Loved this series. Was sorry to see it go in 2015. Two years later it's been reborn in a decidedly less than incarnation. It's not the cast -- it's the writing. Which is, unfortunately, pretty standard issue Special Forces in desert countries shoot-em-up.
Where's the story?
Reviews
29 Reviews
Agatha Raisin
(2014– )
Half Points
21 April 2017
I haven't read the books. That said, this TV series is of marginal interest to mystery fans. The UK excels in mystery scripts and this series is just not up to par. It is barely interesting with the underlying mysteries pretty easy to figure out on your own.
I would give a shout out to Katy Wix who is a stand out as the "helper" in solving the mysteries. Often seeming to be the actual detective in this cast of hapless and helpless villagers.
I would give a shout out to Katy Wix who is a stand out as the "helper" in solving the mysteries. Often seeming to be the actual detective in this cast of hapless and helpless villagers.
Masters of Sex
(2013–2016)
Largely unwatchable
3 September 2015
We're three seasons in and the critics are wrong about this series. If you're watching for the Mad Men appeal of something set in the 50's-60's you're in the wrong place. There are no eye candy sets here, the men are all either unredeemable dicks or hugely patronizing pains and the women are, by far, the most appealing characters and actors. But that said, the writers certainly seem to have taken an interesting series and run it into the ditch by season 3. The characters have pretty much all outlived their viewer interest. The fictional children do not belong in this series based on real people and they are a big drag on the story arcs.
The value to the series is, in my opinion, solely to view the work of Lizzy Caplan, Allison Janney, Annaleigh Ashford, Sarah Silverman and Caitlin FitzGerald. Michael Sheen does nothing with a wholly unlikeable character. There is no humanity in his Bill Masters. The longer this show continues the more awful this character becomes. And he is, ultimately, the reason I can no longer watch the show. I just can't put up with his character that takes up so much screen time to get to the female performances that are actually worth watching.
The value to the series is, in my opinion, solely to view the work of Lizzy Caplan, Allison Janney, Annaleigh Ashford, Sarah Silverman and Caitlin FitzGerald. Michael Sheen does nothing with a wholly unlikeable character. There is no humanity in his Bill Masters. The longer this show continues the more awful this character becomes. And he is, ultimately, the reason I can no longer watch the show. I just can't put up with his character that takes up so much screen time to get to the female performances that are actually worth watching.
I Am Cait
(2015–2016)
What a Disconnect
30 August 2015
Caitlyn, Caitlyn, Caitlyn. Really?
A 10 for coming out as your real self. A 2 for still having the brain of a privileged white man. You've been living with this your whole life and you still have no clue what life is like in America as a woman? Or as an LGBTQ? The homophobia? The transgender hatred? The misogyny? The economic imbalance? The Republican fear mongering? Really? What kind of a rock have you been living under? Thanks and rotten tomatoes to E! for this wholly unsatisfying series. On the one hand it is beyond fabulous to detail the coming out of a celebrity as it moves the cultural conversation forward like nothing else. But on the other hand.... somebody please school Miss Caitlyn in depth ASAP. She's embarrassing herself and making things worse for the transgender community at the same time.
A 10 for coming out as your real self. A 2 for still having the brain of a privileged white man. You've been living with this your whole life and you still have no clue what life is like in America as a woman? Or as an LGBTQ? The homophobia? The transgender hatred? The misogyny? The economic imbalance? The Republican fear mongering? Really? What kind of a rock have you been living under? Thanks and rotten tomatoes to E! for this wholly unsatisfying series. On the one hand it is beyond fabulous to detail the coming out of a celebrity as it moves the cultural conversation forward like nothing else. But on the other hand.... somebody please school Miss Caitlyn in depth ASAP. She's embarrassing herself and making things worse for the transgender community at the same time.
Hell Baby
(2013)
Smiles, no laughter
30 August 2015
This is a 10 minute comedy sketch stretched out to a 98 minute film. Great cast. There is a lot of comedic talent -- writers, creators, actors -- represented here. But the best I could muster were a few smiles.
This is clearly a case of comedians making themselves laugh. Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld would say.
This is clearly a case of comedians making themselves laugh. Not that there's anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld would say.
The Rewrite
(2014)
Make it Stop
16 August 2015
Marc Lawrence has written another mediocre rom-com. This one has the added special sauce of overt sexism added to its dull, predictable script. Hugh Grant turns in another lifeless Hugh Grant performance. Allison Janney's comedic talents are wasted in the role of the stereotyped humorless, angry woman who teaches college level female-centric literature. J.K. Simmons makes the most of his supporting role. And Marisa Tomei is the only clear grown up in the room. Of course the male lead would be attracted to a smart, fun, caring, capable woman who challenges him to be better. The bigger question is why in the world would she ever be interested in Grant's sad sack, has-been, rude, condescending and patronizing leading man?
I think the ugh factor was telling from the beginning when the washed up writer takes a teaching job he doesn't want but a) instead of reading the students' writing samples he uses social media profiles to fill the class with hot girls and two not hot nerdy guys, and b) in a class filled with females of course it's one of the guys who the teacher chooses to promote to his agent and to sell a script. Because, you know......the girls aren't there for the writing. The film continued it's downward slide from there.
I think the ugh factor was telling from the beginning when the washed up writer takes a teaching job he doesn't want but a) instead of reading the students' writing samples he uses social media profiles to fill the class with hot girls and two not hot nerdy guys, and b) in a class filled with females of course it's one of the guys who the teacher chooses to promote to his agent and to sell a script. Because, you know......the girls aren't there for the writing. The film continued it's downward slide from there.
Becoming Us
(2015)
Watch this
4 July 2015
All shows have flaws. But I like this one, and here's why. Gender identity is having a much needed and well deserved moment in American culture and in Hollywood. It's past time for us to understand this issue and put our ignorant rants and biases behind us. This is a great show to help us get there.
If you take away nothing else from this show, please understand this: 1) Gender identity and sexual orientation are two entirely separate things. 2) Talk. Listen. With an open mind an open heart. 3) Everyone's thoughts and feelings come from a place of honesty for them. Receive them as such and your conversation will continue and go deeper.
Caitlyn Jenner has just emerged as a transgender woman. She is one end of the spectrum -- a huge name that will help immensely to propel understanding of what it means to be transgender. Becoming Us represents the other end of the spectrum which is real, average families that love each other and are trying hard to deal with something difficult outside of the world of celebrity.
If you take away nothing else from this show, please understand this: 1) Gender identity and sexual orientation are two entirely separate things. 2) Talk. Listen. With an open mind an open heart. 3) Everyone's thoughts and feelings come from a place of honesty for them. Receive them as such and your conversation will continue and go deeper.
