metal as fuel(?) and futuristic jet air ships with paper wings but they have to adhere to an internal and logic. There has to be solid reasoning and story that lay a foundation for the fantastic. It doesn't need to be possible in our reality but it needs to be reality that makes sense. Perhaps the book delves deeper into the history and technology of the world but the movie has an eye-roll inducing blend of lasers and jets and guns all the while bemoaning how "backward" the world is. There's also the fundamental justification for the predator cities themselves, the Earth clearly has bounced back form whatever devastation it once suffered, as such this overriding motivation for "resources" makes little to know sense. The amount of energy it would require to simply move these various gargantuan monstrosities is so huge it does not make sense with the technology the world purports to utilize. The list goes on and on.

Half-baked, unfocused, tonally(and totally) unaware.

Don't See It.

Heedless

I didn't realize what was at stake
when I voiced my incoherence
which came across
as judgement,
didn't realize until that moment
when it was threatened
what I took for granted,
didn't realize the pain
I could cause or feel
with tactless words.

Love is a dance
not a solo
a twinning
not a tyranny.

'Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse' A Review

Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse is an animated superhero movie based on the Marvel Comics Miles Morals/Spider-Man story line. Miles(Shameik Moore), Brooklynite and graffiti artist, struggles to adjust to his new elite school and his parents expectations. He spends time with his low-key easy-going uncle Aaron(Mahershala Ali) to get away from his overwhelming school work and pressures. One night while the two are out in an abandoned subway tunnel, a canvas for Miles found by his uncle, Miles is bitten by a radioactive spider and develops superhuman abilities. His stumbles upon a confrontation between the existing Spider-Man(voiced by Chris Pine, the Peter Parker we know) and a number of villains as they battle over the machine. Spider-Man is killed but not before charging Miles with the destruction of the machine, he flees, but not before the accelerator opens a door between alternate dimensions which draws various versions of Spider-Man into Miles' world.

The voice performances are all unilaterally good especially Moore and Brian Tyree Henry and  Luna Lauren Velez as Miles' mother and father. For all the action and meta elements what sustains the story is its unflinching commitment and sincerity to its characters. The family dynamic and Miles' coming-of-age lie at the center of the story, the supporting cast is wide and there is a lot of self-referential, pop culture elements as well as an almost taken-for-granted understanding of the parallel worlds theory but despite all the busyness(which is very fun and frequently funny) there is a real emotional story at its center. All the celebrity cameos and supporting turns are part of the pleasure of the film so I won't spoil it here but almost every voice is recognizable and it is clear that all the actors enjoy their parts substantially.

What is so impressive about the film is that it pulls off a supremely complicated juggling act. The emotional tract of the narrative is never compromised and Miles couldn't be on a more real and compelling journey. The alternate worlds element allows for not only fun psychedelic visuals and various forms of Spider-Heroes to team up but allows for gags and bits as well as commentary that a like-our-world-but-not-our-world allows from the poignant to the absurd. And all the while an ongoing playfulness is balanced with the action and more "sincere" elements. The other thing the film gets exactly right is its source material ie comics. This is the first comic book movie that actually justly incorporates comic book elements with the occasional panels flashing on the screen to meta-voice over and talk and think bubbles. It feels like a comic book but not in a way that is hack or distracting but in a way that elevates that material in a surprising way.

A diverse action packed superhero film that despite its seemingly complicated plot manages to be  clear, entertaining, and almost exuberant. And behind all the jokes there is a soft but staying message- anyone can be a hero.

See It.

Ink 2

I do not mark
my body
for others
to see it marked
I mark it
to remember
where I was
and when
who I was
and am.

'Roma' A Review

Roma is a drama about a maid in Mexico City in the early 1970's. The film takes place, roughly, over a year following Cleo(Yalitza Aparicio) as she cares for the household and four children of Sofia(Marina de Tavira). Shot in a rich black and white with alternatively graceful and thrilling long lived-in takes typical to writer/director Alfonso Cuarón the film takes a small story and shows it in all the wonder and heartbreak, all the grandeur and pain, that humanity offers at its most pure. Although produced and released on Netflix this is a film that unequivocally deserves to be seen on the big screen.

