Weekly Wilson - Blog of Author Connie C. Wilson - Welcome to WeeklyWilson.com, where author/film critic Connie (Corcoran) Wilson avoids totally losing her marbles in semi-retirement by writing about film (see the Chicago Film Festival reviews and SXSW), politics and books----her own books and those of other people. You'll also find her diverging frequently to share humorous (or not-so-humorous) anecdotes and concerns. Try it! You'll like it!

“The Square” won the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival this year. Last year, Swedish writer/director Ruben Ostlund’s previous film about an avalanche and family dynamics, “Force Majeure,” was one of the most interesting at the Chicago International Film Festival. Still, a Cannes darling is not always mine.

I am happy to report that “The Square” lived up to the hype and then some. Mind you: I am not always as positive about Cannes’ picks. “Holy Motors” a few years back was not a favorite, so what was “The Square” like?

In a few words, it was funny, thought-provoking, interesting, and timely. It also had the benefit of American actors familiar to U.S. audiences, utilizing Elisabeth Moss (“Mad Men,” Hulu’s “The Handmaiden’s Story”) and Dominic West (television’s “The Affair”).

The plot revolves around a museum director (Claes Bang, who resembles a younger Pierce Brosnan), Christian Juel Nielsen. He manages the X-Royal Museum in Sweden, and the sets and cinematography are superb. The Museum is mounting an exhibition called “The Square” which is supposed to emphasize mankind’s universal need to care for each other. (“How much inhumanity does it take before you exercise your humanity?”)

For example, at one entry point, museum patrons will either push a button that says “I mistrust people” and go left, or will push a button that says “I trust people” and go right for a different museum experience. (The count was 42 for trusting and 3 for not trusting on the screen when this was demonstrated).

The Museum’s mission statement for “The Square” says: “The Square (a 4 x 4 meter space, marked off) is a sanctuary of trust and belonging. Within its boundaries we all share equal rights and equal responsibilities.”

THE GOOD

Again, I found myself laughing out loud at the ridiculous situations that beset the handsome Christian. I did not expect a laugh-out-loud funny movie, but that’s what “The Square” offers viewers. Having said that, it is also extremely thought-provoking and makes wry statements about the pomposity of art in museums, about how we relate in a social context, and about being kind and caring to others. Qualities like trust, caring and moral courage are examined, but the clever way the issues are examined led to laughter, and there are throw-away lines that are hilarious, as well.

Example: a museum employee manning what looked like a street sweeper has accidentally vacuumed up a pile of dirt and rocks that was part of Big Shot Artist Dominic West’s display (roughly 30 piles of dirt and rocks in a room, all the same size/height). When an employee comes to tell Christian of this catastrophe, he immediately makes plans to keep this faux pas hush hush and try to repair the pile of dirt without mentioning it to anyone. The museum employee glances over at Elisabeth Moss, standing off to the side waiting for Christian and seems reluctant to reveal the full extent of the catastrophe with her character (Anne) listening. They’re talking in Swedish. Christian reassures her, “She doesn’t understand a thing. She’s American.” [That can be taken two ways.]

There is also a sub-plot involving Christian’s stolen cell phone, wallet and cuff links. And there is the fancy dinner at the Royal Palace, where an elderly couple is being honored for gifting the museum with 50 million Kroner. The “entertainment” is the entrance of an ape-man, Terry Notary as Oleg Rogojin. The patrons sitting in the fancy ballroom awaiting the entrance are told that some people try to “hide in the herd” and not make eye contact.

The ape man creates havoc, dragging a pretty woman by her hair across the floor, climbing on tables and driving the Alpha Male Dominic West from the room.
After the showing, Terry Notary (the ape man in the trailer), who was present in Chicago shared this with us: “We didn’t really know what we were going to do the day of shooting. We were waiting for an audience reaction. I was told, ‘You need to chase the alpha male out of the room.’ (Dominic West) I decided I was going to start screaming on the way in there. If it had been planned, it would not have felt real. I was told, ‘Go to the one who doesn’t want to be picked.’

Terry went on to say that he has done a lot of motion capture work. “You go in and play and make all these mistakes and you find the character in the mistakes. It’s hard, because you want to know what you’re going to do, but it’s not about acting. It’s about life. Fear is your best friend or your worst enemy.”