Caitlyn Jenner has just emerged as a transgender woman. She is one end of the spectrum -- a huge name that will help immensely to propel understanding of what it means to be transgender. Becoming Us represents the other end of the spectrum which is real, average families that love each other and are trying hard to deal with something difficult outside of the world of celebrity.
Show needs a reboot
30 June 2015
Genealogical research is often fascinating, illuminating and addictive. But here's the thing about televising something that involves a lot of library time and reading -- you have to make it engaging. Finding Your Roots means well but it is nowhere near as fun or interesting to watch as another genealogical show, Who Do You Think You Are, currently airing on TLC. Unfortunately, it is Gates himself that is a drag on the show. He is a scholar and a professor and his sit downs with his guests come across like a dry lecture. The guests show up like good students for the lecture but they have had little or no personal involvement in the quest up to that point. And frankly some of them don't look too interested in their own stories.
I've been involved in genealogical research for many decades and I have learned some remarkable things at the hands of Professor Gates and his association with PBS. I don't want the show to disappear but I would encourage PBS to reformat it in favor of engaging both the guest and the viewer to a higher degree. They have the perfect opportunity to do that in the wake of the revelation that Gates and the show's producers covered up the facts of Ben Affleck's slave owning ancestry.
I've been involved in genealogical research for many decades and I have learned some remarkable things at the hands of Professor Gates and his association with PBS. I don't want the show to disappear but I would encourage PBS to reformat it in favor of engaging both the guest and the viewer to a higher degree. They have the perfect opportunity to do that in the wake of the revelation that Gates and the show's producers covered up the facts of Ben Affleck's slave owning ancestry.
The Sisterhood: Becoming Nuns
(2014– )
To Be or Not to Be a Nun
17 December 2014
Reality television is not my thing at all. I tuned in to this Lifetime series, however, because of the very unusual subject matter. Five girls deciding if they wish to become nuns and devote their lives to the Church. I can't recall any other opportunity to watch something like this on my television screen.
Overall the subject matter was quite interesting and Lifetime handled it well. It seems there could have been a couple more episodes to this very limited series in order to go deeper into the spiritual aspects of the girls' search and decision process. More screen time for the wisdom dished out by the Mothers Superior would also have been good.
The big disappointment was the girls themselves. The level of immaturity and inappropriate behavior, among religious individuals who feel a calling from God, was a shocker to me. It made me reflect on this generation of adult children who haven't a clue about appropriate social discourse and respectful interactions.
Overall the subject matter was quite interesting and Lifetime handled it well. It seems there could have been a couple more episodes to this very limited series in order to go deeper into the spiritual aspects of the girls' search and decision process. More screen time for the wisdom dished out by the Mothers Superior would also have been good.
The big disappointment was the girls themselves. The level of immaturity and inappropriate behavior, among religious individuals who feel a calling from God, was a shocker to me. It made me reflect on this generation of adult children who haven't a clue about appropriate social discourse and respectful interactions.
Little Mosque on the Prairie
(2007–2012)
You need to be from a small town
21 July 2014
After reading all the reviews, I think you have to be from a small town to appreciate this show which is all about a small town. I'm from a town of 4000. Everything about this show rings true to me. Everyone knows everything about everyone. And they talk about it, and you, regularly. With or without you being present.
I really like that this show has the small minded people of a small town learning from each other and always falling back on the fact that they are neighbors. They've known each other all their lives. It does, and it should, mitigate all ill will and hurt feelings. No better example than Fred Tupper, played by Neil Crone, who is the local right wing xenophobic loud mouth. Live and let live was what I grew up on in my small town. And it's what you get with this series.
I tuned out in season 4, however, with the departure of the flawed but kind Rev. Magee and the introduction of Rev. Thorne. The writing for Magee and Thorne were polar opposite and the writing for this new character ruined the show for me. He's mean, vindictive, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and all this from a man of the cloth. Too much for a comedy. Too bad the writers ruined a good thing.
I really like that this show has the small minded people of a small town learning from each other and always falling back on the fact that they are neighbors. They've known each other all their lives. It does, and it should, mitigate all ill will and hurt feelings. No better example than Fred Tupper, played by Neil Crone, who is the local right wing xenophobic loud mouth. Live and let live was what I grew up on in my small town. And it's what you get with this series.
I tuned out in season 4, however, with the departure of the flawed but kind Rev. Magee and the introduction of Rev. Thorne. The writing for Magee and Thorne were polar opposite and the writing for this new character ruined the show for me. He's mean, vindictive, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim and all this from a man of the cloth. Too much for a comedy. Too bad the writers ruined a good thing.
Town Hall
(2013)
Tea Party Activists
16 July 2014
Kudos to Jamila Wignot and Sierra Pettengill for a very well made documentary. The danger of any documentary touching on the political is that the filmmaker's bias will be the most obvious aspect of the film. Not true with Town Hall which turns the camera on two Pennyslvania Tea Party activists in the lead up to the 2010 and 2012 elections. They do all the talking and there are no leading questions or voiceovers.
The end result is a very human and neighborly look inside the narrow, and yes -- racist, often hypocritical views that fuel the Tea Party and the modern day Republican Party. One example of this plays out as one of the activists, John Stahl, assists his elderly mother in the voting booth. She is in a wheelchair, appears not to have all her mental faculties, and is physically unable to handle the ballot or sign her name. Her son accompanies her into the booth and votes for her and one has to assume that the probability is high that he and his Tea Party voice got to vote twice that day -- all happily assisted by the friendly white, conservative poll workers. No questions asked, no obstacles in place. Later on in the film Stahl offers his unsolicited opinion that most immigrants in the area (camera shot of Latinos walking in front of his car) are illegal and undocumented. A bit later on he is shown at a polling station and making a point to go up to every brown voter and inquiring about their immigration status. Watching all that unfold certainly looks like white entitlement with his mother and racist voter intimidation / harassment with the Latino voters. Who were all citizens, by the way. But from where he sits it was an act of patriotism and completely within his purview. No reference is made to this but viewers will surely remember that Pennsylvania's Republican controlled legislature is among those that passed restrictive voter ID laws which are designed to suppress the voting rights of minorities and the poor -- AKA presumed Democrats.
The other activist, Katy Abram, describes herself as a pro-choice liberal in her youth. Until she met her very conservative husband who turned her on to Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, who she listens to quite a lot. No surprise that now, at 35, her opinions mirror those of these men. It is Abram who gives us the best look inside the head of an average member of the Tea Party. Abram is a stay at home mom who got politically fired up and took a job with Americans for Prosperity. She burns with the fire of a new convert. She talks a lot so we get to hear her interior conversation. She provides a clear view of why the GOP not only lost the 2012 election but why they were so stunned by that loss. Abram exists inside a bubble of extreme conservatism. It provides the only media that enters her life (Fox, Rush, Beck, et al), speaks only to like minded people, marvels that the stars of this media are always right, and thinks President Obama is transforming America into a replica of socialist Russia. Insulated, naive, xenophobic, misinformed, vulnerable. In short, easy pickings for anyone to exploit human levels of anxiety and fear. No deep thoughts here. But the viewer will recognize the repetition of a lot of official talking points from Abram.
