TRAIN OF THOUGHT

"Why don't you write about..." Yes, friends offer their advice as to topics for my blog, experts proffer reasons why a blog should focus on one topic, and my over-active mind has an abundance of suggestions. This week, more than most, I've been flummoxed. My eureka moment happened five seconds ago as the ideas kept chugging--train travel, a la Wendy.

Americans rarely get to enjoy an immersive experience riding along the rails. Amtrak does provide sterile comfort in its Acela cars. In contrast, summer 1982, my friend and I rode a British Rail Sleeper train from London to Edinburgh (ed-in-bruh or ed-in-buh-ruh, Quora.com). A night journey leaving at 22:30 (10:30 pm), we didn't have much time to admire the locomotive. And being a morning person, I could barely keep my eyes open until widened by the train's interior. Our attendant led us to our cabin. No sliding glass or metal doors: the polished oak portal with its brass handle invited us in as the uniformed gentleman provided the necessary details about our sleeper and the w.c. down the corridor.

(Caledonian Sleeper Train compartment -
Google images)

I took dibs on the upper bunk and gladly climbed up wearing my (then) Lanz nightgown and thrust my feet under the hospital-cornered sheet and blanket, preparing myself to relish the joy of being lulled to sleep by the train's motion imagining "clickety-clack, clickety-clack."

After the engine lurched the locomotive forward, later that night I got a wake-up call, literally and figuratively. Unbeknownst to either of us, the sleeper was also a mail train. With every break squeak and lunging progression, my circadian rhythm went amok: think of Stephen Glass vs. Brahms or in current music circles, Foo Fighters vs. John Legend. So in time, I surrendered to the experience and tried to count the number of stops until my body acquiesced. Two hours, give or take, sleep and then the train came to a complete stop.

That moment brought relief, like the easing of the steam engine, pure silence, eyes leaden and heavy, "Ah, at last!" I thought.

"Knock, knock!" The firm announcement that our attendant, I'd believed, had wanted to enter.

A "One moment, please," from me, in behalf of my friend, and we scurried to collect ourselves.

With his delightful, somewhat bemused West End accent, the gentleman, instead, remained outside the door and gave us a genuine wake-up call of 7 am, along with "Ladies, breakfast will be served in ten minutes." My favorite part of the trip as he entered with trays carrying our continental meal--Earl Gray tea, crusty rolls, English, and orange marmalade and jams.

In short time, we freshened up using the in-cabin sink and then joined the queue for the loo (Couldn't help that one, a recovering Anglophile).

When the conductor came along to give us our disembarkation time, my normally cranky self after little sleep, felt disappointed. I wanted to stay longer to absorb every detail now revealed in daylight. Not to be, as the attendant reminded us politely, we had to leave. Cheers!

(Class 56 diesel loco - Google Images)

PROFESSIONALS, FRIENDS & ACQUAINTANCES, please support my weekly blog with a one-time or weekly contribution. I hope to parlay this blog into a paying gig. Please click on link and send what you can. Thank you! paypal.me/WShreve71 Funds will go toward marketing, publicity of blog and soon-to-be published third book.

For more information about the Shadowwater series and how to contact me directly, access: www.shadowwater.net

WHAT MAKES A GREAT DISASTER, MOVIE?

Inserted the comma above on purpose. Foremost, the disaster should catch our attention. Why should we care unless the depiction shows a "true" event? Second, any actor, take B movies from the 50s e.g. This Island Earth, can react but to make the audience care about their character and their imminent peril requires talent.

(Google Images)

                   

Having sat through or watched at home many films in that action sub-genre, I have compartmentalized the hits and misses. Writers and directors rarely portray real-life catastrophes with historical accuracy, having to insert enhanced or fictionalized scenes that heighten the suspense. Case in point, Deepwater Horizon (2016), where the filmmakers chose to put in the opening titles, "Based on true events." Smart decision as that statement gave the director liberty to add more explosions, imperiled characters and daring rescues which may or may not have actually occurred.

(Google Images)

Still, Deepwater Horizon succeeded where many disaster flicks have failed--it grabbed me from the beginning and didn't let go until the final rescues. The actors, including Mark Wahlberg as the site engineer, Mike Williams, has come a long way as a performer and for this film at least perfectly cast, keep the momentum building. Even those less-emphasized rough-necks, whom we only glimpse intermittently, pulled me in and made me care.

