Category: Books, Movies, TV & Web

Poirot1    Brett

 

The persnickety little man is back — and not a moment too soon.

I’m referring to Hercule Poirot, as personified by British thespian David Suchet, the actor who has been absolutely nailing Agatha Christie’s fictional detective for 22 years.  PBS will broadcast the first of three new Poirot mysteries, “Three Act Tragedy,” this Sunday.

New episodes of almost any British detective show are always welcome.  I think that’s because in America we are fed a steady diet of car chases, gunfights, explosions, and special effects.  In Britain, the TV-crime aficionado is fed “little grey cells.”

All of these great shows from “across the pond” have this in common:  They are based on popular books that feature quirky, flawed, and brilliant protagonists.  Sure, in America we have our oddball sleuths, our Monks and Houses and Columbos.  But none of them have the literary pedigree of a Poirot or a Sherlock Holmes.

 

Poirot2     Poirot3

Poirot4     Poirot5

 

And so we have a new Poirot this week.  I have just one complaint.  Since 2002, Poirot has dispensed with a trio of supporting actors who lent much-appreciated humor to the series:  (above, clockwise from top right) Hugh Fraser (Hastings), Pauline Moran (Miss Lemon), and Philip Jackson (Chief Inspector Japp).

I’ve missed out on some of these delightful British imports, including the acclaimed Prime Suspect with Helen Mirren, but here’s a rundown of my favorites:

 

Morse

 

Inspector Morse    I love this cantankerous old coot.  Maybe that’s because Morse and I have so much in common:  same age, a weakness for beer, a bachelor lifestyle, a love of opera and poetry — well, maybe not that last.  Morse, as played by John Thaw, is forever irritable, forever single, and forever perplexed by the modern world.  But the bad guys don’t fool him, and he’s at home while prowling the halls of Oxford, where he and sidekick Sgt. Lewis (Kevin Whately) bump heads with stuffy professors, insecure students — and murder on a regular basis.

 

Branagh

 

Wallander    Technically, this is a British series that isn’t all that British.  It’s based on a series of Swedish novels set in Sweden.  But Wallander meets most British mystery requirements:  a flawed, interesting hero; clever plotting; moody atmosphere; and a first-rate actor (Kenneth Branagh) in the lead role.  Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo has been grabbing a lot of attention lately, but author Henning Mankell’s protagonist, the glum, middle-aged Inspector Wallander, is a more nuanced character than anyone found in Larsson’s Girl trilogy.

 

Sherlock

 

Sherlock     When this update of Arthur Conan Doyle’s creation premiered last year, my expectations were low.  Contemporizing the 19th-century stories had been done before, with decidedly mixed results.  And who the hell were these upstart actors playing Holmes and Watson?  Not to worry.  Benedict Cumberbatch (Holmes) and Martin Freeman (Watson) have traded in gaslight and The Times for computers and texting, but the magic is still there.

 

Baker

 

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes    If you mention Sherlock Holmes, I tend to visualize actor Basil Rathbone, pipe in hand, prowling the artificial mists of what passed for London on a Universal Studios back lot in the 1940s.  But ask me which actor has given us the definitive Holmes, and I have to go with Jeremy Brett, who starred as the iconic cocaine addict in 41 television episodes from 1984 to 1994.

 

Midsomer

 

Midsomer Murders    Midsomer is a fictional English county, home to charming villages and nice families like that of DCI Tom Barnaby (John Nettles), a pleasant man who shares a close bond with his wife and his daughter.  Midsomer would seem idyllic were it not for one nagging little problem:  It seems to be the murder capital of the world.

 

Poirot6

 

To see the Masterpiece Mystery! schedule, click here.

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

Sweet1

 

Some movies are like discovering, in the attic, a box with brittle, eight-millimeter film footage shot by a long-dead relative.  The movie is grainy, the camerawork is amateurish, and the color is faded – but the content is fascinating.  Hey, who knew that your Uncle Zack was such a wild guy?

Melvin Van Peebles’ Sweet Sweetback’s Baad Asssss Song is like that.  Everything corny and dated about 1970s cinema is on display:   self-conscious, artsy camera angles; reverse negatives; split screens; cheesy music; clunky fashion and some god-awful acting.  But the movie is never dull.  In fact, were it made today, some of it might be downright illegal.

Sweetback was embraced in 1971 by the Black Panther Party and other militants because of its ostensible message of “sticking it to The Man.”   Van Peebles, who wrote, produced, and directed, also stars as Sweetback, a black street hustler who rebels against the oppressive white establishment in Los Angeles.  He assaults some cops and spends the rest of the movie on the run – that’s the plot.  But it’s Sweetback’s outrageous sex scenes, not so much its politics, which resonate 40 years later.