Each activist offers their opinions on some of the safety net programs and what we hear is hypocrisy, lack of compassion and superficial understanding of the programs. For example, Stahl welcomes Medicare for himself and his mother but wants to end the program for others. Abram's reaction to a child's fear of losing the food stamps that family depends on to get to next week if Mitt Romney is elected is a bizarre glee that somehow this child's remark has just proved the whole "culture of dependency" rhetoric of the right.
The filmmakers merely gave these two the forum to explain their beliefs and the policies they would like to see established. The two activists discredit those beliefs and policies all by themselves.
The end result is a very human and neighborly look inside the narrow, and yes -- racist, often hypocritical views that fuel the Tea Party and the modern day Republican Party. One example of this plays out as one of the activists, John Stahl, assists his elderly mother in the voting booth. She is in a wheelchair, appears not to have all her mental faculties, and is physically unable to handle the ballot or sign her name. Her son accompanies her into the booth and votes for her and one has to assume that the probability is high that he and his Tea Party voice got to vote twice that day -- all happily assisted by the friendly white, conservative poll workers. No questions asked, no obstacles in place. Later on in the film Stahl offers his unsolicited opinion that most immigrants in the area (camera shot of Latinos walking in front of his car) are illegal and undocumented. A bit later on he is shown at a polling station and making a point to go up to every brown voter and inquiring about their immigration status. Watching all that unfold certainly looks like white entitlement with his mother and racist voter intimidation / harassment with the Latino voters. Who were all citizens, by the way. But from where he sits it was an act of patriotism and completely within his purview. No reference is made to this but viewers will surely remember that Pennsylvania's Republican controlled legislature is among those that passed restrictive voter ID laws which are designed to suppress the voting rights of minorities and the poor -- AKA presumed Democrats.
The other activist, Katy Abram, describes herself as a pro-choice liberal in her youth. Until she met her very conservative husband who turned her on to Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, who she listens to quite a lot. No surprise that now, at 35, her opinions mirror those of these men. It is Abram who gives us the best look inside the head of an average member of the Tea Party. Abram is a stay at home mom who got politically fired up and took a job with Americans for Prosperity. She burns with the fire of a new convert. She talks a lot so we get to hear her interior conversation. She provides a clear view of why the GOP not only lost the 2012 election but why they were so stunned by that loss. Abram exists inside a bubble of extreme conservatism. It provides the only media that enters her life (Fox, Rush, Beck, et al), speaks only to like minded people, marvels that the stars of this media are always right, and thinks President Obama is transforming America into a replica of socialist Russia. Insulated, naive, xenophobic, misinformed, vulnerable. In short, easy pickings for anyone to exploit human levels of anxiety and fear. No deep thoughts here. But the viewer will recognize the repetition of a lot of official talking points from Abram.
Each activist offers their opinions on some of the safety net programs and what we hear is hypocrisy, lack of compassion and superficial understanding of the programs. For example, Stahl welcomes Medicare for himself and his mother but wants to end the program for others. Abram's reaction to a child's fear of losing the food stamps that family depends on to get to next week if Mitt Romney is elected is a bizarre glee that somehow this child's remark has just proved the whole "culture of dependency" rhetoric of the right.
The filmmakers merely gave these two the forum to explain their beliefs and the policies they would like to see established. The two activists discredit those beliefs and policies all by themselves.
My Brooklyn
(2012)
Connects the dots between planning and building
18 June 2014
This is a great story and an excellent film that illustrates the how and why of urban renewal projects. "Urban Renewal" has many synonyms including redlining, segregation, gentrification and revitalization. The end result is the same: removal of people of color and those of a lower socio-economic class and turning over both land and profit to a population consisting mostly of white, wealthy, upper class folk. And no matter how much our city, county, state and federal officials protest --- the fact is that the process is pretty much the same in all our communities, large and small. Back room deals get made between government officials who are supposed to be looking out for the best interests of said community and balancing that with need and opportunity for smart change and growth. Instead what typically happens is the act of back scratching between public and private entities that results in developers getting most or all of what they want, including millions in giveaways and tax breaks (AKA "subsidies"), officials being allowed to take home a piece of the profit and existing residents and business owners being shut out of the whole thing. Not only does the public have no influence in the decision but their elected leaders have thrown them under the bus by not requiring developers to do much, or anything, in the way of preserving affordable housing or public spaces. Or to contribute what they actually owe to the tax base. Public comment meetings take place only after all decisions have been made and things are already in motion. It's just that no one will speak that truth out loud.
There are two ways to look at something like this. 1) The process of how decisions get made and projects get built in this country is seriously broken. Or -- 2) The process works just fine. Because profit is the only thing that we worship and the only thing worth pursuing. I think we like to believe that we are a melting pot country that values the benefits of diversity when the real truth is that everything about our public policy says we only value profit and the resulting segregated, homogenized, chain store culture. And we can only place blame on our elected officials to a certain degree because it is us, after all, who voted them into office. And even though we can fire them at any time -- we apparently choose not to do so.
There are two ways to look at something like this. 1) The process of how decisions get made and projects get built in this country is seriously broken. Or -- 2) The process works just fine. Because profit is the only thing that we worship and the only thing worth pursuing. I think we like to believe that we are a melting pot country that values the benefits of diversity when the real truth is that everything about our public policy says we only value profit and the resulting segregated, homogenized, chain store culture. And we can only place blame on our elected officials to a certain degree because it is us, after all, who voted them into office. And even though we can fire them at any time -- we apparently choose not to do so.
A Snore
6 June 2014
Well, blow me down. As much as I love cooking, eating, and food movies I could not get all the way through this unexpectedly boring documentary.
The filmmakers took an exciting subject, a masterful chef and artist and a completely unique restaurant and turned it all into a slog and a bore. This is cinema verite at it's worst. A film that lacks sufficient explanation, interest and visual excitement.
There is so much more involved to making a good documentary than turning the camera on and leaving the room. The film falls short on it's appeal to film lovers, anyone who's good in the kitchen, and scientists as well.
The filmmakers took an exciting subject, a masterful chef and artist and a completely unique restaurant and turned it all into a slog and a bore. This is cinema verite at it's worst. A film that lacks sufficient explanation, interest and visual excitement.
There is so much more involved to making a good documentary than turning the camera on and leaving the room. The film falls short on it's appeal to film lovers, anyone who's good in the kitchen, and scientists as well.