(Google Images)

Other outstanding performances included Kurt Russell as Mr. H., Kate Hudson, whose been underused for years, as Mike William's wife, John Malkovich's calculating BP well-site leader, and Gina Rodriguez, the rig's only woman who steered the "helm" of the platform which could be maneuvered when needed. Each of these actors found an arc in their characters, surprising us at unexpected moments.

Blending the action and the portrayals seamlessly takes an experienced hand, and although delighted the actor Peter Berg helmed this story (an actor's director) I believe the realism went amok at the story's climax. Confession: I have some familiarity with oil rigs, what I learned from living in Singapore and briefly dating an engineer, and, my boyfriend, a retired 30-year fireman who later provided his viewpoint, sat next to me. Therefore, I had higher expectations of the movie's realism than others may have. You will need to see the movie to judge for your yourself how realistic the action-sequences were toward the movie's end.

Despite this, Deepwater Horizon moved me. Very difficult these days, as I've become more inured and cynical. No matter the rationalizations and attempts at objectivity, however, and, having followed the aftermath on the news and read about the real disaster's unfoldment, the loss of any crew working on that rig could've been prevented had the workers' lives been paramount in the BP camp.

Some have objected to the movie not citing the historical, environmental aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy. Within the movie, the director, Berg, did show overt examples--gushing oil out of control spewing into the stratosphere, a seabed plunged into darkness; a seabird in agony--trickles yet harrowing nevertheless.

The devastating ecological consequences of BP's negligence, as I see it, should be told on the big screen as a separate drama, so that audiences can process and absorb the gravity of what they have seen without cutting the tether to the initial man-made cataclysm.

Pull in your gut and go see the film, Deepwater Horizon. The somber images will linger in your mind, the tragedy will burn your senses, but the heroism of the rig's crew will give you hope.

PROFESSIONALS, FRIENDS & ACQUAINTANCES, please support my weekly blog with a one-time or weekly contribution. I hope to parlay this blog into a paying gig. Please click on link and send what you can. Thank you! paypal.me/WShreve71 Funds will go toward marketing, publicity of blog and soon-to-be published third book.

For more information about the Shadowwater series and how to contact me directly, access: www.shadowwater.net

I SALUTE YOU, AVA DUVERNAY!

Grabbing an opportunity to combine two passions, film and social justice, as I write today about Ava DuVernay. If unfamiliar with her name, she directed the Academy Award nominated bio-pic Selma (2014). In her film, DuVernay unveils the riveting story of Martin Luther King's crusade to end voter-discrimination against blacks in Alabama. 

(EW-Google Images)

Gayle King, CBS This Morning, highlighted in a recent interview with DuVernay, that the director became the first woman-of-color to have her film nominated for Best Picture. During their discussion, Ava DuVernay articulated her opinions about women's and, in particular, African-American women's struggles to be accepted in the male-dominated industry. Notably, DuVernay voiced her dislike of the word, "diversity," "too medicinal," and preferred "inclusion," more emotional, thus more effective. "No one wants to be excluded," DuVernay added when speaking about society and the film industry. When I heard her declaration I clapped my hands and said to myself, "Bravo!"

(Google Images)

More overt is how African-Americans exclusion from fair treatment in criminal justice compelled DuVernay to direct a timely documentary, the soon-to-be-released The 13th (2016), about racial disparity an equality, especially in prison sentences. Nowhere could you find a more topical commentary about the hidden injustices toward people of color. Ask a black man if he's ever been pulled over by a police officer for a "trumped" up reason, or, if he'd been sent to jail overnight or longer when a white male wouldn't have been. One clearer example, is the recent trend excluding young, white privileged males from having to serve little or no time for rape convictions when young, black, impoverished males, under similar circumstances, are incarcerated. DuVernay has boldly gone where few women, let alone African-American women, have ventured to expose the inequities of imprisonment.

Just as important, DuVernay reveals how black women have received unequal treatment. Sadly, I suspect few theaters will show this documentary. Fear and discomfort will avert movie-goers from seeing the film. Let neither of these reasons prevent you from attempting to watch it.

