(no subject)

[shadowkat]

1. I'd been feeling disconnected today, and stumbled upon a post that touched me, and I found myself crying, just crying. Tears flowing down my face. It was about the pain of grief, the inability to share it, or find compassion or comfort. Being in pain, and just wanting someone to listen. Not offer advice. Not commiserate. Not shuffle off. Just be there. Life is extremely lonely sometimes - even more so in the company of others, be them friends or family.

The world felt cold these last few day like shards of glass, sharp, and painful couple with a growing sense of futility...then I stumbled upon that post...and I thought, oh, I'm not alone after all. It's not just all glass and sharp edges. There are people out there who feel as I do, differently of course, but like me they yearn for a hug, or just to hold a hand and listen.

Also it makes me realize how little people listen in this world brimming with noise and one too many barkers selling their wares...whether we need or want them or not.

2. Oppenheimer topped the global box office this weekend...with Barbie in second for the first time, and followed by No More Bets, and finally Gran Turismo

I'm fascinated by Barbieheimer's dominance of the box office. (I am among the few who saw Oppenheimer - who didn't see it because of the marketing hype - I saw it because it had Robert Downy Jr, Cillian Murphy, and Emily Blunt in it - and was directed by Christopher Nolan. Also I have a crush on Murphy - and had been anticipating it since I found out about it in February or somewhere around that point. So I'd been wanting to see it forever. I didn't expect it to do that well - hello, biopic, worse? Historical bio-pic about a little known scientist and the atomic bomb. While that's interesting to me - right up my alley, it's not necessarily to anyone else. I have off-beat tastes. I like movies about scientists and scientific discoveries - I find scientists and science interesting. It's one of the reasons I like hard science fiction. But most people don't.)

I think it took off - because practically every movie out is one of the following and has been for a very long time:

1. based on a video game (Gran Turismo)
2. adapted from a superhero comic book or about a superhero (Guardians, Quantumania, Blue Beetle, The Flash...)
3. a sequel to another movie or in some cases about the third, fourth or sixth sequel to it (Mission Impossible and Indiana Jones)
4. Features mainly car chases, stunts, or action (Gran Turismo, John Wick, Fast and Furious)
5. Horror film
6. Kids animated film

One gets bored after a while. Barbie and Oppenheimer were just different.

3. 2023 seems to be the year of union strikes, everyone is striking. And my heart goes out to the unions - because when you strike - you lose pay. You are taking a huge risk to get more pay.

Some can't strike - the TWU union or Transit Workers Union can't strike - because it shuts down the city and essential services putting lives at risk. The last time they did it - every member got fined.

Right now we have the auto-workers going on strike, the pilots threatening to strike, the nurses (NYU Langone's) threatening to strike due to under-staffing, the writers on strike, the actors on strike...

People have been striking right and left all year long.

4. Almost done with The Killers of the Flower Moon - it's divided into three sections, so I've almost completed the middle section narrated by Will Patton. The first section is about the Osage Tribe and how they fell into legal guardianship, and their murders, the second is about the FBI and the investigators who solve the case and figured out the killers. Not sure about the third section.

Second section got interesting when they started talking about Leavenworth Penitentiary in Kansas. (I did a legal internship with that Prison in the mid 1990s. Remember traveling to and from it - on the back roads. Got lost several times. Pretty country side. I even drove to it during a scary thunderstorm - and sat in the rotunda with a prisoner waiting for a parole hearing during a prison-wide lock-down during a thunderstorm, and limited lighting. ) So, it was kind of interesting to listen to the story of William White, the former Texas Ranger and FBI agent who was a Warden of the Prison, and the Killers of the Flower Moon residing there. There was even a prison breakout.

I've seen the interior of that prison - and yeah, I can see how they did it. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to break out of it - when I was sitting in the middle of it waiting for a parole hearing.

4. Finished Fisk over the weekend, it's better towards the end. Co-worker and I agreed that once you get away from the annoying AirBnb owner and the cafe, it gets better.

Comments

[shadowkat]

Has she read it yet?

The audio is really good, not sure how the print version is....narrators often help. But of the three, I'd say Patton was the best and I kind of wish he did the third chapter as well.

Regarding Scorsese' movie? It has a really crappy trailer. I've watched a few times - and it makes it look like Deniro is the hero, and DiCaprio is a victim. (Really not.) Shows too much of the wrong things. So, it's not being marketed well.

Early viewings by critics are decidedly "mixed". It's a long-ass movie, three hours and a half. (Oppenheimer was only three hours, Endgame was only 3 hours.) Also, movie theaters for about a month, then straight to NETFLIX.

Add to all of this? The protagonist in this film should be White, but he's in a supporting role and being played by Jesse Plemmons (great actor, but not that charismatic) and up against the "stars" Deniro (Hale) and DiCaprio (Ernest Burkhart) - they are NOT protagonists in the book.

The book's focus is on the OSAGE tribe and White, the Movie's appears to be on Burkhart and Hale (which fits with Scorsese's film style).

That said? The Osage tribe reached out to Scorsese and expressed their concern that their story be represented fairly, and honorably, along with their tribe. So Scorsese changed his movie, and the direction of it halfway through the filming, even going so far as to go back and re-film certain scenes.
And in return, the Osage gave him access to their customs, and culture - for a fair and honorable representation.

The third part of the book - goes into detail about how the Osage can't forget what happened, even though the world did. Imagine having a good portion of your family and friends killed in front of your eyes, and getting no justice for it for years - and having to pay $300,000 to get it from the US Federal Government?
That's how bad it was. Actually, I'm understating it.

