I WONDER WHAT HE/SHE THINKS?

A wide swath of celebrities and pundits have been interviewed about American politics, here and abroad. My thoughts drift with authors from other countries, outsiders, whose works describe political chaos, many in their own countries, and social disillusionment through their fictional characters.

Milan Kundera (The Festival of Insignificance, his most popular work, The Unbearable Lightness of Being), Tom Stoppard (Rock 'N Roll; film fans will know him as the Academy Award winning screenwriter of Shakespeare in Love), Azar Nafisi (Reading Lolita in Tehran) and Margaret Atwood (The Handmaid's Tale) are alive and kicking. How would they analyze the current American circus performers? I'd never presume to step in these author shoes and theorize their personal beliefs; however, I'd go so far as to posit what their characters might say.

In The Festival of Insignificance Milan Kundera offers his admiration and criticism of French cultural life and politics, and the bourgeoisie in all its incarnation. Political satire that cuts but doesn't burn. Kundera's prose (written in his second language, French) elicits laughs, smirks and daggers. He sees all the foibles of his adopted homeland and never embraces blind patriotism, a lesson his protagonist learned in The Unbearable Lightness of Being. The Soviets marched in with tanks into Prague, Czechoslovakia; initially resistance was futile. Kundera, in his stories demonstrated he learned the power of the press. Nowhere, in The Festival of Insignificance, does he lampoon his characters to the level of our loud-mouthed, bombasts or apathetic dissonants who decry the horrors of American life yet refuse to participate in its democracy. In essence, Milan Kundera comes from the land of "The Velvet Revolution."

Tom Stoppard, another Czech ex-patriot, (his family left their country before the Nazi occupation) explores in his play. Rock 'N Roll, the dramatic swing between the Prague Spring (1968) and the "Velvet Revolution (1989), and how Western music served as a catalyst to the reformers. Stoppard alludes to dissident Václav Havel's future vision for his country, as seen in Havel's own plays and writings. Socialism supercedes repressive communism, allowing for freedom of expression and tolerance, The hero argues that social upheaval does not demand brutal resistance. Is this always true?

Azar Nafisi, Reading Lolita in Tehran, returned to Iran to teach, as professor of Western Literature, at the University of Tehran during the calculated upheaval of Iran's revolution (1978-1981) in 1979. Idealistic that the end of the Shah's regime would bring political and social freedoms, Nafisi explains in her memoir how she rebelled, endured, then rebelled against the religious intolerance espoused by the Ayatollah Khomeini, e.g. refusing to wear a head scarf  in the classroom and later forming a private book club for students where they discussed forbidden works, e.g. Lolita. (SPOILER ALERT) Once in the U.S. Azar Nafisi acknowledged that blaming the Iranian government completely would then dismiss the peoples' part, enabling a fundamentalist regime to gain power. Interesting that Nafisi emigrated to a country where, in some places, selected fiction has been banned and history re-written to serve an intolerant elite.

In Margaret Atwood's book, The Handmaid's Tale (1985), leaders, albeit fictional, have also established a religious, fundamentalist, caste-driven state, the former United States of America. The heroine (Offred) is captured and made to serve as a concubine. Her reproductive rights in tatters, Offred is forced to help a childless couple conceive, the assumption being the statesman's wife is infertile. Yes, Atwood's dystopian, "speculative" (her word) fiction, has an outsider's perspective--unlike the above authors I've mentioned. But, Atwood touches on a more than topical premise: the direction the U.S. could be headed, because of narrow-minded anger, ignorance or apathy, if our people allow it. Moreover, at the end of  The Handmaid's Tale,(SPOILER ALERT) Offred appears to escape her captors. In the movie adaptation, Offred takes her exodus one step farther: she leaves for the land of the free, Canada.

UNIVERSAL TRUTHS: THE FINEST HOURS, NOT JUST A CAPE COD STORY

The Coast Guard often receives attention for their daring rescues, even when they have mishaps such as: Coast Guard boat capsizes (Queens, New York).

CG-36500, the  36 foot, wooden lifeboat featured in the movie "The Finest Hours," didn't capsize. Its captain, Bernie Webber, and three crewmen weathered 40 to 60 foot waves to reach the SS Pendleton and save 32 men from the split tanker during a nor'easter. Why, then, has the film made only 37 million dollars so far? Marketing!

To encapsulate my review, "The Finest Hours" delivers as a remarkable adventure with suspense and moving performances; a wonderful yarn few have seen.