Fed Up
(2014)
Big Food is killing us for profit
29 May 2014
The film itself was disappointing in it's often unreadable graphics and sometimes ADD-like pacing of images but I give it a 10 for the important messages that need to find as wide an audience as possible. One of those messages is of the extreme amounts of added sugar in the average American diet but the other is about the tremendous conflict of interest in most government agencies, and our public servants in Congress, which have chosen to protect corporate profits over the health and safety of our citizens.
The more one learns about the causes of obesity and how to effect healthy weight loss the more one understands that most doctors and nutritionists are subject to the same misinformation and propaganda as the rest of us. It's not about exercise nor is it about calories. It's about the quality and the combination of the foods you consume.
I strongly recommend the books of Dr. Mark Hyman to anyone who wants to learn more. Especially "The 10 Day Detox Diet" which is a fast, uncomplicated read with very clear instructions. Diet, in this sense, is less of a weight loss scheme and more of a well explained, sensible plan on how to eat for the rest of your life to stay healthy. Weight loss is a byproduct of healthy eating. I recently followed his detox and lost 10 pounds by removing sugar and other inflammatories from my diet. I'm a very good cook, cook all my own food, and purchase nearly everything at the farmer's market. I thought I was already eating quite well. But I was ignorant on certain foods, such as beans and starchy vegetables, which rapidly turn to sugar once consumed. The body has a similar reaction to foods which turn into sugar quickly as it does to eating raw sugar directly. The point is that even if you think you have a healthy diet there are probably simple things you can do to make it even better.
Michael Pollan has offered some of the very best food advice that is too simple to ever forget. Eat real food, not too much, mostly plants. Don't eat anything your grandmother wouldn't recognize as food. Don't eat anything with more than 5 ingredients unless you made it yourself. I know that my grandmother wouldn't recognize most of what is sold in any supermarket in the country as actual food. What's on the shelves these days is more like futuristic food-like substances. Reminds me of how we used to giggle when Velveeta was marketed as an "authentic cheese food". That's about as far away from actual cheese, or real food, as one can get. And Kraft was being surprisingly honest about that.
As with most things nowadays, one has to learn to read the coded language of the marketing campaign as well as the not entirely truthful nutritional labels and ingredients list. Because while Big Food may be subject to some sort of wrist slap for outright lies they have officially sanctioned governmental approval to be as purposefully misleading as possible.
The more one learns about the causes of obesity and how to effect healthy weight loss the more one understands that most doctors and nutritionists are subject to the same misinformation and propaganda as the rest of us. It's not about exercise nor is it about calories. It's about the quality and the combination of the foods you consume.
I strongly recommend the books of Dr. Mark Hyman to anyone who wants to learn more. Especially "The 10 Day Detox Diet" which is a fast, uncomplicated read with very clear instructions. Diet, in this sense, is less of a weight loss scheme and more of a well explained, sensible plan on how to eat for the rest of your life to stay healthy. Weight loss is a byproduct of healthy eating. I recently followed his detox and lost 10 pounds by removing sugar and other inflammatories from my diet. I'm a very good cook, cook all my own food, and purchase nearly everything at the farmer's market. I thought I was already eating quite well. But I was ignorant on certain foods, such as beans and starchy vegetables, which rapidly turn to sugar once consumed. The body has a similar reaction to foods which turn into sugar quickly as it does to eating raw sugar directly. The point is that even if you think you have a healthy diet there are probably simple things you can do to make it even better.
Michael Pollan has offered some of the very best food advice that is too simple to ever forget. Eat real food, not too much, mostly plants. Don't eat anything your grandmother wouldn't recognize as food. Don't eat anything with more than 5 ingredients unless you made it yourself. I know that my grandmother wouldn't recognize most of what is sold in any supermarket in the country as actual food. What's on the shelves these days is more like futuristic food-like substances. Reminds me of how we used to giggle when Velveeta was marketed as an "authentic cheese food". That's about as far away from actual cheese, or real food, as one can get. And Kraft was being surprisingly honest about that.
As with most things nowadays, one has to learn to read the coded language of the marketing campaign as well as the not entirely truthful nutritional labels and ingredients list. Because while Big Food may be subject to some sort of wrist slap for outright lies they have officially sanctioned governmental approval to be as purposefully misleading as possible.
Running from Crazy
(2013)
More like Running From Well Earned Depression
30 April 2014
I am a fan of Barbara Kopple's films and this is not one of her best. I'm not sure I would even call it a documentary. It's more like a self-help / memoir video. As such, it was very fitting that it had it's television premiere on OWN, where it was called a docudrama. To some that may seem a small distinction but to anyone who truly appreciates good documentaries it's huge.
This is Mariel Hemingway's story of the many years and many paths she's been on to find that something or someone who makes her feel loved, protected and okay as a human being. "Crazy"......not so much. WASP protected, never spoken of lives of great sadness and depression despite "having it all".....you bet. I am not saying mental illness does not exist in the Hemingway gene pool but that really isn't what this film is about. It's about Mariel's quest for spiritual healing and fulfillment. Part of which is the very admirable public speaking that she does to put a public face on illness and depression few wish to acknowledge within their own families.
By far, the most absorbing pieces of this film are those that are about Margaux. Margaux's own documentary footage is used extensively and it is the only portion of the film that truly captures our attention. She speaks from the place of someone who has great insight into herself and her family. Even her body language is extraordinary in what it reveals about what she knows to be true. I'm sorry to say that Mariel does not come across with that same depth of knowledge despite the years of searching.
The most revealing portions of the film pertain to truths Mariel has apparently yet to acknowledge. One is that her first husband has a cameo, out of nowhere, and appears to be having a coded conversation with her about how maintaining control has been her one big must in life lest she end up dead like 7 other family members and yet she has a tendency to inappropriately give that control away to others. Two is that her boyfriend sure looks to me like he is controlling, manipulative and openly disdainful of her. And the obvious-o-meter goes ding,ding,ding!
This is Mariel Hemingway's story of the many years and many paths she's been on to find that something or someone who makes her feel loved, protected and okay as a human being. "Crazy"......not so much. WASP protected, never spoken of lives of great sadness and depression despite "having it all".....you bet. I am not saying mental illness does not exist in the Hemingway gene pool but that really isn't what this film is about. It's about Mariel's quest for spiritual healing and fulfillment. Part of which is the very admirable public speaking that she does to put a public face on illness and depression few wish to acknowledge within their own families.
By far, the most absorbing pieces of this film are those that are about Margaux. Margaux's own documentary footage is used extensively and it is the only portion of the film that truly captures our attention. She speaks from the place of someone who has great insight into herself and her family. Even her body language is extraordinary in what it reveals about what she knows to be true. I'm sorry to say that Mariel does not come across with that same depth of knowledge despite the years of searching.