Ava DuVernay does have a future in the business. By having a "diverse" portfolio of directing/producing/writing credits in film and television (including directing Wrinkle in Time (pre-production and an episode of Scandal, for example) and a background as a publicist and promoter, I expect DuVernay will continue to break barriers.

Cracking the film industry, takes perseverance and resolve; challenging the criminal justice system requires audacity and conviction. Ava DuVernay has the cajones to do it all.

If you haven't seen the movie, Glory, it's available on Blu-Ray/DVD and the song of the same name, which won the Academy Award (for Common and John Legend) is available via all music formats. Follow the link for the music video: GLORY


PROFESSIONALS, FRIENDS & ACQUAINTANCES, please support my weekly blog with a one-time or weekly contribution. I hope to parlay this blog into a paying gig. Please click on link and send what you can. Thank you! paypal.me/WShreve71 Funds will go toward marketing, publicity of blog and soon-to-be published third book.

FILM REVIEW: HELL OR HIGH WATER

(Google Images)

The bank robbers: brains and beauty embodied by Chris Pine as Toby Howard and the devil-may-care, ex-con characterized by Ben Foster, Tanner Howard, make up the outlaws. Two brothers who have reasons to be driven, but only one who has everything to lose. Each actor captures the nuances beneath the obvious, taking a winding road to very different destinations.

(Google Images)

On the hunt is Marcus Hamilton, the irascible, laconic enforcer (the excellent Jeff Bridges) whose body is overdue for retirement along with his racists views. He's partnered with a younger, more polished compatriot, Alberto Parker (Gil Birmingham in a stand-out performance), a Mexican/Native-American deputy, with a resentful conscience. Although Parker respects Hamilton's keen, methodical brain, Parker verbally wrestles with him about the older man's on-going barbs, a match the deputy knows he cannot win or can he?

And we can't ignore the women! Screenwriter Taylor Sheridan's (Sicario) female characters often work against expected stereotypes and boldly assert themselves, especially Margaret Bowman (No Country for Old Men), the T-Bone Restaurant's waitress. When she enters the scene, fasten your seat-belts!

To boot, the actors' mannerisms, physical quirks delineate the characters: we can read their faces without being given the store. Although the director, David McKenzie (Perfect Sense), maintains heightened suspense, who these men are weighs as heavily as what they do. What's more Sheridan's sharp dialogue moves the plot along without detracting from the momentum. The characters drive this story.

Set in West Texas and Oklahoma but filmed in real time, in New Mexico, the backdrop doesn't disappoint. A classic Lincoln whips around curves faster than a tumbleweed as iconic shots grab our attention. Smartly, the director, McKenzie, and his cinematographer, Giles Nuttgens (Perfect Sense), juggle the imagery from the expected--arid, lifeless, dusty plains--to the unexpected--verdant green mesas and jewel-like deserts--which pops in and out with every twist and turn. McKenzie and Nuttgens capture the highs and lows of the landscape while keeping the focus on the action-at-hand. I suspect and hope we'll see this pairing again.

(Google Images)

Hell or High Water's production team does what many writers strive to do: they show more than tell. Jeff Bridges' determined Marcus Hamilton provides necessary details: he loves to tell stories to his deputy and to predict the bank robbers' every move, So in a sense he is a surrogate, albeit minimalist, narrator. In spite of that, his partner and the audience are kept on a need-to-know basis.

Go see this film. What makes this movie remarkable is how the director, McKenzie, keeps the audience guessing as to who to the villains are and who to admonish. And even in the end, a loose string left untied, I welcomed the ambiguity.

Rated R.


PROFESSIONALS, FRIENDS & ACQUAINTANCES, please support my weekly blog with a one-time or weekly contribution. I hope to parlay this blog into a paying gig. Please click on link and send what you can. Thank you! paypal.me/WShreve71


Oh, by the way, I'm "auditioning" to be hired as a paid, on-line film critic. I've an encyclopedic memory of movies, casts, story-lines, etc. and have much experience as a copywriter and blogger. Also, I took film criticism with the incomparable, Thelma Adams. Any takers? Clips available upon request. Contact: author@shadowwater.net

CAPE COD LIFE: THE ART OF PAUL SCHULENBURG

Among the many professional artists on the Cape, I chose to champion Paul Schulenburg and his "Waterfront" paintings because the artist adeptly captures a dying breed, commercial fishermen (and women).