The initial trailer essentially had "tanked" the movie. Only when the second trailer was introduced, emphasizing the action, did the film gain momentum, though too late. The remarkable story had every opportunity to grab potential moviegoer's hearts and at least break even, but it did not.

Knitpicking about the waves being too high (huh?!) as one uninformed critic noted or the film too long (I agree) shouldn't have stopped moviegoers from seeing "The Finest Hours." No, Disney sabotaged the movie from the start by initially deciding to release it in December 2015. What?! We, those of us who follow film, gasped knowing that "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" would open that month. Realizing their error, the producers moved "The Finest Hours'" release date to January 29, 2016. What I call the" winter doldrums" of movie-going.

Wisened trend-followers would assume that Disney didn't expect the movie to do well; therefore, the producers selected a period after the excitement of  "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" had lessened. Also, they marketed the film to attract an older generation instead of seeing a universal story that would capture worldwide attention. In fact, "The Finest Hours" featured mostly younger actors unknown to many baby-boomers, with the possible exception of Chris Pine and Casey Affleck.

Spike Lee, on CBS This Morning, noted how producers would make much more money if they marketed (and made) movies which appeal to wider audiences. "The Finest Hours'" cast reflects the real crew of the USS Pendleton, multicultural sans women. Women do have important roles in the story, however. We live in a global community. It's time that the studios get their "heads" out of the sand and join the real world.

http://movies.disney.com/the-finest-hours

MISSING PIECE: Cautionary Message for Parents about HPV

Growing up, my mother taught me about the bonds between a man and a woman, what to look for in a man, and how my father changed her life--Mom, the ultimate romantic. Dad told me about sex. He never shied from discussing the "bare essentials," and I listened. "Use protection." "If you feel uncomfortable, leave." "Your health more important than taking chances." We discussed the how, what, when, where and why.

I learned more from friends, books and watching movies. However, experience taught me to wait vs. acting on impulse. What did that mean? I'll refrain from sharing intimate details, but I will say that if I saw holes in a potential relationship, I sabotaged any chance for a future or I scrammed.

Then, there were the times when I wouldn't let go, believing I'd found love though one-sided. Still, like pushing a fast-forward button, I'd leave, quickly. Only later in life, much later, did I find true love. Mom would be proud. Dad, delighted with one exception: that as an educated woman I didn't keep up with the latest warnings about STIs (Sexually Transmitted Infections, formerly STDs), in particular HPV. I heeded my father's, friends' and colleague's cautionary words about all the other STIs. Therefore, I waited until my partners and I were in close relationships and were tested.

When diagnosed with HPV last year, I shook my head and truly believed that as with most other women the virus would disappear in two years, as my gynecologist assured me.

And, forty years ago, we didn't have vaccines to prevent HPV. Today, we do but only for young women, and yet:

     HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection (STI). HPV is a different virus than HIV and HSV (herpes). HPV is so common that nearly all sexually active men and women get it at some point in their lives. There are many different types of HPV. Some types can cause health problems including genital warts and cancers. Anyone who is sexually active can get HPV, even if you have had sex with only one person. You also can develop symptoms years after you have sex with someone who is infected making it hard to know when you first became infected. (CDC)

The CDC goes on to explain how even using a condom or even being in a monogamous relationship may not stop a woman from getting HPV. So, what should we do? For your daughter, get her vaccinated:

HPV vaccines are safe and effective. They can protect males and females against diseases (including cancers) caused by HPV when given in the recommended age groups...HPV vaccines are given in three shots over six months; it is important to get all three doses. (CDC)

Unfortunately, the vaccine is only recommended for pre-teens 11-12 to age 26 (for some groups). Screenings for HPV should begin, for women, only after age 30. So, "free love" addicts have their hands full. I'm not advocating celibacy or living in fear. The statistics for getting HPV, nonetheless, are staggering: 

About 79 million Americans are currently infected with HPV. About 14 million people become newly infected each year. HPV is so common that most sexually-active men and women will get at least one type of HPV at some point in their lives. (CDC)

There are many variations of the HPV virus. Most women will never develop symptoms or if diagnosed will weather the infection without developing serious symptoms. Furthermore, the number of women who get genital warts is relatively tiny (@360,000, CDC), and cervical cancer even smaller (@11,000, CDC). These numbers change with time--they are growing everyday. Do you want your daughter to take that risk? Remember, it's her future you should be concerned about, when she's no longer living with you and you cannot protect her. 