THE BAD

The sub-plot involving Elisabeth Moss, as well as that involving a young boy who is stalking Christian and demanding an apology for having been accused of the theft of Christian’s wallet and phone (his cuff links turned up in Christian’s shirt, after all) seemed unfinished. Elisabeth’s accusations that Christian used the prestige of his position to bed women, while perhaps true, didn’t seem that related to the main idea of “The Square.”

Not knowing what happened to the young boy who stalks Christian made the film feel unfinished, to me, and Elisabeth’s sexual encounter with Christian was strange, to say the least. (But funny)

I also would have liked a better explanation of the REAL ape that appears in a few short scenes in Elisabeth Moss’s house or hotel room.

VERDICT:

While I have seen Cannes’ favorites that I did not like at all (“Holy Rollers” comes to mind), this one I liked very much. Lines like “Consider the social consequences of your actions” and “So, suddenly, it comes down to politics and the distribution of assets” were very timely in today’s world. The film is ambitious and brilliant, with beautiful sets, good acting, and a message delivered with wry humor in both Swedish and English.

I won’t reveal the Marketing Faux Pas that a young P.R. team unleashes upon the populace, for fear of ruining its effect on the film for you, but let’s just say that making a video that “goes viral” is not always a desirable thing, and it certainly isn’t in this case. But it’s pretty funny in a macabre way.

“Marshall” Opens the 53rd Annual Chicago International Film Festival on October 12th

By Connie Wilson

On October 13, 2017

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

The opening film of the 53rd Chicago International Film Festival was “Marshall,” directed by Reginald Hutton. The film is a depiction of a case that NAACP lawyer and first black Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall took in Bridgeport, Connecticut. The 1941 case involved a charge of rape made by a prominent white socialite Eleanor Strubing (Kate Hudson). Mrs. Strubing accused a black chauffeur, Joseph Spell (Sterling K. Brown, “This Is Us”), of raping her and throwing her in a nearby river while she was bound and gagged.

THE GOOD

Learning more about the background of famed attorney Thurgood Marshall in a fictional format was informative and entertaining. For instance, the supremely confident Marshall, when he arrives in Connecticut, tells the local attorney with whom he will have to work (Josh Gad of “The Book of Mormon” as Jewish attorney Sam Friedman) that he wanted to attend law school at the University of Maryland, which was very close to his home, but he was forced, instead, to attend the predominantly black Howard University, which was not close by at all. Marshall adds that he learned law well enough to later sue the University of Maryland. We also learn that Marshall argued cases before the Supreme Court 32 times and only lost 3. He won the Brown versus the Board of Education bill that opened schools to all races in 1954 and became the first black Supreme Court Justice in 1967.

The cast includes Chadwick Boseman as Marshall, Sterling K. Brown as the accused chauffeur, Josh Gad as co-counsel, Kate Hudson as the rape victim, Dan Stevens of “Downton Abbey” as prosecuting attorney Loren Willis and Academy Award nominee James Cromwell (“Babe”) as Judge Foster. Keesha Sharp has a small role as Thurgood Marshall’s wife, Buster. Jussie Smollett of “Empire” is also cast in a small role as poet Langston Hughes, a classmate of Thurgood Marshall’s. His role seemed unnecessary and superfluous, to me, and made Marshall seem as though he were so single-mindedly fixed on civil rights that he makes a disparaging remark about Hughes not doing anything noteworthy with his life.

The cinematography by Newton Thomas Sigel was good, complete with vintage cars and clothing, and the music (Marcus Miller) added much to the production with a stirring song by Dianne Warren (“Up Where We Belong”) at the end, called “You Can’t Be Nothin’ if You Don’t Stand Up for Something.”

THE BAD

The script, written by Jacob and Michael Koskoff, had its moments, with lines like “Here in America our differences are not supposed to matter,” and (said to Marshall upon his arrival in Connecticut), “You have enough confidence for us all, misplaced as it may be.” Another good line was, “The only way to get through a bigot’s door is to break it down.” There is also the counseling of the accused by Marshall that Joseph Spell not take a plea deal, with the future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court saying, “We aren’t slaves, ‘cause we rose up and fought and fought and fought.”