The most revealing portions of the film pertain to truths Mariel has apparently yet to acknowledge. One is that her first husband has a cameo, out of nowhere, and appears to be having a coded conversation with her about how maintaining control has been her one big must in life lest she end up dead like 7 other family members and yet she has a tendency to inappropriately give that control away to others. Two is that her boyfriend sure looks to me like he is controlling, manipulative and openly disdainful of her. And the obvious-o-meter goes ding,ding,ding!
The Illness and the Odyssey
(2013)
Hug a Scientist Today
15 April 2014
We need a lot more documentaries like this, which was aired on PBS. We live in an underfunded, anti-science time which is also hostile to fact and truth. This shows the slow, methodical detective work - not to mention the struggle for funding - that is the hallmark of all great scientific efforts and breakthroughs.
Doctors and scientists in the fields of neurology, immunology, infectious diseases, etc. were drawn to Guam in the 1950's to study a local ailment which displayed symptoms of ALS, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. It is called Lytico-Bodig and researchers treated the island population as though they held the Rosetta Stone of understanding all three of these degenerative diseases and perhaps many others as well.
Sixty years later and there is still no answer as to cause or prevention. But that is not the same thing as saying researchers have made no progress. Science is perhaps the only field by which success is defined by continuous failure. Every new theory must be fully and repeatedly tested before determining what, if anything, was learned and is of value before moving on to the next theory. Perhaps one day bits and pieces from numerous theories will be discovered as the answer -- once they are linked together as a result of endless and meticulous testing.
Doctors and scientists in the fields of neurology, immunology, infectious diseases, etc. were drawn to Guam in the 1950's to study a local ailment which displayed symptoms of ALS, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. It is called Lytico-Bodig and researchers treated the island population as though they held the Rosetta Stone of understanding all three of these degenerative diseases and perhaps many others as well.
Sixty years later and there is still no answer as to cause or prevention. But that is not the same thing as saying researchers have made no progress. Science is perhaps the only field by which success is defined by continuous failure. Every new theory must be fully and repeatedly tested before determining what, if anything, was learned and is of value before moving on to the next theory. Perhaps one day bits and pieces from numerous theories will be discovered as the answer -- once they are linked together as a result of endless and meticulous testing.
Mixology
(2013–2014)
Offensive
27 February 2014
I found the writing to be shockingly dreadful, offensive and virulently anti-female. Television critic Tim Goodman nailed this show when he wrote "The level of tone deafness in the writing of Mixology is astounding." And continues on to call it "a misogynistic piece of frat-boy awfulness".
The way these men think about and speak about women is nothing short of appalling. The women aren't much better as their near total lack of self-worth is contained in every word and every too short skirt. The whole thing calls out for a cultural intervention / revolution.
We should be so lucky as for Mixology's inevitable cancellation to serve notice on Hollywood executives that this kind of writing has got to go. Enough. No more.
The way these men think about and speak about women is nothing short of appalling. The women aren't much better as their near total lack of self-worth is contained in every word and every too short skirt. The whole thing calls out for a cultural intervention / revolution.
We should be so lucky as for Mixology's inevitable cancellation to serve notice on Hollywood executives that this kind of writing has got to go. Enough. No more.
Big Sur
(2013)
Gorgeous scenery
3 December 2013
I think it is fair to warn people that the telling factor on whether you will enjoy this film or not is your relationship with Jack Kerouac and the writers of that time and crowd. The more you enjoy Kerouac's writing the more you will enjoy this film which has remained true to him and his words. If you don't enjoy Kerouac or are not familiar with him, then you might be tempted to walk out, or pass out with boredom.
M. David Mullen's cinematography is spectacular and the Big Sur coast is stunning even on a bad day. But for the average viewer, this is a film with not much of a story or character development and an often irritating narration (Kerouac's words) that, depending on your love of Kerouac will come across as either evidence of his genius or delusional in it's presumption of profundity.
M. David Mullen's cinematography is spectacular and the Big Sur coast is stunning even on a bad day. But for the average viewer, this is a film with not much of a story or character development and an often irritating narration (Kerouac's words) that, depending on your love of Kerouac will come across as either evidence of his genius or delusional in it's presumption of profundity.
Open Secret
(2011)
Misdirected emotions
5 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers ahead....
Al Jazeera America showed this documentary recently and it bugged me so much that I had to post some comments. The open secret is really nothing that isn't a (sadly) fairly common occurrence all across America. It's so common, in fact, that it was a recent plot line on ABC's Scandal. Steve Lickteig discovers that his oldest sister is actually his mother. And that the whole family of parents and eight siblings raised him while telling him he was adopted. In fact, the entire town kept the truth away from him. But it's what follows that is so disturbing.
Steve Lickteig is in public radio. He is the writer, director and star of this film. One would think that he would bring a more objective eye to it and try to see the events from many perspectives. Certainly to make an attempt to see it through the eyes of every major player. But he doesn't. Rather he seems to be in the throws of a decades long self centered tantrum with childish bursts of anger and completely inappropriate and misdirected cruelty towards his birth mother.
It is apparent to viewers that Lickteig's family is pretty messed up. But it stems from Steve's grandparents, specifically his grandfather, who Lickteig lets off virtually unchallenged. And his grandmother, owing to her husband's insistence that they remain in a place she not only hated but never agreed to and which ultimately destroyed her. She is the focus of some attention as it is revealed that she was emotionally and physically abusive to her children, most specifically to Lickteig's birth mother whom she singled out for extra "control" because she was a free spirit who reminded her mother of all the things that would never be possible in her own life. She, in fact, spent some time in a mental institution and had electroshock therapy. So when Joanie became pregnant with Steve and her mother laid out the plan for "adoption" she was already so accustomed to being terrorized by her mother that she did not and could not protest. All of this is corroborated by other family members who were equally cowed into silence.
Lickteig's rant about being lied to and his narcissistic me, me, me focus means that his perfectly lovely, open & engaging birth mother is once again the object of misguided family cruelty. Lickteig searches for clues as to his birth father and discovers that he was 20 years older than his mother, knocked her up and was never seen or heard from again after he learned of the pregnancy. Lickteig then tracks down this man's only child, who is actually Lickteig's half sister, who didn't know anything about anything but with complete clarity noted that she was sorry for Lickteig's mother who was so clearly a hapless, harmless victim in all this. And this is the big problem with Lickteig's story. Viewers and a complete stranger half sister can see it so plainly but he cannot.
Now, since Lickteig wrote, directed and presumably oversaw the editing of this film as well one would think that he got exactly the edit he wanted. But the film makes him look like a real big jerk. So that says to me that his self awareness is probably seriously skewed. There is a very revealing exchange between Steve and his mother in which it is acknowledged that her mother gave him a happy childhood. Precisely because she gave her such a miserable one. I get that. Most viewers would get that. Lickteig showed no ability for reflection where he could ever understand that. Rather he seems to take the position that since he had a happy childhood it isn't possible that perhaps this is not true for all others in the family. The perspective of the filmmaker is very shallow indeed.