My wish for your child is that she isn't caught by surprise. That she not become one of the few who potentially gets cervical cancer. That once she finally finds the love of her life, she can enjoy every moment and not be concerned about what may be. Even if it was only a scare, I encourage women to be screened for HPV, i.e. the multitudes who didn't have access to the vaccine.

We're living in an age where HPV can be prevented. Your daughter is lucky. May she continue to be so.

For more information on HPV, follow the link: http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm

CAN YOU NAME THE LAST FILM ABOUT OR STARRING WOMEN THAT WON BEST PICTURE?

Unless you're a movie buff, I'd bet you can't. If you count musicals, CHICAGO (2002), if not, SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE (1998).

That's right: 1998 or eighteen years ago. Yes, movies starring people of color have often been ignored, too. The Academy of Motion Pictures, as most know by now, comprises 90+ percent white males. When will this change? The Academy's president, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, has pledged more diversity among members and voting. As an African-American, she has a case. As a woman, she also has a right to speak about inclusion.

Lupita Nyong'o
(CGI for Star Wars: The Force Awakens)

Daisy Ridley
(Star Wars: The Force Awakens)

So, how did the Academy's voters become predominantly white male? An easy answer would be studios have produced movies which cater to that demographic and executives have little backbone to risk hiring women or other minorities. The "big boys" also cater to their own tastes, with an emphasis on teenagers. Studio reps often argue: "We give the public what they want." Anything considered to be a "woman's movie," or in derogatory terms, a "chic flick" rarely does well at the box office thus doesn't get the backing from producers and the recognition.

Well, we've seen many independent and smaller films garner box-office gold via smaller budgets and larger profits, though few have received glowing reviews e.g. BRIDESMAIDS or SPY. Those that critics consider to be award-worthy, for example, this year's BROOKLYN or ROOM, may have gotten a Golden Globe or two, and/or may receive Oscars for acting (ROOM being a safe bet), but rarely will these films win Best Picture (HURT LOCKER doesn't count, guys).

Encouraging or pressing the Academy to change its voting procedures is a beginning. However, like today's politics, the system has to evolve from the ground up: movie-goers must push studios for films for all ages, genders, ethnicities and even tastes. It's time the boys became men and include our real world.

Personal grudge: STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS and STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON, which garnered high box office receipts and strong critical acclaim, got shafted by Academy voters.

Want quality suspense and mesmerizing magic in your stories? Read the first two books in my SHADOWWATER series. Third book's launch tentatively scheduled for June 2016. www.shadowwater.net

FILM REVIEW - THE REVENANT: REVENGE IS SOUR (Spoilers Alert)

"You should be a film critic!" That's what friends have implored for years. I'm happy to announce to them, my readers and followers, I've decided to include movie reviews on a regular basis in this blog. Will cover the gamut. 

Urged by my man to attend a movie I'd normally avoid, I saw The Revenant. First reaction, too violent and filled with holes. Confession time: I had a sinus attack which hampered my objectivity and went to the movie ready to dislike it. I also abhor the reverence for violence many film critics and Academy voters often accept, as in The Departed or No Country for Old Men. In contrast, I admire directors who can realistically portray violence without resorting to blood baths and glorification. A good night's sleep produced a rested mind: yes, the film should be seen.

After a successful hunt, The Revenant opens with hunters preparing their pelts for transport. Various stages from skinning to folding the furs in canvas and binding the prized bounty are depicted. Modern viewers, like me, may be repulsed by the process. Director, Alejandro González Iñárritu chooses, however, to allow the hunters momentary revelry before the predators become the prey. The ragged group are attacked by the Arikara Indians and experience heavy losses and injuries. Hugh Glass (DiCaprio) the hunter and scout for the group knows the territory and is the group's only reliable compass to finding their way back to camp. Glass's mixed-race son, Hawk (Forrest Goodluck), accompanies his father yet remains silent per his father's orders as not to incense the volatile hunter's irrational fears of the "Indian," particularly "half-breeds," Only the Captain truly understands Glass's value.The director introduces his viewers to an initial form of revenge: killing the white men who have taken the Native American's means of survival to sell for profit.

Iñárritu, helmed last year's Oscar winner for Best Picture: Birdman, another movie where I respected his choices more than the story. As a one-time theater goer and behind-the-scenes gopher, I'd have to favor Birdman, wondrous though the shots in The Revenant may be. As an ensemble film Birdman carries us away yet keeps the audience grounded, whereas Iñárritu's follow-up, The Revenant, has fantastic elements sprinkled amidst realistic drudgery.