The woman sitting next to me brought up an interesting point when she repeated a line from the film (one that breaks the case wide open): “Men are men and women are women.”

As we discussed the film that had just ended, she said, “Does that mean that Harvey Weinstein’s actions are okay, because he was just being a man?”

I responded, “Yes, and does the line about bigotry mean that someone should be breaking down the door of the Oval Office right about now?”

We both wondered how accurate the portrayal of this early case was, and, just as we were discussing that, a disclaimer came onscreen mentioning that certain characters were composites, etc., etc., etc.

The Judge, played by James Cromwell, seemed too evil and prejudiced to be true to life. He basically hamstrings the defense at every opportunity and is blatantly unfair. His role was over the top.

VERDICT

I’ve been a big fan of Chadwick Boseman ever since he appeared as James Brown in the 2014 bio-pic “Get On Up.” I thought he should have received an Academy Award nomination for his work in that movie, but the release date was too early in the year and hurt his chances. (“Marshall” opens on Friday, October 13th.)
The co-stars all do adequate jobs, although Kate Hudson was underwhelming in her role.

The entire film made me think of the Oprah Winfrey 2013 film “The Butler” (billed as “Lee Daniel’s The Butler”) that starred Forest Whitaker as the long-serving black butler at the White House. There was an outcry that year about the lack of African American nominees amongst the Oscar nominees. Some actors were even boycotting the event. Since then, changes have occurred to make the Academy Awards more diverse (and less old and white).

When the outcry over “The Butler” arose, while recognizing that Forest Whitaker always does a credible job, I was not among those who felt he had been sadly overlooked by not being recognized with a nomination. In this film, aside from Chadwick Boseman’s role, I didn’t see any Academy Award-worthy work here, either. The film seemed very old-fashioned. I had the feeling I’d seen many just like it previously. It was not that fresh, original, or unique.

Marina plays Josh Gad’s wife, Stella Friedman.

Josh Gad is good as co-counsel and Boseman continues the excellent work he displayed in “Get On Up” but, for me, this was a slightly above-average film, with a lot of semi-boring courtroom scenes that almost took you back to the days of “Perry Mason” on television. (Extensive courtroom scenes tend to be difficult to bring to vivid life in today’s Cineplex, but this film certainly tries.)

Overall, my reaction to the entire film, while positive, was “been there/seen that.”

Still, the issues raised are timely, especially now, and for that reason “Marshall” is worth seeing.

True Tale of Saving the Elephant at the Belfast Zoo in WWII

By Connie Wilson

On October 11, 2017

In Pop Culture, Reviews

“Zoo,” written and directed by Colin McIvor, is the true story of how a lonely widow and three schoolchildren banded together to save an elephant in the Belfast, Northern Ireland zoo (the Bellevue Zoological Zoo) to prevent the pachyderm from being slaughtered during World War II.

Belfast had two major bombing raids on its populace during World War II, killing over 1,000 people. In light of the blitzkrieg by the Luftwaffe, in April of1941, orders went out to slaughter 33 of the animals in the zoo, to prevent them from running amok amongst the populace should the zoo be hit. Even Hugo, the giant rat, and Gilbert, the Barbary lion, were killed.

The zoo veterinarian’s son, Tom Hall (Art Parkinson)—an animal lover of the first magnitude (“I would never harm an animal”)—takes it upon himself to rescue an elephant named Buster. The name Buster seems to be an homage to comedic actor Buster Keaton.

Tom’s father, Dr. Hall, has gone off to war and Tom’s mother, Emily (Amy Huberman), is a nurse ministering to the sick and injured. Once the directive saying, “All potentially dangerous animals must be destroyed” goes out, it becomes Tom’s mission to organize 2 good friends and classmates, Jane Berry (Emily Flain, age 11) and Peter (Ian O’Reilly), to assist him in breaking the elephant out of the zoo and hiding it somewhere to keep it from being euthanized.

THE GOOD

A lonely widow (known later as “the elephant angel”), Mrs. Denise Austin, also enters the plot, agreeing to let the young people hide the beast in her brick-enclosed back yard. Her son was killed in Belgium in World War I and she is portrayed as friendless prior to throwing in with the youngsters to save the elephant. Denise Austin is played by Penelope Walton, known to viewers as Isobel Crowly on “Downton Abbey” from 2000-2015 and a much-decorated British actress. Mark Thomas’ music is well-suited to the material and the costuming by Claire Ramsey is very authentic to the period. Director of Photography on the film was Damien Elliott. He makes Northern Ireland (where it really was filmed) look gorgeous.