Al Jazeera America showed this documentary recently and it bugged me so much that I had to post some comments. The open secret is really nothing that isn't a (sadly) fairly common occurrence all across America. It's so common, in fact, that it was a recent plot line on ABC's Scandal. Steve Lickteig discovers that his oldest sister is actually his mother. And that the whole family of parents and eight siblings raised him while telling him he was adopted. In fact, the entire town kept the truth away from him. But it's what follows that is so disturbing.
Steve Lickteig is in public radio. He is the writer, director and star of this film. One would think that he would bring a more objective eye to it and try to see the events from many perspectives. Certainly to make an attempt to see it through the eyes of every major player. But he doesn't. Rather he seems to be in the throws of a decades long self centered tantrum with childish bursts of anger and completely inappropriate and misdirected cruelty towards his birth mother.
It is apparent to viewers that Lickteig's family is pretty messed up. But it stems from Steve's grandparents, specifically his grandfather, who Lickteig lets off virtually unchallenged. And his grandmother, owing to her husband's insistence that they remain in a place she not only hated but never agreed to and which ultimately destroyed her. She is the focus of some attention as it is revealed that she was emotionally and physically abusive to her children, most specifically to Lickteig's birth mother whom she singled out for extra "control" because she was a free spirit who reminded her mother of all the things that would never be possible in her own life. She, in fact, spent some time in a mental institution and had electroshock therapy. So when Joanie became pregnant with Steve and her mother laid out the plan for "adoption" she was already so accustomed to being terrorized by her mother that she did not and could not protest. All of this is corroborated by other family members who were equally cowed into silence.
Lickteig's rant about being lied to and his narcissistic me, me, me focus means that his perfectly lovely, open & engaging birth mother is once again the object of misguided family cruelty. Lickteig searches for clues as to his birth father and discovers that he was 20 years older than his mother, knocked her up and was never seen or heard from again after he learned of the pregnancy. Lickteig then tracks down this man's only child, who is actually Lickteig's half sister, who didn't know anything about anything but with complete clarity noted that she was sorry for Lickteig's mother who was so clearly a hapless, harmless victim in all this. And this is the big problem with Lickteig's story. Viewers and a complete stranger half sister can see it so plainly but he cannot.
Now, since Lickteig wrote, directed and presumably oversaw the editing of this film as well one would think that he got exactly the edit he wanted. But the film makes him look like a real big jerk. So that says to me that his self awareness is probably seriously skewed. There is a very revealing exchange between Steve and his mother in which it is acknowledged that her mother gave him a happy childhood. Precisely because she gave her such a miserable one. I get that. Most viewers would get that. Lickteig showed no ability for reflection where he could ever understand that. Rather he seems to take the position that since he had a happy childhood it isn't possible that perhaps this is not true for all others in the family. The perspective of the filmmaker is very shallow indeed.
Tomlinson Hill
(2013)
Operation Rescue: Marlin, TX
14 July 2013
This documentary would have been a lot more interesting if it actually fit the description provided of the black and white branches of the Tomlinson family discovering each other and their shared roots. Instead, most of the film is about Marlin, Texas. Marlin, like small towns everywhere, is a town of empty storefronts. A decaying town filled with decaying buildings. A good 2/3 of the film is about efforts to bring the people of the community together to save their community. Without much in the way of results.
The portion of the film that deals with Tomlinson family genealogy is interesting and something that deserves greater exposure and conversation in America. White people need to stop being so shocked at the knowledge that they share DNA with black people. While those white landowners were having a grand old time in their local KKK branch they were simultaneously creating new generations of mixed race children. Hence it is not at all unusual to have, in this case, Tomlinson cousins of different races. It is also not unusual that the black cousins have grown up with this knowledge and the accompanying family stories but the white cousins have grown up clueless of the extended family. Even when everyone lives in the same tiny town.
The most noteworthy takeaway from this documentary comes from a historian who notes that whatever else Texas is it is A Southern State. And it is the most un-reconstructed of all the Southern states. And those two sentences explain so much about why Texas is the way it is.
The portion of the film that deals with Tomlinson family genealogy is interesting and something that deserves greater exposure and conversation in America. White people need to stop being so shocked at the knowledge that they share DNA with black people. While those white landowners were having a grand old time in their local KKK branch they were simultaneously creating new generations of mixed race children. Hence it is not at all unusual to have, in this case, Tomlinson cousins of different races. It is also not unusual that the black cousins have grown up with this knowledge and the accompanying family stories but the white cousins have grown up clueless of the extended family. Even when everyone lives in the same tiny town.
The most noteworthy takeaway from this documentary comes from a historian who notes that whatever else Texas is it is A Southern State. And it is the most un-reconstructed of all the Southern states. And those two sentences explain so much about why Texas is the way it is.
The Fosters
(2013–2018)
Worth your time.
2 July 2013
I first heard about this show at episode 3. I wasn't that impressed with the one episode but thought this is a show I'd like to know more about, so circled back to the pilot and ep. 2. I must say, not only did I change my mind but I want to thank ABC Family for putting this show on the air. It's unique, delightful, real, impressive in all it's warts of family life and a wonder to see unfold.
It is rare, indeed, to see lesbians on screen in any capacity. To see a series devoted to moms and their family is noteworthy. To see a real life depiction of a foster situation, and all the inevitable anger and acting out against the "good guys" (in this case, the good moms) is even more rare and wonderful. I have no issues with the acting, only with the preposterous scenario of setting up ex-spouses as police patrol partners. Never gonna happen. For good reason.
To be a foster parent means, by definition, to show great patience and love with children who need it more than you can imagine. I think this is exactly what you see on screen. And ultimately, what you see is children who appreciate that, and show it in ways large and small. As much as they can muster on any given day.
Well done ABC Family.
Update: The first half of season 1 was pretty great. And then they took a six month break and came back with a second half of the season that appears to have been written with focus group feedback and/or merchandising potential in mind. Not much of it was believable except that emotions run high amongst teenagers. It was a big disappointment. I'm hoping for a return to better writing with the new season.
2nd update: 2015 - Quickest demise of a noteworthy series on my watch. Bad writing has ended my season pass. What first brought praise now brings scorn for shoddy workmanship. Come on, Hollywood. You know you can do better.
It is rare, indeed, to see lesbians on screen in any capacity. To see a series devoted to moms and their family is noteworthy. To see a real life depiction of a foster situation, and all the inevitable anger and acting out against the "good guys" (in this case, the good moms) is even more rare and wonderful. I have no issues with the acting, only with the preposterous scenario of setting up ex-spouses as police patrol partners. Never gonna happen. For good reason.