This lone-wolf story is an intelligent examination of the old West and the killed-or-be-killed mentality to ensure survival. (In my mind, the foundation for our current American obsession with gun-violence.) No, I can't use the verb "loved" to describe my reaction to this film, better to write I respected most of the process, the production: acting, cinematography, directing (as described above) and screenwriting. I had problems with the editing. The movie, as is the norm these days, is too long. And scenes, particularly one involving a conifer left this benefit-of-the-doubt movie fan rolling her eyes and screaming in her head, "Cut!" 

Okay, Leonardo, I'd endorse your getting an Oscar at last. I have watched for growth in this actor since his days in Titanic, and have finally accepted he has the chops. Another performer, Domnhall Gleeson plays the cavalry Captain who has a pivotal role in the movie. Cinephiles will recognize Gleeson from the brilliant film, Ex Machina, and the equally terrific, Star Wars: The Force Awakens. If any performer should be nominated for Best Supporting Actor, it's Domnhall Gleeson. 

In The Revenant. cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki captures not only the breathtaking vistas of Alberta, Canada  (where much of the movie was filmed) but the smallest creatures as well like carpenter ants climbing over one another to reach the summit. In a blink this scene ends yet serves as a perfect metaphor for the teamwork expected by the Captain of his remaining men to undertake their arduous journey to reach the fort. 

Story-wise, historical accuracy comes and goes. In truth Glass didn't have a son, which leads to a peevish injection: why do movie marketers/producers insist on posting the words, e.g. "based on true events," on their posters? In the case of The Revenant the contradictions are staggering (for a well-researched history of Hugh Glass, read Rebecca Onion's excellent article on the Glass myth in Slate Magazine: Who was Hugh Glass? ). The screenwriters do provide ethical lessons for audiences to ponder, and work hard to show a balanced perspective, from the in-fighting among various tribes to the cavalry captain and the complex "villain", Fitzgerald. I also admired the main theme, reinforced throughout the movie, of revenge and its consequences (Gladiator references abound, intentional or not, I don't know.).

Moreover, the Native American women may be victims or need rescuing in this story, but their pride and self-empowerment, especially in one brutal scene, rise to the surface in unexpected places.

In the future, I hope to interview some Native Americans who have seen this movie to get their opinions. I know my boyfriend, part Blackfoot, felt emboldened by the screenwriter and director's choices. In my opinion, The Revenant boldly and reverently depicts the tribes as they try to maintain their culture and protect their lands. Forced to take sides, French vs. British/Colonials, these indigenous people have fateful choices. 

Making decisions is the fundamental basis of a director. Iñárritu, and his cinematographer Lubezki, illuminate all that is beautiful and ugly in our natural landscape. Choosing to film in natural light, from a myriad of vantage points, these men show the land, nature as gifts to be savored not squandered. 

In the end, the quest for vengeance left this audience member shaken, unsatisfied, a reaction I'd bet Iñárritu wanted. So, see a master craftsman and his artists at work. You will be affected. In its message, The Revenant shines a new light on the early days when men raped the land and left little except for the very few. An old lesson yet to be learned by mankind.

Links to my books, articles, etc. 
www.shadowwater.net  
https://www.facebook.com/shadowwaterseries/ 
LinkedIn

GREED: CAN WE PREVENT ANOTHER GREAT RECESSION? (Spoilers Alert)

Movies such as THE BIG SHORT show us greed at the macro level--collusion of big banks, brokerage firms and mortgage companies to artificially inflate subprime mortgage lending rates, or, why the housing market tanked and the "Great Recession" occurred--from the inside.

Yes,  Mark Baum (as portrayed by Steve Carell) embodies the vocal "moral" conscience in the movie who decries the inevitable: small-scale investors, consumers, the under-privileged getting the shaft. However, Baum and his colleagues (SPOILER ALERT) make, in sum, a billion dollars from anticipating/betting on the devaluation of subprime bonds. Other savvy foretellers also rationalize their profits or learn the price many Americans will pay for banks' corrupt lending practices. These men, however, will become very rich.*

And that's the rub. (SPOILER ALERT) Two inexperienced men, the "little" guys in the film, bet their life savings that the market will crash. They win, but do they? [Will they learn from being lectured by Ben Rickert (Brad Pitt)?] If wrong, the amateurs would have been forced to sell their few remaining assets and potentially be impoverished or underemployed for years to come, all of which would cost the average taxpayer (by taking away economic stimulus and increasing the price of debt).