 

Sweet2

 

The film opens in a whorehouse.  Young Sweetback (played by Van Peebles’s real son, Mario, then 14 and decidedly underage) loses his virginity to one of the working girls in a bizarre scene in which the woman simulates passionate sex while young Mario seems to be thinking, “What the hell?”  In a jump-cut, Mario is replaced from his position between the woman’s legs by father Melvin.

In an interview about his X-rated movie, the elder Van Peebles is refreshingly honest about “my most infamous scene”:  “The critics are giving me credit for this scene as ‘a well-thought-out metaphor, a tableau of the rites of passage.’  That wasn’t what happened.  The truth of the matter is … I was just being my horny self,” he says.  “What the hell, I’m only human.”

That’s evident in several later scenes, especially in what is likely Sweetback’s second-most infamous sequence, when Van Peebles does some unsimulated pumping of a white biker chick in front of an appreciative crowd of Hells Angels.  Uncle Zack was never that outrageous.       Grade:  C+

 

Sweet3

 

Director:   Melvin Van Peebles   Cast:  Melvin Van Peebles, Simon Chuckster, Hubert Scales, John Dullaghan, Rhetta Hughes, John Amos, Niva Rochelle, Lavelle Roby, Mario Van Peebles, Sonja Dunson, Marria Evonee, Joni Watkins, Maggie Bembry   Release:   1971

 

Sweet4     Sweet5

Sweet7     Sweet6

Sweet8     Sweet9

Sweet10     Sweet11

 

           Watch the Trailer  (click here)

 

Sweet12

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

Queen1

 

How you feel about The Queen will likely depend on how you feel about a whole host of issues:  What do you think of the British monarchy?  What did you think of Diana Spencer?  The Prince of Wales?  Do you think movie “biopics” do a good job depicting real people?  Are projects like The Queen hopelessly biased?

I have strong opinions about a number of those questions, but I’m willing to concede that – being no English historian, and certainly no royal insider – I could be dead wrong on a number of counts.  All I can do is go by what I see.  What I see in The Queen is a captivating performance by Helen Mirren as Elizabeth II, a woman charged with upholding tradition in a changing world.  When Diana dies in a car accident, Elizabeth is faced with a dilemma:  honor traditional protocol, or cave in to the will of the people?

Is Mirren’s portrayal accurate?  I have no idea.  Is it eminently watchable? Oh, yes.  In fact, Mirren’s Oscar-winning turn is the best reason to watch The Queen.  Most of the other characters are either unbelievably white (Michael Sheen as a too-good-to-be-true Tony Blair; you can practically see his teeth sparkle), or implausibly black (James Cromwell as a homophobic, misogynistic, bombastic Prince Philip).  Director Stephen Frears, who generally handles this material well, indulges in a bit of heavy-handed symbolism involving a hunted animal; who knew that traditional England had so much in common with a doomed stag?

For the record, I personally think that the monarchy is a ridiculously outdated institution.  But there are worse things.  The world has changed, whether we – and the queen – like it or not.  But as Elizabeth puts it to Blair: “That’s the way we do things in this country:  quietly, with dignity.  That’s what the rest of the world has always admired us for.”  If you buy that, is it something you really want to change?      Grade:  B+

 

Queen2

 

Director:  Stephen Frears  Cast:  Helen Mirren, Michael Sheen, James Cromwell, Alex Jennings, Roger Allam, Sylvia Syms, Helen McCrory  Release:  2006

 

Queen3    Queen4

 

                                       Watch Trailers and Clips  (click here)

 

Queen5

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

Bride1

 

The makers of Bridesmaids are going to great lengths to convince prospective ticket buyers that their film is not one of those dreaded “chick flicks.”  Don’t let them fool you, fellas, because Oh.  Yes.  It.  Is.

Bridesmaids brings to the table nearly everything clichéd about the much-maligned wedding movie:  the self-pitying heroine (Kristen Wiig), who watches in horror as her best friend dumps her in favor of material bliss; the caddish lover (Jon Hamm); the long-suffering “good guy” (Chris O’Dowd) who puts up with all manner of female foolishness; the wisecracking girlfriends.  In other words, Bridesmaids is a female version of a Judd Apatow movie – and that’s not a good thing.

Apatow, perhaps stung by criticism of the string of male-oriented Porky’s clones on his resume, produces this vehicle for Wiig (she also co-wrote the screenplay) and, I’ll have to admit, on the few occasions that I actually laughed, it was during scenes that featured an Apatow specialty:  gross-out humor.

But this movie is no step forward for the romantic comedy.  Showcasing actresses who behave just as immaturely as the boys do in movies like Superbad and The Hangover is not exactly an advancement for feminism in Hollywood.  Proving that girls can do everything boys can do only matters if what they do is worth doing.  Alas, just as The Hangover insisted it was the bachelor party that matters most, in Bridesmaids it’s the wedding that is all important – not marriage itself.