So, Scorsese's film is dicey. If it in any way shape or form portrays the Killers sympathetically or as anti-heroes, that film will get a huge backlash. And I'm not entirely confident it doesn't based on that crappy trailer. But I do know he changed the film - so it might. I just wish there was a more charismatic and better known actor in White's role. I'd have flipped DiCaprio and Plemmons.

[cjlasky7]

No, she hasn't started; she's finishing another book first.

By an amazing coincidence, on the day before her birthday (with the book wrapped up in a drawer upstairs!), we watched The FBI Story (1959), starring Jimmy Stewart as a fictionalized version of the investigating agent.

I was worried that she would get all she needed to know about the Osage murders from the movie and my present would be redundant...

I didn't have to worry. Movie just skimmed the incident, all from Stewart's point of view.

That's what I'm afraid Scorcese's movie is going to do: present it all from the FBI agent's POV. I'm not interested in that; as I just said, it's been done. I want a deeper dive into the Osage and how they dealt with the killings. I hope those reshoots meant Scorcese pivoted in that direction.

[shadowkat]

The book refers to The FBI Story several times - and not in a good way. (LOL! I've seen it too but have no memory of it outside of seeing it, too long ago). Apparently - Tom White (the FBI agent who investigated the murders) asked to consult, but Hoover (who was a narcissist) said no - he was enough and wanted the focus.
Also the murders - per Hoover's requirements, weren't to be the focus of the film, but the FBI. And he didn't want a specific agent specified. So, no, it didn't even focus on White or the investigators of the Osage murders. It was a fictionalized version of the FBI or a whitewashed version.

The Osage Tribe and Tom White were annoyed by the film. Hoover was happy though.

That's what I'm afraid Scorcese's movie is going to do: present it all from the FBI agent's POV. I'm not interested in that; as I just said, it's been done. I want a deeper dive into the Osage and how they dealt with the killings.

Actually, I'm worried it's far far worse than that - that it's going to present it all from the "killers" pov. DiCaprio and DeNiro are playing the "killers" not the FBI agents. Relative Unknowns are playing all the Osage (which makes sense - they are Native American actors, thank god), and the agents are portrayed by musicians, Jesse Plemmons (Power of the Dog, Friday Night Lights, Fargo S2...). That's disconcerting.
The big name stars or the ones getting paid a lot of money are the murders.

That's a huge problem. They are major players in the book, but the focus is mainly on the Osage Tribe and White. We don't get much back story on the Killers, outside of how horrible they are.

I'm hoping the reboots focus more on the Osage. There's hope - a lot of name stars as the lawyers trying the case. So I'm guessing the film focuses a lot on the trial? Lithgow and Fraiser are portraying the attorneys, with Lithgow as the prosecutor and Fraiser as the unsavory Defense attorney. Most of the suspense is with the trial - not so much the investigation. But getting the evidence, the witness statements, and Molly Burkhart discovering who was responsible and why.

[shadowkat]

As an aside - hard to say on the effect if any that Oppenheimer and Barbie will have on filmmaking. Currently everything (except for non-studio affiliated projects) are shut down due to the two strikes. Also the folks running things aren't very smart in regards to trend spotting - they really don't understand what draws an audience. They think - oh superhero films do well, we'll do that. Uhm no, interesting characters, good story, good world-building does - and it has to be a good collaboration.

Right now they appear to be thinking - oh Barbie did well, we need more movies about Toys, it's just like The Lego Movie. Uhm no, most of the people who went to see Barbie - didn't go to the Lego Movie, and many of the ones who went to Lego Movie didn't go to Barbie. Barbie's not a homage, it's satire about gender politics and focuses on women. The Lego Movie is well a homage to well Legos. But they don't get that - and are already pushing for Pocket Annie as another project. (I don't know what it is but apparently a toy.)

Oppenheimer? Expect to see more biopics and WWII films, because again studio heads aren't very bright.

[cjlasky7]

Barbie is a "toy" movie only in the broadest sense. Gerwig uses Barbie as a lens through which she can examine the problems of coming of age as a woman in American society. (It's about other things, too, but...)

Any attempts to leave out the sociopolitical satire and just focus on the toy would be completely missing the point. Audiences who loved the Barbie movie would smell the "fake."

[shadowkat]

Yet, the idiotic studios are already doing it - with options for pocket annie by Lena Durham. It's kind of like assuming Oppenheimer was a biopic and why people liked it. (No. It had a lot more going on than that, straight bio-pics rarely do well and tend to bomb, unless it's musical aka Freddy Mercury or Johnny Cash.)

[shadowkat]

Oh - another problem Killers faces that Oppenheimer didn't? The strikes. They could promote Oppenheimer, it came out prior - and everyone finished their interviews and promotions prior to the strike. Killers is coming out in November - and none of the actors can promote it. I think only Scorsese can.

[cjlasky7]

I read that Mervyn LeRoy (the director of FBI Story) was constantly stymied by Hoover, who insisted on personally clearing every last frame of film.

I'm hoping that the trailers focus on DeNiro and Dicaprio because they're the big names and the film will be much more nuanced.

[shadowkat]

A good sign is the Osage Tribe got involved halfway through and Scorsese listened to them and changed the direction of the film as a result. Also later trailers are focusing more and more on the osage, and not showing DiCaprio in a good light.