Newcomer Aparicio gives a masterful performance. She is on screen almost the entire film and carrie that weigh with an effortlessness that is captivating. She is totally emotionally available and not only in times of joy or despair but in every little flicker in between. We are with her on this journey, find the pleasure and boredom and frustration in the mundane day-to-day chores and activities. And we are with her seeing and feeling with her as she struggles with bigger challenges. There are so many stand-out scenes in the film to list them would be to simply recount it but there is one moment when Cleo is celebrating New Years toasting with a friend where she is bumped and her drink spills that is so powerful and so true to describe it as stunning would be an understatement. The honesty of her performance is captivating and unique, its not totally rare that an unknown non-actor gives a star, but it is rare that one gives such an dynamic, emphatic, almost mythic but at the same time totally human performance. The supporting cast are filled with amazing performances capturing life with all its complexities and humor and occasional darkness but none of them would work without Aparicio at the center. She grounds the story in the real but at the same time(with the assistance of the stunning camera work) elevate it to the divine.

The cinematography, no surprise from Cuarón, is breathtaking. Paired expertly and homogeneously with the lead performance the visuals give us what would appear to be mundane things- cleaning, laundry, long tracking shots of two friends walking down the street, a couple kissing at a movie theater- but with such patience and detail the richness, the reality, and the beauty are undeniable. The score is more subtle but equally evocative with a couple well placed and poignant diegetic moments and with an layered and immersive soundscape, in the theater at least utilizing surround sound more expertly than any experience I can recall.

The story and themes are simple but run deep. The story is small, a year in the life of a maid in a particular time, but what its really about is the glory and tragedy of the human experience. The themes are far reaching- sexual politics, gender disparity, class, race- you name it. As with real life the narrative touches on many things but its investigation of these themes is gentle, almost reverent. The lead is a maid and that is not ignored- her indigenous background, her poverty or circumstance-but her position is not the focal point, the film doesn't bludgeon or burden us with preaching, pontification, or flagellation. We see a life, a beautiful, complicated, layered life. The hardships aren't ignored they are accepted as reality, and given that, how can one transcend is the question. And that, ultimately, is what the film is about- transcendence.

In our age of turmoil where despair and hate are close Roma trumpets hope and grace and celebrates that thing we all share- being human.

Don't Miss It.

Ink

My cousin Phil
was the first person
I saw, in the flesh,
with tattoos
he looked like a biker
but was quiet
and unassuming
at 7
it was my first lesson
in the dissonance
between media
and reality.

In college
my roommate Bob
had a patterned piece
on his back
with a bass cleft
at its center,
he was a musician
and the rightness of it
struck me
its emblematic portent
defining, complementing
who he was or perhaps
wanted to be.

It wasn't the aesthetic
that attracted me
or the culture
I wanted to join
but the talismanic power
of image
burned into flesh
symbols
that provide meaning
and fortify identity
details of time
and place and purpose
a record of life lived.

'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 2: The Crimes of Grindelwald'

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is a fantasy adventure movie the first sequel to the 2016 franchise starter. Set in the Potterverse in the first half of the 20th century the dark wizard Grindelwald(Johnny Depp) escapes his captivity in New York and sets out to woo powerful unstable magical force Credence(Ezra Miller). Dumbledore(Jude Law) sets our friendly neighborhood creature charmer Newt(Eddie Redmayne) on the task to find Credence and thwart Grindelwald.

None of the performances are particularly notable because no individual character is given any time to do much of anything other than puppet-like jerk through the convoluted, incredulity inducing, ultimately banal plotting. The one clear and present eye sore is Johnny Depp who puts in a thin, lazy, fleshy turn and begs the question why his casting was maintained from the first movie to this. His domestic abuse, bad behavior, willful substance abuse problems are all well documented which is reason enough to recast but even if you are a die hard separatist of the art and the artist it is unarguable that Depp hasn't given a more than adequate(at best) performance in 15 years. Whatever charisma or ability he once had is faded to nothing. Johnny Depp's casting is the most egregious error in a movie filled with them.