Art Parkinson, who plays Tom, plays Rickon Stark in “Game of Thrones” and also played Kubo in “Kubo and the Two Strings.” Ian McEhinney, who plays Mr. Shawcross here, is also a “Game of Thrones” regular as Barristan Selmy. The cast does a nice job with the material. One of the most amusing parts was watching the drills where students were put in a truck and gassed, to see if their gas masks were working properly. The character who plays Peter (Ian O’Reilly) says, “Surely this is not on the curriculum: gassing the pupils.”
THE BAD

The “name” actor that audiences may recognize is Toby Jones, who plays the Security Guard and ticket seller/ticket taker at the zoo. Toby plays Charlie and doesn’t even get a last name for his character. Toby Jones is most recognizable for once playing Truman Capote in a bio flick (“Infamous,” 2006) and for playing the mad scientist on the television series “Wayward Pines” (2015-2016). Jones will also be appearing in “The Snowman” later this year and appeared in “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” “Atomic Blonde,” “The Hunger Games” and “My Week with Marilyn.” Jones is widely regarded as one of Britain’s premier actors. It was a shame that he was given such a small part with so little to do.

The elephant portraying Buster was actually Nellie the elephant. This made me wonder about the elephant casting. Surely a male bull elephant looks different than a female? It is true that we mainly see the trio scrubbing Buster’s hairy back in lighthearted moments or leading the beast through the woods at night by means of a rope, but Nellie does not sound like it would be of the same gender as an elephant named Buster.

Colin McIvor’s feel-good true story of saving the elephant in the Belfast (Northern Ireland) zoo during WWII.

The film is premiering in Chicago on October 14th and will open in the United Kingdom in 2018.

“Ali’s Wedding” & “Maktub”: Comedies Screened Prior to the 53rd Chicago International Film Festival

By Connie Wilson

On October 10, 2017

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

Two comedies have been screened for critics at the 53rd Annual Chicago International Film Festival during this lead-up week. ”Ali’s Wedding” from Australian director Jeffrey Walker, reminds most of the recent hit “The Big Sick.” “Maktub” (“Fate”) from Israel director Oded Raz featured Guy Hamir and Hanon Savyon, both Israeli television stars in such TV series as “Scarred,” “Asfur” and “Ma Bakarish.”

The Australian film “Ali’s Wedding” starred the real Ali (Ali Basahri) just as “The Big Sick” was written and performed by the real person who lived that story, Kumail Nanjiani. In this lighthearted film, Ali, the son of a popular Muslim cleric, is expected to do well on the examinations to become a physician.

When Ali does not score high enough for entrance to the University Medical School, he conceals that fact and lets the congregation think he has scored the second-highest score on the exams—in the 90s when he was only in the 60s. Ali even attends classes, although not technically admitted. Ali also is hiding his love for Dianne Mosen, the daughter of the Lebanese fish and chips merchant, who has a very over-protective single father.

It is only a matter of time before the house of cards (lies) that Ali has begun to tell will collapse and trap him, causing anguish for him, his family, and his friends. There is even an “arranged” marriage with another girl that Ali somehow becomes entrapped in, when all he wants is to be with Dianne. Dianne did score high enough to enter the University of Melbourne, but her father has grave misgivings about a girl going off to the University of Melbourne to become a doctor.

Don McAlpine was the Director of Photography and the 3 brothers in Ali’s family represent modern-day influences on Muslim youth, while the old traditions attempt to be enforced by the Muslim elders. In that respect, there was another similarity to “The Big Sick,” with its tale of the many eligible girls who would be suitable mates for Kumail in an arranged Indian marriage, as they are invited to “drop by” for dinner by his meddling parents.

