Change Your Image
mazedm
Reviews
Sam Now (2022)
Worth seeing--thoughtful but also frustrating
I watched "Sam Now" recently on PBS, and it is a beautifully-made, thoughtful documentary. The excerpts of the Super 8 films the filmmaker made with his brother, Sam, over many years I worried at first would be simply an annoying gimmick, but they in fact lend an additional layer of poignancy as well as visual interest to the film.
Even a few days after watching it, I'm still feeling disgust with Sam and Jared's mother for what she did to her boys; she could be the textbook definition of "narcissist." I could only shake my head at Sam's grandmother's comment, about her former daughter-in-law's choices, that "individual happiness" counts for a lot. Sure...except narcissists seek their own individual happiness with zero regard to the extreme unhappiness, even destruction, this may cause others in their lives. Honestly, her comment made me wonder if the grandmother is beginning to experience dementia. Not holding a grudge is admirable, but seemingly dismissing the pain and suffering her grandsons' mother caused them because, well, she had wanted to pursue her idea of "individual happiness," left me a bit baffled.
What baffled me even more watching this was when Sam's mother discusses her own childhood in which she describes how she was frequently emotionally abused by her adoptive mother. (She seems truthful about this, although the adoptive mother claims she never treated her any differently from her non-adopted children.) While I am sorry for her that she was mistreated, it only made me even more disgusted that she knew the pain of being abused by her adopted mother, yet despite this she abandoned her sons. Sam, if you are reading this, whatever problems you have (as we all do), I came away from this film admiring your emotional strength. I wish you a wonderful future and happy life.
Secrets of Playboy (2022)
I started watching as a Playboy fan, but I believe these women
Although I'm a woman, I've long been a bit of a Playboy fan. I thought it was ridiculous some years ago when several feminists wrote pieces in outlets like The Guardian cheering the demise of Playboy magazine (this was before it ended up being sold). To me, fairly tasteful photos of beautiful naked women were something to be more celebrated than ever in an era when the most vile, degrading imagery imaginable of women are really available online. As far as Hugh Hefner, while I assumed the man was not exactly a paragon of virtue, nor did I believe he was evil or a sleaze bag. So, I had no axe to grind against Playboy or Hefner as I began watching this series.
After watching a couple of episodes, though, I can hardly believe how naive I was. What man with immense power, wealth, and fame--all of it due to a business built on the images of beautiful, and usually very young, nude women--isn't going to end up corrupted? I actually found myself saying out loud at one point, "Christ, this man was actually **evil.**" I recall seeing an interview with Hefner's ex-paramour, and ex-Playmate, Barbi Benton, when the Bill Cosby scandal originally broke, and she declared flatly, "Her would never have tolerated anything like that," meaning rape. Well, not only did he tolerate other famous and/or powerful men committing rape, he raped too. (The photos of poor Dorothy Stratten taken after her assault by Hefner, compared to her earlier photos, are chilling. She looks dead inside, whereas in her earliest Playboy photos she appears genuinely happy.) Don Cornelius in particular (the longtime host of the old TV show Soul Train) deserves to burn in hell next to Hef. I am embarrassed I was ever a Playboy fan.
Girlboss (2017)
Glad now that I didn't buy the book
I was looking through shows on Netflix recently when "Girlboss" caught my eye because I had once thought about buying the memoir it is based on, by Sophia Amoruso, for my tween daughter. I had heard of Amoruso before and imagined it would be an inspiring, girl-power type of read, one I'd probably enjoy too, but then I thought the content would probably be too mature for a tween. Well, having watched a few episodes of the show, I believe I made a good choice to pass on the book, since I later read an interview online with Amoruso in which she stated that the TV show is in fact a pretty accurate adaptation. Egads.
If that is true, I can hardly believe she made it in business, or for that matter that she has any friends. Granted, I know many successful businesspeople are not exactly known for their likability--the late Steve Jobs springs to mind. However, Amoruso's character in the show is not only relentlessly unlikable but stupid to boot. I don't think I could stand to be around her for more than ten minutes, and I think even some middle-school girls might feel the same. I don't have to like a protagonist, but I have to at least like SOMETHING about them, and there is simply nothing to like about the Sophia of the show except that she is pretty. Actress Britt Robertson is lovely and has a lot of charm, and she does do a good job, I think, playing an essentially one-note character (call that note "narcissistic," "spoiled," "entitled"...any of these would be apt). It's certainly not her fault that the character is so horrifically annoying. You know how you usually root for a character whom you like, even when he or she does something you don't like? In the case of Sophia, I was rooting against her from the very first episode: "WHY doesn't her boss just fire her for being unapologetically late yet again (and having an attitude about it)?" "WHY can't she get arrested for her multiple shoplifting incidents?" and so on.
One of the few bright spots for me was that two of the minor characters--Sophia's neighbor, and her boss at her short-lived job at the SF Academy of Art--are played by performers whom I love: RuPaul and comedian Norm Macdonald, respectively. It was a welcome surprise seeing each of them (and I barely made it to the first of the few episodes with Macdonald). Alas, while both played their roles well, they were not enough to make this worthwhile viewing.