Despite what the promoters of Bridesmaids would have you believe, this movie is not about “relationships” between anyone – male or female.  Each character is there to serve a simple function:  set up the next (usually lame) comedy sketch.

Whatever happened to the good “chick flick” – movies like Four Weddings and a Funeral and Terms of Endearment        Grade:  C+

 

???????????

 

Director:  Paul Feig   Cast:  Kristen Wiig, Maya Rudolph, Rose Byrne, Melissa McCarthy, Chris O’Dowd, Wendi McLendon-Covey, Jill Clayburgh, Jon Hamm, Ellie Kemper   Release:  2011


BRIDESMAIDS         Bride4

???????????         Bride6

 

Watch Trailers and Clips (click here)

Bride7

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

     by Timothy Schaffert    

Coffins

 

Ordinarily, if you tell me that a book is “charming,” “lyrical,” and set in small-town Nebraska, I’ll ask you to hand me the TV remote on your way out the door, but Coffins is an exception.  Schaffert’s plot is slight and a bit far-fetched:  A cornfield community gains notoriety when the national media descends to cover an alleged child abduction, while a publishing house chooses the same burg to surreptitiously print a Harry Potter-like book.

It’s the characters who matter in this novel, in particular three generations (grandmother, grandson, and his teen niece) of one family.  They reassure us that in 2011 Mayberry might be battered, bruised, and a bit less innocent, but its wholesome values survive at least in one Midwestern town. 

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

by Samuel Beckett

Godot

 

This was named the “most significant English language play of the 20th century” in a poll of 800 British playwrights, actors, directors and journalists.  Do I agree with that?  Probably not.  I think that Godot’s exalted “significance” stems from the fact that Beckett’s play is open to so many interpretations.  Does the never-seen title character represent God?  Of the four main characters, does one pair represent capitalism and the other socialism?  Is the entire thing an allegory for the Cold War?  Who knows?  Apparently, Beckett didn’t confirm or deny any of those theories.

But that’s part of the charm of this two-act gem – you can read practically anything into it, and probably will.  The story itself struck me as an absurdist Of Mice and Men:  Two vagabonds spend consecutive days waiting on a country road for the mysterious Godot, diverting themselves (and us) with a mixture of fatalistic philosophy, slapstick comedy, and Alice in Wonderland wordplay.

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

Stake1

 

The vampire (or zombie) movie, when it falls flat, is almost too easy to pick apart. But let me do it anyway.

Story:  “Mister” (Nick Damici) and young Martin (Connor Paolo) drive north in hopes of finding a better life in New Eden (Canada), but on the journey they clash with religious fundamentalists, vampires, and a low budget.

What’s Rotten:  Damici has all the charisma of a wooden stake and the magnetism of garlic breath.  He is the “strong, silent type,” which is a good thing because at least that means he doesn’t have much dialogue.

Soaring violins are no substitute for real drama, mellow piano music doesn’t trump genuine pathos and, most of all, LOUD sound effects are a cheap way to make the audience jump.

Director Jim Mickle aims for a grim, gritty ambience, a la The Road, and mostly he succeeds.  But you need interesting characters to populate such a dreary, apocalyptic universe.

What’s Fresh:  There are a couple of cool scenes, both of them, interestingly enough, involving aggressive female vampires.  Or maybe that’s just me.

When the stereotyped “small group of survivors” expands to include women, it’s refreshing that Mickle eschews the usual Megan Fox-type and instead includes a pregnant woman and a middle-aged nun (played by Kelly McGillis, of all people).

If you’ve seen The Road, I Am Legend, The Walking Dead, or any other zombie/vampire movie, then you’ve already seen Stake Land     Grade:  C+

 

Stake2

 

DirectorJim Mickle  Cast:  Nick Damici, Connor Paolo, Danielle Harris, Kelly McGillis, Michael Cerveris, Bonnie Dennison  Release:  2011 

 

Stake3    Stake4

Stake5    Stake6

 

     Watch Trailers (click here)

 

Stake7

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

  by Camilla Lackberg

Princess

 

Story:  A writer returns to her hometown on the Swedish coast and stumbles into murder and romance.


Good Stuff

  • Lackberg writes sharp characters, most of whom seem real, flawed, and quirky.
  • The little burg of Fjallbacka, which bustles with busybodies and buried secrets, is a fun setting for a mystery.
  • The identity of the killer surprised me.
  • Princess has a believable plot and denouement – not bad for a first-time novelist.