The Sydney Symphony Orchestra provided the score and the film opens with Ali (Ali Basahri) driving an out-of-control tractor through an Australian field. The many situations that Ali gets himself into are both amusing and also telling of the ongoing cultural battle between the old and new order in a modern country like Australia.
********************
“Maktub”, by contrast, has two fast friends (Guy Amir and Hanan Savyon as Stephen and Chuma), who are mob enforcers for a small-time gangster named Kaslassy. The destiny of these two small-time enforcers for a Jerusalem mob protection racket irrevocably changes when they survive a suicide bombing in a restaurant. The $400,000 in a suitcase carried by another member of the gang remains intact, but the large criminal with the glass eye that the briefcase was attached to is toast. Recognizing their great good fortune in surviving, Steven and Chuma wind up fulfilling the wishes of those who leave notes at the Wailing Wall.
Some of the humor comes from the fact that women are only allowed to approach certain parts of the Wailing Wall and men go to a different area. Therefore, in order to access the women’s side, each man is seen in drag at various points and the assumption, for humorous purposes, is that one or both men have become “trannies”.
There is a backstory involving Steve’s small son by his ex-girlfriend Doniasha. The boy may or may not be Steve’s biological offspring. Steve is loathe to parent the winsome child. Since Steve was once told he was infertile by a fertility clinic, he refuses to believe that the cute little boy who only wants his father to attend his soccer game is really his son and does not do the right thing in parenting him. Chuma tries to cover up the fact that Steven does not believe the child is his and, while paying frequent visits to Doniasha, finds himself attracted to her.
Zaful, the large Telly Savalas look-alike who provides muscle for Boss Kaslassy, has a wife who longs to have a child, but is 40 and fears it will never happen. All these random components come together at the climax of the film, to prove that “Maktub” (“Fate”) really can step in and change one’s life. Apparently “mitzvahs” (good deeds) can (sometimes) change one’s life.

“Sicilian Ghost Story:” A True Story of Crime & Consequences

By Connie Wilson

On October 8, 2017

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

Classmate Luna will not stop searching for her 13-year-old kidnapped classmate Guiseppi.

The Italian film “Sicilian Ghost Story,” directed by Fabio Grassadonia/Antonio Piazza is based on a real-life Mafia kidnapping of a 13-year-old son of a Mafia don who was kidnapped and held hostage to be used as leverage to make his criminal father stop cooperating with the police. The term, in Italian, seems to be “supergrass,” although, since I don’t speak Italian, I am merely relying on the subtitle term, [which was foreign to me in English.]

The young boy (Guiseppi) was held for 776 days in an attempt to get his father (whom we never see) to stop giving the police information.
The only person who still seems to be looking for the young victim is a teenaged girl Luna, his classmate. She will not give up in looking for the boy with whom she has become infatuated.

Just before Guiseppi disappeared, Luna wrote: “I lock myself in my room and dream. When I’m sad, I dream, and when I’m happy I dream. Only you can help me because it is of you I dream. If you say no, I’ll stop dreaming. If you say yes, I’ll stop dreaming, because it will be of us together.”

The forest and lake scenes are beautifully photographed, usually with the camera looking up at the trees. The underwater sequences are equally haunting.
One saying, repeated by Luna’s best friend is a bastardization of a Russian idiom that says every time there is a moment of silence in Russia, a cop is born. The friend notes that “Here, every time there is a moment of silence, a Mafiosa is born.”

Amidst the forest scenes and the gnarled roots of trees there is a drama playing out between Luna and her loving father and her cold Swiss stepmother and the authorities, who are less-than-intent on finding the young victim.

French Film About Love & Its Effects Gives Viewers Much to Think About

By Connie Wilson

On October 6, 2017

In France, Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

The lead-up to the Chicago International Film Festival’s 53rd year is underway. Critics are getting the chance to screen films from over 95 countries, including 1,044 feature films, 3,500 shorts and 646 documentaries. Twenty-five of the films will enjoy their North American Premiere here and 29 others will have their U.S. Premiere in Chicago when the festival begins on October 12th.

Many films are embargoed, meaning that a complete review cannot be written until the film is actually released. Let me give you a peek at onr of these new films.

The black-and-white French film “L’Amant d’un Jour” (“A Lover for a Day”) directed by French director Philippe Garrel (“Regular Lovers”) was quite charming and a Cannes favorite. This one had much food for thought. Here are a few lines of dialogue and a brief synopsis:

“A Lover for a Day” is the provocative tale of modern love and family ties. When Jeanne’s (Esther Garrel) boyfriend Mateo breaks up with her, she is forced to move back home with her father, charismatic college professor Gilles (Eric Caravace) and discovers that he is now living with a girl her age, Ariane (Louise Chevillotte), his philosophy student.