To be a foster parent means, by definition, to show great patience and love with children who need it more than you can imagine. I think this is exactly what you see on screen. And ultimately, what you see is children who appreciate that, and show it in ways large and small. As much as they can muster on any given day.
Well done ABC Family.
Update: The first half of season 1 was pretty great. And then they took a six month break and came back with a second half of the season that appears to have been written with focus group feedback and/or merchandising potential in mind. Not much of it was believable except that emotions run high amongst teenagers. It was a big disappointment. I'm hoping for a return to better writing with the new season.
2nd update: 2015 - Quickest demise of a noteworthy series on my watch. Bad writing has ended my season pass. What first brought praise now brings scorn for shoddy workmanship. Come on, Hollywood. You know you can do better.
This is not a fashion documentary
2 July 2013
I must disagree with the naysayers. I enjoyed this documentary. And I think that those who knock it are doing so from a starting point of viewing it with the expectation that it is a fashion documentary. It is not that. This is a documentary of Bergdorf Goodman. A retailer.
I think that anyone who has an appreciation of history and art will enjoy this film. Bergdorf Goodman is a success story, known the world wide. It's a family owned department store that broke new ground in many ways -- in business understanding and scope, in architecture, marketing, mentoring, sales, window art, and building a phenomenally loyal clientele. In essence, this is a documentary of an American family owned business success. Part of that success has been to discover designer talent, teach and mentor them, create a Designer and a Line. You'll notice that every designer interviewed is both radiant and reverent when discussing Bergdorf Goodman. No one could have done what BG did for their career, except BG. And they know that.
I was surprised at how much I enjoyed the coverage of the window displays. The behind the scenes work and artistry that go into that is a revelation. And a celebration.
I think that anyone who has an appreciation of history and art will enjoy this film. Bergdorf Goodman is a success story, known the world wide. It's a family owned department store that broke new ground in many ways -- in business understanding and scope, in architecture, marketing, mentoring, sales, window art, and building a phenomenally loyal clientele. In essence, this is a documentary of an American family owned business success. Part of that success has been to discover designer talent, teach and mentor them, create a Designer and a Line. You'll notice that every designer interviewed is both radiant and reverent when discussing Bergdorf Goodman. No one could have done what BG did for their career, except BG. And they know that.
I was surprised at how much I enjoyed the coverage of the window displays. The behind the scenes work and artistry that go into that is a revelation. And a celebration.
DTLA
(2012– )
Amateurish
28 June 2013
Intrigued with the 7.2 IMDb rating on this one, I decided to check it out. I could not even make it through two full 30 minute episodes. I thought the writing was awful, the dialogue laughable and the acting was mostly straight off the high school stage. Perhaps, had I decided to stick with it, I might have been in for a pleasant surprise. But, given what I saw, I don't think so.
I could give something like this a 7 or 8 rating simply for existing in the world of not much LGBT television options. But writers of shows like this need to step up their game and put things on television that are actually worth watching. The days of getting a 10, and a ready and forgiving audience eagerly waiting for your subpar product, are over.
I could give something like this a 7 or 8 rating simply for existing in the world of not much LGBT television options. But writers of shows like this need to step up their game and put things on television that are actually worth watching. The days of getting a 10, and a ready and forgiving audience eagerly waiting for your subpar product, are over.
The Staircase
(2004–2018)
Marvelously Gripping True Crime Mocumentary
28 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Possible spoilers ahead -- best read once you know a thing or two about the case and the players.
I give it a 10 as an edge of your seat, deliciously consuming film treat. I give it a 3 for truthiness. To find out what was omitted from the film I recommend Diane Fanning's 2005 excellent true crime book, "Written in Blood" which covers the case and the trial in detail.
First of all, I completely reject the comments of reviewers who say that this film is somehow an indictment of the jury trial system and that it shows that Southern juries and populations hear the word bisexual and vote to convict. Hogwash. But I will caution first time viewers to watch this film through the lens of what should be completely obvious, which is, that it is a tool of the defense. At some point while watching you must wonder why the evidence and the prosecution gets so little airtime while we instead get so much of the defense team talking about how to craft their story to best tear down anticipated arguments and witnesses for the prosecution. And way too much of a jovial and harmless looking Michael Peterson, surrounded by his very protective adult children.
I watched the film having only the vaguest familiarity with the case. I do, however, have familiarity with the courtroom, attorneys and narcissists. It was immediately apparent to me that Peterson is quite likely a narcissist and that the "narcissistic family" dynamic was on full display. Michael Peterson was the center of everyone's universe, prompting a fierce display of united loyalty. But that loyalty looked false and coerced. Too much, too forced, too effusive, too grandiose. Red flags that something else is going on with this family. Some of them are true believers that what they are showing is absolutely sincere. This false reality is the definition of love that they know to be true. With that understanding --- NOW think about the future for the most harmed children that Michael Peterson put on display for his own use: Margaret and Martha Ratliff. Caitlin Atwater will find her way to a better and healthier life, and she has sane family members to help her do that. Margaret and Martha may never be able to do that because they have been so inculcated in the narcissistic family abuse/intimidation/fear/demands which have been defined for them as love -- and they have only the Petersons to guide them.
Americans believe in many myths about our democracy. One of the most egregious being that truth and justice awaits you in the courtroom. Again -- Hogwash. The courtroom is a stage and all who enter it enter the theater. The best actor, not necessarily the truth, wins. The name of the game is always to destroy the credibility of each and every witness, which is always easiest to do with personal attacks rather than evidentiary rebuttals. This said, however, I believe it was entirely appropriate to speak of both Michael Peterson's sexual trolling and his financial position because both go directly to motive. Personally, I don't believe Kathleen Peterson knew her husband was being unfaithful to her until the night of her death when I think it is likely that she found evidence on Michael's computer and confronted him. (Remember that, inexplicably, he spent the next hours and days after her death reading emails and deleting files from his computer.) She had ended her first marriage over her husband's infidelity. Why would anyone not consider it relevant to the case that if she had discovered it happening with her second husband she may ultimately be moved to end that marriage as well. And if that happened, Michael Peterson would have no source of income at all and his high standard of living would literally go Poof in an instant.
And lastly, a comment on the sons - Todd and Clayton. It seems apparent to a discerning viewer, and obvious to a reader of Diane Fanning's book, that Todd absolutely had an agenda. He seems to be the sociopath "boy next door". I believe he was an accomplice in Kathleen's murder and the ensuing story being fed to police, friends and family. He clearly orchestrated the obfuscation and failure to cooperate with EMT's and police at the scene of the crime. In the follow up episodes of the film, when Michael Peterson is seeking a new trial, Todd offers a very strange toast to the family and singles out Margaret, especially, for all that she's done to stand by Michael. Surely, it would not be notable for a lot of viewers but I found it chilling. The look on his face was smug and intimidating and, when he noticed the camera on him, changed to a much softer, camera friendly look. The impact of his words goes to the heart of the narcissistic family --- Margaret was used and manipulated by Todd, Michael and the defense team and she is utterly clueless about that. In short -- they got away with murder, in part, because of Margaret's dutiful assistance.