I first viewed his paintings at The Addison Gallery in Orleans, MA. Throngs of people weaved in and out at the gallery's reception for local artists. What drew me to his collection were his representational or figurative paintings: this artist knows draftsmanship, and how to use color, light and shadow to illuminate his subjects. Influences? A touch of Hopper, a smattering of Millet or Vermeer, and photo-realism, I surmise, yet very much his own.

Schulenburg's "Waterfront" paintings reveal a way of life, ebbing away with the tide. I can't help feel wonder and pathos when studying his work. In this series, many figures have their backs to the viewer or are looking down, focusing on the task-at-hand or regaining their strength. The artist recognizes that commercial fishing whittles away at a man or woman's body, psyche--a dangerous profession coupled with grueling hours. His figures demonstrate a fierce determination, despite the odds against them of catching a bounty of fish, making a living wage. And, Schulenburg has etched the struggle into his subjects' eyes. Young and old, these fishermen carry a tradition on their backs along with the heaviness of wondering when the legacy behind them will cease to continue. The heaviness of being (nod to Milan Kundera), the desire to escape into darkness via alcohol, drugs, or worse suicide, lingers in the shadows.

However Schulenburg's compositions reveal contrast too: the brightness of the day or the light illuminating wearied faces. His younger men and women have muscled, sinewy bodies with smooth skin either tanned by the summer sun or paled by winter's overcast skies. Schulenburg asks us to admire their physique, some of the men wear their oilskins sans a shirt underneath, revealing their bare chests (not a luxury for the women). The painter's faces may divulge hardship, but the bodies illustrate an artist's reverence for human form.

Harbor Sentinel
(Schulenburg Studio)

Yet, you don't have to search long for more weathered figures. In the painting to the left, a lone man stands on a pier as he looks toward the sea: a long day has finished as a five o'clock shadow brushes the fisherman's face. His eyes are tired, even blurred (Schulenburg includes a head study from this painting on his website), reflecting the man's weariness. The fisherman's arms crossed as if to say, "Leave me alone, or, why am I doing this?" Speculation, I agree, yet I wonder how anyone familiar with the fishing industry couldn't read these thoughts into the man's eyes?

Paul Schulenburg also chooses to paint his men and women in more active representations. Dressed in a long rubber apron and/or waders cleaning the deck of a boat with a hose or shoveling ice into the hold, these fishermen--their bodies laboring without apparent effort--peer downward with the same intensity as Schulenburg's other, more stationary figures.

That said, the painter doesn't ignore individual features. Below, a ginger-haired young man with cropped hair, wears pumpkin-orange oilskins held in place by black suspenders and contrasting cobalt-blue rubber gloves. His pristine outerwear provide evidence that he hasn't begun his arduous task. The clenched left hand sits on the bulkhead, where blood dried by the sun smears the surface, as if the younger fisherman is steeling himself to face the day.

Shadow Contemplation
(The Addison Gallery/Paul Schulenburg)

Fascinating that the artist rarely depicts the harbor or sea in his "Waterfront" portraits. Harkening back to Dutch genre painting, the painter focuses on the daily routine of the fisherman. For Paul Schulenburg's subjects, like enervated fish, struggle on land, but once in the water, they thrive.

For info about the artist/his work, go to Paul Schulenburg's website: http://www.schulenburgstudio.com/ or 

The Addison Gallery, http://www.addisonart.com/

Read my Shadowwater books for more on commercial fishing and Cape Cod life: www.shadowwater.net

NEWS FROM MOTHER EARTH

(Democracy Now - Google Images)

How would you react if a bulldozer unearthed your relatives' or ancestors' graves?

Like the scene below from the film Poltergeist (1982) when my heart leapt as I learned the town's cemetery was being demolished by developers, I can only imagine how the Standing Rock Sioux have felt seeing their burial grounds in North Dakota desecrated by Dakota Access for a pipeline.

(Poltergeist - Google Images)

My question: why didn't Dakota Access plan accordingly? Knee-jerk reactions and greed color the oil company's decision-making. Per the Standing Rock Sioux, Dakota Access knew the tribe's members were going to file papers on a Monday morning to halt construction. The company then decided to bulldoze during the weekend (EcoWatch).