I confess, these issues were a bone of contention for my boyfriend and me after we saw the movie. I surprise myself by writing that I took the more cynical position. For I believe once a person earns or receives large amounts of money, they often change. Investing is gambling. And investors allow financial institutions to use their money to garner profits. Of course, many investors didn't count on their bankers and brokers to make millions of dollars for personal profit via unethical practices and thereby sacrifice their customers' assets in the process.

Yes, the institutions, e.g. big banks, created an artificial culture encouraging, enticing people to buy homes with little or no credit, no down payments knowing that in time, with the adjustable interest rates, these consumers would never be able to pay their mortgages. Worse, brokers knowingly sold "synthetic" bonds that had no real value.

Revenge wields its ugly head in fair-minded people who want justice for the Great Recession. Bailing out banks, in particular, has inflamed the anger of even passive observers who wanted the government to let commercial banks falter. And yet, we're told to learn from history. In the 1929 market crash, banks did go bust and the Depression dragged on for almost a decade. Many who lost everything had their savings tied up in these banks and/or in the stock market. The already poor got poorer. The middle class disappeared. Sound familiar?

(SPOILER ALERT) The end of THE BIG SHORT alludes to a probable return to the very practices which brought down our economy and other economies around the world. Moreover, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and others have warned if banks, brokerages, mortgage lenders aren't closely regulated average Americans will pay the price, again. The struggling middle-class and working poor have little leverage to change the system and self-regulation only benefits the top one percent.

How can a citizen stop the impending catastrophe? VOTE for candidates, from the local level to the federal government, who support economic reform. Although it may take five minutes from your day, go on-line and use social media to express your opinions or better, become an activist to help create change.

If people can't or won't follow through with the above recommendations to act, if they continue to invest in real estate, the stock market and subprime bonds without understanding the consequences, and/or, if they walk around enraged at corrupt institutions and the government but live a life where they spend, spend, spend and don't teach their children--the future of our planet--the value of restraint, then they encourage greed.

For in the end, it's the desire to make more and more disposable income that has fueled our corrupt culture, the underpinnings of the very system many wish to change: capitalism.

*Women in THE BIG SHORT are portrayed as either being blind to or part of the corrupt institutions. However, at least one woman did see what was coming, Meredith Whitney.

Bending vs. breaking the rules is a theme in my first book: Shadowwater. For more info, go to: www.shadowwater.net

GREEN RIBBONS FOR CHILDREN'S FUTURE

 Yesterday, I mustered my energy and participated in Provincetown's March for Climate Change and recognition of the current CO2 summit in Paris.

We arrived early at the UU church on Commercial Street. I worried that the turnout would be small and ineffectual, unusual for me as I carry hope in my heart despite the dire predictions. Like children peeking in a store window, some people began to tentatively approach the meeting place. Whereas others didn't hesitate to walk toward us, boundless energy bursting--all ages; a human menagerie. Some participants carried signs, others wore hats or garlands of green leaves.

The cold temperature, around 37 degrees--not counting the blustery wind skirting across the flat, hooked appendage and the northernmost-point of Cape Cod--forced marchers to bundle up against the chill. But we carried our banners, posters and green ribbons to show our solidarity.

Among the diverse collection of marchers, were teenagers; young adults who waved their banners and cheered on the procession, giving me hope that the Cape's youth will continue the cause.

What were they/we fighting for? Within one generation, Nauset Beach--as scientists have predicted--will have eroded to the point of no return. Liams, an Orleans seafood shack on the border between the parking lot and the beach, will have disappeared. My childhood oasis and others' will become "dust in the wind." Scattered fresh-water ponds will change to saltwater via the encroaching sea; health concerns will rise significantly as pollutants from Boston, surrounding states increase. (For specs, please refer to The Cape Cod Times' special section  Cape Cod Times on Climate Change )

And if a motley band of politicians, entertainers, writers, small business people and environmental activists can remind those who have no regard for our cause why stemming climate change is imperative, then I foresee a small victory for our beloved Cape Cod and a better future for residents, young and old.

Below are more pics from our march, Sunday afternoon:

Our fearless leader!

State Representative Sarah Peake and I.

Musicians led the way.

Two spirited activists.

The end of the March but not our deep passion for the cause.