Let me first disagree that Gilles is “charismatic” He’s dumpy looking and he is not young, but, in a classic case of transference, Ariane (Louise Chevillotte) has decided Gilles is the one for her. She pursues him until he catches her. Maybe she has a thing for older men (father fixation) or maybe it is the fact that Gilles was her Professor of Philosophy. Who knows? His appeal is not immediately apparent, but “the heart wants what it wants.”

When Jeanne comes calling at her father’s flat, Ariane is in residence; the two young women become friends.

Jeanne is extremely distraught over her break-up with fiancé Mateo, but Ariane, who is roughly Jeanne’s age, reassures her that, “You’ll get over it. We always do.”

Jeanne: “He kept telling me he loved me. I held off, at first. He came chasing after me. Now, there’s nothing there. I was totally played by love…and it all ends like this.”

The relationship between Gilles and his young lover continues, but there is a discussion of them having an “open” relationship where Arianne can take younger lovers, as long as Gilles doesn’t know. (“Not only do I not want to know, I’d rather have no idea.”)

Ariane counsels the heartbroken Jeanne with lines like, ”Sure, he (Mateo) was selfish. It happens to us all. I know it hurts, but it’ll pass.” She tells her new friend Jeanne that her father has been married and divorced three times and that she “thinks he enjoys divorcing.” This should give Gilles pause, if nothing else about Ariane does.

There’s a discussion of the Algerian War, in which one million Frenchmen were drafted to fight against Algeria. During the dinner-table discussions, the beautiful Arianne is ogled by another cute young Frenchman and Gilles seems upset. Ariane says, “It’s what you want. For me to flirt with others but sleep with you.” She also says, “You know me so well. I can’t hide a thing. It’s crazy to even try.”

Gilles responds, “I know you because I love you, perhaps.”

Voice-over: “Eternity never stopped. Happiness reigned over their home.”

However, problems arise, which, indirectly, are Jeanne’s fault. The denouement was interesting, to me, as I wondered, “How is this going to end?”

More thoughts that the movie gives us about love, in general: “When you’re so young and fragile, it can mark you for life.” (A reference to Jeanne’s heartsick behavior).

Ariane tells Jeanne: “You must know how to choose lovers. When you fall in love, you fall in love with everything; you become stupid.”

Jeanne responds, “But it’s sad to never fall in love, isn’t it?”

Of being in love: “I love it and, at the same time, it pisses me off. It’s great, but, then again, it’s super crazy. You just feel great, like you’re wrapped in a great coat/”

Gilles’ goal is this: “I want to age in a loving relationship.” He also admits this about himself: “I hurt women who did nothing to deserve it.” (*Note: the script was written by Philippe Garrel, Jean-Claude Carriere, Caroline Derues-Garrel, and Arlette Langmann).

Will Gilles and Arianne go the distance? Is Jeanne’s engagement to her fiancé, Mateo, really over? You’ll have to see the movie to find out when the it is released in the United States. (It played Cannes and also was featured October 10th at the New York Film Festival before it shows on October 13th in Chicago.)

“Blueprint” Film at Chicago International Film Festival Examines Gun Violence on Chicago’s South Side

By Connie Wilson

On October 3, 2017

In Movies, Pop Culture, Reviews

[contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Website” type=”url” /][contact-field label=”Message” type=”textarea” /][/contact-form]“Blueprint”, directed by Daryl Wein, and co-written by Daryl Wein and the film’s star, Jerod Haynes, is a close look at the issue of gun violence in Chicago—specifically, Chicago’s South Side. The film includes a citing of the May total of 486 shooting that resulted in 52 deaths. (*Note: WGN news of 10/1/2017 did report a recent decrease in such mayhem.)

The film is told through the point-of-view of Jerod Haynes’ character (also named Jerod). He is struggling to find a job to support a young daughter and the child’s mother (it’s never very clear if they are officially married or simply parents to the child together). Haynes is a talented, young African American Chicago actor who had roles in “Southside with You” (2016) and television’s “Empire” (2015) and he does a fine job playing this role.