(Boston.com - Google Images)

Across the country in Boston pedestrians, especially those with dogs, have been warned to stay away from the Charles River this week due to algae blooms. The contaminated water could potentially harm humans and animals should they be exposed to it. At the same time in Dorchester, large numbers of dead birds (including 47 songbirds) have been found--some have been seen falling from trees (Boston Globe). And people are asking, "Why?" Necropsies and other tests will be done, but I'd bet a link exists between the two events, even if indirectly. Pollution wields its ugly head, once again.

Another consequence of pollution: WHO (the World Health Organization) and PSR (Physicians for Social Responsibility) cited dramatic increases in air pollution-related health problems across the world and here in the U.S., especially among the poor who live in urban areas. According to PSR:

Despite significant progress in air quality improvement, approximately 150 million people across the United States continue to live in areas with unhealthful levels of air pollution in the form of either ozone or particle pollution. (PSR, 2016)

(Google Images)

In my case, I live in an apartment above the back entrance to a restaurant. A window fan used in my kitchen for ventilation and cooling becomes caked, in a matter of days, with sticky soot from trucks' diesel engines. I have little doubt that the particulates from the emissions have exacerbated my own health issues. I'm lucky, however, I have access to health care in Massachusetts, and natural surroundings where I can breathe clean air. The poor in the U.S. and around the world often don't have a choice as to where they live, especially children, or adequate medical care. 

Worse, Donald Trump, without forethought, wants to abolish the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). The result would be a bureaucratic nightmare, let alone disastrous for our country's economic and environmental future:

It is the agency charged with implementing laws such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, which have been passed by Congress. It studies pollutants that are harmful to human health, writes rules to curb those pollutants, and monitors compliance. If Congress abolished EPA but did not repeal the laws that require the federal government to limit pollution, the result would be total incoherence. The government would have legal obligations it could not meet (Adler, Grist.org, May, 2016).

As more than 90% of scientists have confirmed, humanity can no longer ignore the direct link between pollution and climate change. Our climate has been forever altered and will continue to deteriorate despite warnings from decades ago. Citizens across the world suffer the consequences from high-level governmental and corporate indifference to these dire forecasts of global warming. For without a worldwide effort to stand against the use of fossil fuels and to stop industrial pollution/waste in the air, water and ground, edible food and clean water will become inaccessible and health costs will continue to escalate.Furthermore, indigenous peoples around the world have warned their countries that such a day would come. 

In the U.S., the disrespect shown to the Standing Rock Sioux and other caretakers who wish to protect their ancestral heritage, the land which belongs to no one, shows this writer that those in charge simply don't care.

(EcoWatch - Google Images)

FILM: REMAKES UNKNOWN

Nostalgia for the fantastical of childhood reaches into my heart this weekend with Gene Wilder's death. He returned us to that place where a parent, friend or teacher read bedtime stories or fairytales and took us on adventures, magical journeys that sparked our "Pure Imagination," as in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971).

(Gene Wilder in Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory)

Wilder's innocence and devil-may-care persona imbued film viewers with wonder, and sometimes fear that what we dreamed would not come true. Sadly, the great comedian's passing reminds me of how Hollywood producers have been misguided in their remake choices. Another more literal adaptation based on Roald Dahl's book, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, illustrates my assertion. If a studio wants to redo a classic film, it must be either improved or produced with a fresh vision that allows the movie to stand alone, like buying new tires instead of retreads. 

Purists will argue the later adaptation, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005), honored Dahl's darker intentions. Still, watching Tim Burton's interpretation only reminded me how much better the earlier musical is. For the director, Mel Stuart, of Willy Wonka understood how to tap children's wonder. Conversely, Burton tried to touch on adults' lost child and devilish behavior to mixed success.

The word "remake," does make me cringe. I'd say it's a rare day in filmmaking when a movie surpasses the original. However, when critics omit that the movie has been remade, I want to retrieve my light saber and exact my revenge, metaphorically of course.