 

Bad Stuff

    • Yet another crime novel in which a key plot point is childhood sex abuse.  Whatever happened to the good old days, when routine peccadilloes like blackmail and ruined reputations were essential ingredients?  I guess they were usurped by the serial-killer novel, which has now given way to omnipresent child molesters.
    • There is an abundance of continuity slips and groan-inducing clichés.  From page 90: “It was so quiet in the room that you could have heard a pin drop.”  Did Lackberg actually write that, or was it the English translator’s contribution?
    • Stupid Cop Syndrome, in which the amateur heroine makes crucial discoveries that the cops, inexplicably, overlook.  Sure, it’s possible, but no, it’s not plausible.

 

Report Card:  B

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

Against1

 

I believe I finally know enough about Bobby Fischer.

I remember when Fischer, in 1972, defeated the Russian Boris Spassky and became world chess champion.  In the years since that historic match in Iceland, I’ve read many articles about the strange boy wonder from Brooklyn.  Earlier this year, I consumed Endgame, a 416-page biography of Fischer’s evolution from chess prodigy to infamous anti-Semitic, anti-American, radio-ranting fugitive from the law.

And now, thanks to Liz Garbus’s documentary, Bobby Fischer Against the World, I even know what Fischer’s backside looks like in the shower.  Other than that unexpected visual, the movie didn’t really show me anything new about the person Life magazine dubbed “The Deadly Gamesman.”

But the film is still intriguing, mostly because its subject remains such an enigma. Nothing I’ve read and nothing in this documentary really explains the reason behind Fischer’s intense drive.  Bobby Fischer became the world’s best chess player because, basically, chess was all he did.  No football games with the boys for young Bobby, and no girls in the backseats of Chevys.  Just Bobby and a chessboard – thousands and thousands of times, for years on end.

Fischer simply fell in love with the game and, whenever possible, used it to escape from the outside world.  Ironically, that obsession eventually brought the outside world to him.  If Fischer were alive (he died in 2008), he might say the makers of this movie got the title backwards – he would probably prefer The World Against Bobby Fischer.

Fischer’s single-minded drive cost him a chance at a well-rounded, balanced life – and quite possibly his sanity.  That’s enough for me to know.        Grade:  B

 

Against2

 

Director:  Liz Garbus  Release:  2011

 

Against3     Against4

Against5     Against6

 

Watch Liz Garbus Discuss Her Film (click here)

 

Against7

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share

Nim1

 

When the end credits began to scroll for the new documentary Project Nim, I rose from my seat to leave but found the aisle blocked by a young boy and his family.  I tapped the kid on his shoulder, made a slitting gesture across my throat, and said a single word to him:  “Dirty.”  The kid smiled, stood up to let me pass, and asked his parents to do likewise.

The kid and I had communicated like Nim Chimpsky, the “star” of Project Nim.  Nim, a chimpanzee born in captivity, was the subject of a famous – or infamous – scientific experiment that began in 1973 when a Columbia University behavioral psychologist and his students began a sort of English immersion project for Nim.  The idea was to place the chimp with a New York City family – husband, wife, kids and pets – and to raise the little fella exactly like a human infant.  The goal was to determine whether chimpanzees can learn language – not just symbols and memorization, but real grammatical communication.

Depending on whom you believe, the experiment did or did not go well.  After years living with the LaFarge family, Nim was transferred to a string of unpleasant new homes, including an animal medical research lab.

Project Nim is a remarkable movie.  It tells the sad story of Nim, certainly, but it also reveals a lot about the people in his world, including project leader Herbert Terrace, a man seemingly more interested in bedding female undergrads than in making good science and who, probably to his regret, allowed director James Marsh to interview him for this film.  There is very little humor in Project Nim, but the audience broke out in derisive laughter whenever the unctuous, clueless Terrace attempted to justify his self-centered behavior.

Some people love animals, and some do not.  I’d call myself a “dog person.”  I’m not all that crazy about other creatures, including cats, birds … and chimpanzees.  Face it:  Chimps grow monstrously strong, frighteningly aggressive and, as demonstrated in the movie, disturbingly horny.  Nim was no exception – he was no Old Yeller, and he wasn’t Bambi, either.

But when Nim is torn from his human environment and consigned to a lifetime of caged isolation, you have to be pretty cold-blooded not to feel for him.  One episode near the end of the film, when a former “family” member comes to visit Nim in his pen after years of absence, took me completely by surprise with its emotional power.

Oh, yeah.  You might be wondering about that business between the kid and me at the end of the movie; the boy who let me pass after I gestured at him and said, “Dirty.”  What was that about?  I could tell you, but I don’t want to.  You’ll have to see Project Nim to find out for yourself.        Grade:  A-

 

Nim2

 

Director:  James Marsh  Release:  2011


Nim3      Nim4

 

       Watch Trailers and Clips  (click here) 

 

Nim5

 

© 2010-2026 grouchyeditor.com (text only)

Share