The film focuses on the death of Jerod’s best friend Reggie, who was a star basketball player and one of “the good guys that represented peace.” It opens with the two old buddies shooting hoops, but we soon learn that the unarmed Reggie was shot in the back by a policeman, while running away. Reggie’s death is yet another shock to the black community. (One dedication at film’s end to 33-year-old Curtis Posey, who acted in the film in a small role and was killed by violence on 6/27/1.7 was but one of 3 similar incidents that affected cast members since the beginning of the film.)

After that dismal news, Jerod begins to drink heavily and his relationship with the mother of his young daughter suffers. They were already on the outs; Jerod was living in his mother’s house.

Reggie’s friends and relatives on the South Side are both angry and anguished at his senseless killing. They aren’t buying any accounts that try to say Reggie was packing heat and the best line describing how they feel is uttered by Reggie’s mother, who says, “Reggie got shot because they didn’t see him as a human being. We can’t have that luxury of thinking it won’t happen to us, because, every other day, it’s somebody else.”

With the recent Trump Twitter storm about NFL athletes who take a knee during the National Anthem, it is easy to see that this is a timely and topical film, and with the shooting deaths tonight of 58 concert-goers in Las Vegas attending a Jason Aldean concert, it’s easy to also say that it’s about time we had a serious discussion about gun violence in America that doesn’t cave to NRA lobbyists.

Tai, the mother of Shanesia, wants Jerod to step up and be a man, act like a man, be responsible. In a Black Lives Matter gathering following Reggie’s death, Jerod says, “We don’t have fathers. We don’t have the blueprint. The women are holding us together.” This, of course, is a true allusion to the fact that black families are often matriarchies where the women do hold the family together.

In the aftermath of Reggie’s slaying, various factions meet to discuss what can be done to stop this violence. The pastor in the film quotes the Bible, saying, “The Bible says, ‘Be angry, but sin not.” An opposing point of view is voiced by a young black man who says, “It’s not what we can’t do. It’s gonna’ be what we will do. We can’t allow them to do us like this.” He hands Jerod a gun, saying, “This is life and death right here,” and urging Jerod to defend himself, if necessary. Nevertheless, the feeling articulated in the film is: “It’s a cycle. It’s a continuum.” And, notes Jerod, “Everybody I get close to I lose.”

Later in the film, we will see Jerod throw the gun in a trash bin (symbolic screenwriting 101). I am sure I am not the only audience member who was thinking, “He should wipe that thing clean of his fingerprints before he rejects violence and discards it. Otherwise, he risks being framed for another murder!” Nor am I the only one who noticed that the hero and “good guy” was driving drunk after the funeral of his best friend.

Another plot point that three critics near me argued about after the film finished was whether or not Jerod qualifies as a hero when he is drinking heavily, is still unemployed, and is still living at home and, according to girlfriend/wife/soulmate Tai (Tai Davis) has been sneaking around with another woman.

Regardless of Jerod’s heroic goodness (or lack thereof), the actor playing him, as well as the supporting players, do a fine job. The issue of gun violence is certainly relevant. The young girl playing Jerod’s daughter (Shanesia Davis-Williams) is very natural and delivers her lines like a true pro, especially this one: “Do our lives matter, or is it that white people’s lives matter more?”

The racism issue is complex and the answer is lost in the eternal ongoing dispute over gun rights versus gun control. Nevermind that other countries like Australia found a way to curb senseless gun deaths. We don’t seem to have a handle on the problem, even after Sandy Hook and the tragic murder of entire classrooms of elementary school children. (Some of the more radical GOP talking radio hosts even insist that the poor children of Sandy Hook never died; it was all a hoax, just like the moon landing in 1969.)

One somewhat lame line was: “One day—I don’t know when—it’ll get better.” (To which I muttered, under my breath, not while Donald Trump is allowed to run roughshod over the Constitution and sully the Presidency.)

The movie is well-acted and it is also well-photographed by cinematographer Toshihiko Kizu, who makes the South Side and settings like the Shedd Aquarium, plus the many bridges in the city, come to life as near-characters in their own right(s). There is also original music by Jukebox and one with the refrain “Fall in love with the magic girl.” (That, apparently, will solve all the problems the film presents.)