Clayton has a history of violent and subversive acts and has spent time in prison for them. Conveniently, none of that was mentioned in the film.
The bottom line on this film is to view it with the full understanding that it shows you a small piece of the puzzle. The most meaningful aspects of the family picture are not included. Neither are the most damning pieces of evidence. Which means that those who cry "Travesty!" at Michael Peterson's conviction are speaking from the viewpoint of one who is ignorant of the evidence. And this includes the family of Michael Peterson.
I give it a 10 as an edge of your seat, deliciously consuming film treat. I give it a 3 for truthiness. To find out what was omitted from the film I recommend Diane Fanning's 2005 excellent true crime book, "Written in Blood" which covers the case and the trial in detail.
First of all, I completely reject the comments of reviewers who say that this film is somehow an indictment of the jury trial system and that it shows that Southern juries and populations hear the word bisexual and vote to convict. Hogwash. But I will caution first time viewers to watch this film through the lens of what should be completely obvious, which is, that it is a tool of the defense. At some point while watching you must wonder why the evidence and the prosecution gets so little airtime while we instead get so much of the defense team talking about how to craft their story to best tear down anticipated arguments and witnesses for the prosecution. And way too much of a jovial and harmless looking Michael Peterson, surrounded by his very protective adult children.
I watched the film having only the vaguest familiarity with the case. I do, however, have familiarity with the courtroom, attorneys and narcissists. It was immediately apparent to me that Peterson is quite likely a narcissist and that the "narcissistic family" dynamic was on full display. Michael Peterson was the center of everyone's universe, prompting a fierce display of united loyalty. But that loyalty looked false and coerced. Too much, too forced, too effusive, too grandiose. Red flags that something else is going on with this family. Some of them are true believers that what they are showing is absolutely sincere. This false reality is the definition of love that they know to be true. With that understanding --- NOW think about the future for the most harmed children that Michael Peterson put on display for his own use: Margaret and Martha Ratliff. Caitlin Atwater will find her way to a better and healthier life, and she has sane family members to help her do that. Margaret and Martha may never be able to do that because they have been so inculcated in the narcissistic family abuse/intimidation/fear/demands which have been defined for them as love -- and they have only the Petersons to guide them.
Americans believe in many myths about our democracy. One of the most egregious being that truth and justice awaits you in the courtroom. Again -- Hogwash. The courtroom is a stage and all who enter it enter the theater. The best actor, not necessarily the truth, wins. The name of the game is always to destroy the credibility of each and every witness, which is always easiest to do with personal attacks rather than evidentiary rebuttals. This said, however, I believe it was entirely appropriate to speak of both Michael Peterson's sexual trolling and his financial position because both go directly to motive. Personally, I don't believe Kathleen Peterson knew her husband was being unfaithful to her until the night of her death when I think it is likely that she found evidence on Michael's computer and confronted him. (Remember that, inexplicably, he spent the next hours and days after her death reading emails and deleting files from his computer.) She had ended her first marriage over her husband's infidelity. Why would anyone not consider it relevant to the case that if she had discovered it happening with her second husband she may ultimately be moved to end that marriage as well. And if that happened, Michael Peterson would have no source of income at all and his high standard of living would literally go Poof in an instant.
And lastly, a comment on the sons - Todd and Clayton. It seems apparent to a discerning viewer, and obvious to a reader of Diane Fanning's book, that Todd absolutely had an agenda. He seems to be the sociopath "boy next door". I believe he was an accomplice in Kathleen's murder and the ensuing story being fed to police, friends and family. He clearly orchestrated the obfuscation and failure to cooperate with EMT's and police at the scene of the crime. In the follow up episodes of the film, when Michael Peterson is seeking a new trial, Todd offers a very strange toast to the family and singles out Margaret, especially, for all that she's done to stand by Michael. Surely, it would not be notable for a lot of viewers but I found it chilling. The look on his face was smug and intimidating and, when he noticed the camera on him, changed to a much softer, camera friendly look. The impact of his words goes to the heart of the narcissistic family --- Margaret was used and manipulated by Todd, Michael and the defense team and she is utterly clueless about that. In short -- they got away with murder, in part, because of Margaret's dutiful assistance.
Clayton has a history of violent and subversive acts and has spent time in prison for them. Conveniently, none of that was mentioned in the film.
The bottom line on this film is to view it with the full understanding that it shows you a small piece of the puzzle. The most meaningful aspects of the family picture are not included. Neither are the most damning pieces of evidence. Which means that those who cry "Travesty!" at Michael Peterson's conviction are speaking from the viewpoint of one who is ignorant of the evidence. And this includes the family of Michael Peterson.
Scenic Route
(2009– )
Mediocre
15 May 2013
This series is a road trip, hosted by David Keeps, a travel, leisure, art and design writer for publications such as the LA Times, In Style and New York magazine. Most of this series involves California sights and destinations.
There's nothing wrong with the series and many viewers will undoubtedly find things to enjoy about it. To me, it seemed like a low budget production that could easily be found as an adjunct to most small town local television stations. I found Keeps and his delivery to be offputting and did not enjoy the series as much as I might have with another host. Keeps has that certain tone, delivery and body language of someone who thinks he's the life of the party and the smartest guy in the room. Another series with Keeps as host, "Art & the City" (not listed on IMDb) is much worse in this regard. Television always wants to keep shows like this "light" but in actuality, the subject matter is better presented if the host treats it with respect and tells us why he thinks it worthy of sharing with us. And why we might want to schedule a visit to that place ourselves. Scenic Route and Art & the City failed to rouse my travel interest because of both the chosen subject matter and the presentation.
There's nothing wrong with the series and many viewers will undoubtedly find things to enjoy about it. To me, it seemed like a low budget production that could easily be found as an adjunct to most small town local television stations. I found Keeps and his delivery to be offputting and did not enjoy the series as much as I might have with another host. Keeps has that certain tone, delivery and body language of someone who thinks he's the life of the party and the smartest guy in the room. Another series with Keeps as host, "Art & the City" (not listed on IMDb) is much worse in this regard. Television always wants to keep shows like this "light" but in actuality, the subject matter is better presented if the host treats it with respect and tells us why he thinks it worthy of sharing with us. And why we might want to schedule a visit to that place ourselves. Scenic Route and Art & the City failed to rouse my travel interest because of both the chosen subject matter and the presentation.
Tell Your Friends