Three stars for Macdonald, RuPaul, the actress who plays Sophia's best friend (who was very good), some gorgeous location shots (though they looked suspiciously clean to be of San Francisco), and some great songs on the soundtrack. This could have been SO much better.
Crip Camp (2020)
Inspiring but might be more effective as two documentaries
I just watched Crip Camp for the second time, as a viewing was assigned for a college course I am taking about special education. Honestly, although I recommend it, I doubt I would ever have re-watched it if not for the course. I agree with a previous reviewer that the documentary seems like it would be more effective as two different films. Yes, most of the pioneering disability rights activists apparently met while they were teens at Crip Camp, but the film does not entirely succeed in showing the link between their experiences at the camp--however life-transforming--and the genesis and eventual hard-won successes of the fight for the most basic rights for people with disabilities. Still, it is well worth a viewing.
Fleabag (2016)
Not the worst show, but the hype is beyond me
I seem to be one of the very few reviewers of this series who hasn't given it either a 1-2 or a 9-10 review. On the plus side, it has some good acting, although I find that a little of the lead actress/writer Phoebe Waller-Bridge goes a long way, and there are a few surprises in the storylines. However, I am truly puzzled by the preponderance of reviews here calling this show a work of genius. There is little, if anything, here which is even innovative, let alone genius.
Breaking the fourth wall? Please. Not only is that fast becoming a cliche, but as another reviewer here described better than I can, even barely-funny, obvious jokes and scenes do not require the title character to explain them to us in advance (and detracts from what humor there may have been otherwise).
I felt that this, like Broad City, is yet another grossly over-hyped series (The Guardian, I'm looking at you!) which is supposedly feminist because it is written by and starring mainly women. Not that I don't appreciate more women-created content (I do), but it is tiresome that so many shows about neurotic, immature, unpleasant women making mostly very poor life choices somehow merit the "feminist" title. At least Fleabag, unlike Broad City, has some very good acting and (if you're an Anglophile like I am) British accents to enjoy.
Broad City (2014)
Yet another over-hyped "feminist" comedy
I watched Broad City after a very intelligent friend had recommended it. I read in one review here that the first season was great, and to be clear, I watched the more recent seasons (2016-2019), so that may be why I am unimpressed. Honestly, although there were a few laughs, I mostly found the humor puerile--really, fart jokes? Maybe it's because I am raising twin boys, but while I do not find flatulence jokes offensive, nor do I find them remotely witty or humorous. My friend who likes the series described it as "feminist," but I don't think of ten-year-old boys when I hear the word "feminist"....that is about the level of much of the humor in this series.
In addition, I found the two lead characters' obsession with African-Americans and African-American culture bordering on fetishistic rather than appreciative. A couple of times the character of Abbi remarked that she didn't want to be guilty of "cultural appropriation," which I actually laughed out loud at since there are whole scenes in which the leads are doing exactly that.
I really dislike bringing up actors' looks, but I cannot help but wonder if some of the love for this series (and praise for its supposed "feminism") is due largely to the lead actresses not being conventionally pretty. (I disagree with those who say they are ugly or unattractive, though.) In that sense, at least, the show is refreshing.
Ford v Ferrari (2019)
Flawed but highly entertaining
I have read several of the reviews posted here for "Ford vs. Ferrari," and I generally agree with most of the criticisms: too long (15-30 minutes could have been cut, in my opinion), too many cliched scenes, and a very cliched character in the form of Leo Beebee, a Ford executive, who is clearly supposed to embody evil, soulless corporate greed (in case you have an IQ under 50 and can't figure that out within the first two minutes that character is on screen). Finally, I agree that Christian Bale's accent sounded cockney as opposed to Brummie--and I'm an American. Speaking of accents, I am surprised none of the nit-pickers here has mentioned something else I found slightly annoying: the character of Ken Miiles' son is portrayed by a boy with a strong English accent, but Miles' son was growing up in California and therefore would have had an American accent. Maybe the producers just thought a kid with an English accent would sound more appealing to audiences. (The child is a good actor, at any rate.)
All that aside, even a huge movie snob like me found the film highly entertaining, and the length bothered me less than in other overly-long movies. (I believe most Hollywood movies in recent years could benefit from losing at least 15 minutes, frankly--Black Panther and Wonder Woman immediately spring to mind, although there are many others.) I did not go to see this expecting a documentary but rather to be entertained. I will add that I attended it with my brother, who is a former automotive journalist and therefore, to put it mildly, a real "petrolhead," While he commented that there were definitely historical inaccuracies in the film, he genuinely enjoyed it as well. (Since leaving automotive journalism behind, my brother has worked in Hollywood, so that probably helps; he does not have any expectation that a Hollywood release is aiming for historical accuracy, since he knows that business well too.) However, I can understand why other automotive and/or racing obsessives might be more bothered by the film's flaws. If you are simply looking for well-acted, fast-paced (well, during the on-track scenes) fun, I highly recommend this.