Case in point, Steven Spielberg's excellent Munich (2005). Starring Eric Bana, in a role which launched his now-stalled career, the movie depicts the task force sent by Golda Meir to avenge the Munich Olympic Games' attack which killed eleven Israelis. Politics aside, critics generally praised the film--if you want stats or percentages of how many reviewers liked Munich this was before Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic emerged. When released, I read several reviews about Munich because I sought an article that mentioned the 1986 television movie based on the book, The Sword of Gideon. Not one writer I researched noted either precursor, albeit from other media. And worse, a national newspaper critic actually wrote how if anyone should make a movie about the true events for the first time, it's Steven Spielberg.

Today, reviewers rarely reference earlier film versions of movies. With some exceptions, e.g. Jeffrey Lyons, few professional critics have an in-depth knowledge of movie history. Editors may argue that their writers don't need to be as well-informed because their reviewers write subjective, opinion pieces and don't do actual reporting. For newspapers at least, those who get the plumb assignment to review movies often have earned their stripes by reporting on news stories or writing more substantive editorial content. The New York Times used to revolve its critics and/or reporters on a regular basis, for example Janet Maslin, up-to-task by the way, reviewed films for twenty years. Then, during a controversial move by The New York Times, the editors moved her to the Book section.

(DOWN WITH LOVE, Google Images)

Another illustration of critic (and editorial) sloppiness involves the 2003 film, Down with Love (2003), starring Renée Zelleger and Ewan McGregor. Many writers, including one I hold in high regard, chose to ignore that Down with Love took much of its plot line from the 1964 production, Sex and the Single Girl (also based on a book by Helen Gurley Brown) starring Natalie Wood, Tony Curtis, Lauren Bacall and Henry Fonda. Yes, some chose to acknowledge references to Doris Day movies, and yet they ignored the obvious parallels to the earlier version.

Other blatant omissions: The Island (2005) a fun, but obvious rip-off of the better 1976 movie, Logan's Run (Soon to be "remade" again). Okay, I did find a scant number of critics who referenced that sci-fi classic in their commentary. Burnt (2015), an obvious reboot of Mostly Martha (2001), remade as No Reservations (2007). And, The Imitation Game (2014), the much more historically accurate version of an earlier film about the "Enigma" codes, called Enigma, starring Kate Winslet and Dougray Scott.

Yes, word counts have forced critics to write shorter reviews in record time, and omitting allusions to earlier movie versions, as with The Imitation Game and Enigma, has some rationale. But for those directors, actors, producers, and most importantly, screenwriters--who either wrote the original story or adapted the book for the screen--that invested their heart's blood into making their films, dismissing earlier attempts is tantamount to movie blasphemy. Besides which, some filmmakers may be unaware that they've borrowed the same plot, often lines, from previous movies and are infringing on copyright laws. 

Naysayers may argue that hampering the creative process by micromanaging how movie remakes/reboots would lead to fewer films being produced or at least stalling the productions indefinitely. And of course, studios have fact-checkers, researchers, lawyers, etc. to avoid outright plagiarism, copying. What's essential from this critic's viewpoint is that film reviewers acknowledge precedents. For to ignore the past repeats the future, and audiences pay the price. In fact, I can't count the number of times I've heard others say or I've said to myself: "Where have I seen this movie before?", or more aggravating, "Why didn't the critic mention the first version?"

Movie critics also have a responsibility to their readers to acknowledge earlier productions of biographical or historical dramas (not documentaries, there is a difference, pedants). Sometimes previous Hollywood filmmakers got it right such as, The Miracle Worker (1962) which is far better than the later television remake. Or terribly wrong: Hollywood chose to reboot the brilliant Anglo-French production of Day of the Jackal (1973) as The Jackal (1997), with a new, modern plot. The movie contained the original structure's underpinnings, though it got "lost in translation" and became a wasted effort.
With the upcoming release, 2017, of Dunkirk, I will be bold and share the following: my message to local, regional and national critics is don't forget to at least mention, if not see and give a nod to, the terrific 1958 movie of the same name starring John Mills and Richard Attenborough. All right, the black-and-white production lacks the CGI we're accustomed to now. Still, I dare the updated version's director, Christopher Nolan (whom I greatly admire) to capture the taut, thought-provoking atmosphere that his earlier counterpart, Leslie Norman, so aptly portrayed. And, I throw down a challenge to critics viewing other remakes/reboots this year or Dunkirk next year to remember what came before and to avoid history repeating itself.

(Google Images)