The narrative suffers from the worst habits of modern franchise filmmaking. It is all filler, the characters are moved like chess pieces around a board but nothing actually happens. With a two hour plus running time the only thing of significance that happens comes at the very end and ultimately its a MacGuffin we weren't even aware of. The successful aspect of the first installment was the chemistry of the core four leads especially the charm and humor of Dan Fogler as Jacob and Allison Sudol as Queenie. Grindelwald and the machinations of his rise are not terribly interesting especially since the performance and the story are but a pale approximation of something we've already seen ie Voldemort. The filmmakers seem not to be aware of why Harry Potter was a success, why the first film was a moderate success, or how to tell(or have forgotten) a competent engaging story. It's the people. Interesting people and compelling relationships make for good stories. Full stop.

The characters we are familiar with are given little screen time, are underdeveloped, and are separated in a ham-fisted way that goes against what we know about them as characters. A myriad of new characters are introduced but there are so many, needlessly, they are given no real context, backstory or development. The result is a bunch of two dimensional cut outs wobbling through the motions of an unbelievable piece of glittering CGI artistry.

Reminiscent of the failed 21st century Narnia series this franchise will derail if some serious adjustments aren't made.

Don't See It.

'The Favourite' A Review

The Favourite is part historical drama, part dark comedy loosely based on the brief reign of English monarch Queen Anne in the early 18th century. The film opens on the frail, volatile queen(Olivia Coleman) and her closest adviser, friend, and defacto head of state Sarah Chruchill(Rachel Weisz). Enter an estranged cousin fallen on hard times Abigail Hill(Emma Stone) who seeks to insinuate herself between the two in order to survive. Struggles of political, sexual, and emotional power simmer and erupt as the three combat for position, prestige, and favor.

Coleman is a revelation, rapidly cycling through kaleidoscopic emotions with such elegance and sincerity this seemingly pathetic character is fascinating and easily the strongest and most complex of the three leads. Her Anne is so raw but also so guileless, a fascinating portrait of a tragic life paired with the singular royal burdens of state. Weisz is captivating as the capable and commanding Churchill, a consummate politician, proficient with horses and guns, as well as etiquette. She is physical solid, almost imposing, and she moves through the film with an unflinching certainty which elevates her already inherent magnetism. Stone is the lone false step in casting. She is serviceable but is simply out classed by Colman and Weisz and as the narrative progresses and Stone is given more and more screen time this becomes more and more apparent. She doesn't have the range, or at least doesn't display it here, to captivate to the level that the film requires as it rounds into its third act. Her low key charm and wide eyes only go so far especially in comparison to Coleman's contagious effervescence and Weisz's emphatic confidence. The supporting cast are mostly men and all well cast and well played but they are mostly, and deliberately, window dressing in heavy makeup, involved outfits, and foppish wigs.

Visually the film is lush and stark in equal measure. Almost exclusively shot with wide-angel and fisheye lenses and confined to the palace a cavernous yet claustrophobic mood is evoked. Trance like and despite the period trappings seemingly out of time. The costumes feel appropriate but not period beholden. They serve to elevate, and evoke the moods and themes of the piece rather than a specific time. The ominous and repetitious score also serves to extenuate the mercurial genres and relationships the film encapsulates. The narrative is tight, fluctuating from absurd comedy to brutal drama on a dime without losing its way, however it does slow down considerably towards the end and concludes with more of an ellipses rather than a thrilling baffling crescendo which fans of director Yorgos Lanthimos may be accustomed to given his two previous films The Lobster and The Killing of a Sacred Deer.

Lanthimos always delivers something different, something unexpected, and always gets singular performances from actors. The script and Stone however fail somewhat to live up to the potential of the film. Not a deal breaker more a disappointment for those who are familiar with Lanthimos work. However it is his most approachable and accessible film while still maintaining his singular eye and bizarre(gratifying) sensibilities.

See It.

Roads

As I travel
this thread of asphalt
I wonder
at its convenience
and simplistic beauty
in a pocket out of time
I traverse the distance
to my destination.

And beyond
this small track
between Chicago Illinois
and Madison Wisconsin
I think of all the miles and roads
that continue
stretching to other cities
and forgotten towns
and sleepy nooks,
of this continent
and the one below
all connected
by lines of pavement
carved out
by ingenuity and sweat.

The complaint of traffic
seems myopic
given the freedom
accorded by the Road.