I did not like the upbeat happy ending. It begs the question of, “What ARE we going to do about these senseless killings? One character says, “What can we do? I dunno. That’s the problem. We’ve got to figure out what to do.” Isn’t that generally the issue with ANY problem? And do any of these issues seem to be getting better (or, indeed, any attention) under the current federal administration?

There is even a line that says, “We’re seeing social injustice all around the world.” NEWS FLASH: we all know that. What does this film propose be done about it? I did not see it come down on the side of violence (Malcolm X, the Black Panthers) or the side of peaceful nonviolence (Martin Luther King). It just sort of straddles the fence in presenting the modern-day horror of life in the ‘hood.

I grew up in the 60’s. I remember Tommy Smith and Juan Carlos’ Black Power salute at the 1968 Olympics and the Symbionese Liberation Army and Bobby Seales and Huey P. Newton founding the Black Panther movement and all the rest of it (Watts, etc.). I was in France when the French newspapers trumpeted: “America At the Edge of the Abyss.”

We’re there again, folks. Happy endings are looking pretty scarce, and we DO need to figure out what to do about it.

Tour Dates & Blogs for THE COLOR OF EVIL Tour

By Connie Wilson

On September 29, 2017

In Books, Editorial, Local, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Pop Culture

FOLLOW COLOR OF EVIL SERIES BY CONNIE CORCORAN WILSON TOUR

Teddy Rose Book Reviews Plus Sept 29 Review & Giveaway

Gayle Books Reviews Etc Oct 3 Review

Beverly’s Book Blog Oct 13 Review, Excerpt, Interview, & Giveaway

Dawn Bound 2 Escape Oct 10 Excerpt & Giveaway

Angélica Amazon Review Nov 1 Review

Jessica JBronder Book Reviews Nov 8 Review

Shannon The Pulp and Mystery Shelf Nov 13 Excerpt & Interview

Donna Amazon Review Nov 15 Review

Cheryl’s Book Nook Nov 21 Review, Excerpt, & Giveaway

Dawn Bound 2 Escape Nov 28 Review

Dr. Jacques Coulardeau Amazon Review Nov 28

Lisa Lisa’s Writopia Nov 29 Review

Erica Bassgiraffe’s Thoughts Nov 30 Review

Lorna Amazon Review Nov 30 Review

THE COLOR OF EVIL Boxed Set Tour Is “On”

By Connie Wilson

On September 29, 2017

In Books, Editorial, Local, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Pop Culture, Reviews

COLOR OF EVIL SERIES BOXED SET

BY CONNIE CORCORAN WILSON

Publisher: Quad Cities’ Press (Aug, 2017)
Category: YA, Psychological Paranormal Thriller
Tour Dates: Oct/Nov, 2017
Available in: E-book, 725 Pages

THE COLOR OF EVIL series presents you with characters who live, breathe and die in small town Cedar Falls, Iowa. Tad McGreevy, the focus of the series, has a paranormal power, Tetrachromatic Super Vision, that allows him to see auras that tell him whether a person is good or evil. At night, in horrifying nightmares, Tad relives the crimes of the evil-doers. Eventually, becomes the target of a particularly lethal antagonist, Michael Clay (aka Pogo the Clown) who wants to eliminate the teen-aged boy. In three books, we witness the power of evil faced off against a good-hearted young boy who just wants to protect those he loves.

Beginning with the first manifestations of this supernatural power at the age of 8, the book quickly takes us forward to the high school years of Tad and the band of friends we come to know well. We follow their progress from their junior year of high school through graduation with danger always lurking in the background. As others have said, it’s quite a ride.

Begin the journey today with this specially-priced trilogy: THE COLOR OF EVIL; RED IS FOR RAGE; and KHAKI=KILLER..

“THE COLOR OF EVIL series is old-school psychological horror, artfully blended with new-school shocks and twists. Bravo!” —Jonathan Maberry, New York Times best-selling author, multiple Bram Stoker winner.

MY THOUGHTS COLOR OF EVIL SERIES BOXED SET BY CONNIE CORCORAN WILSON

by Teddy Rose

I rarely read books like these but have heard so much about them and have enjoyed Ms. Wilson’s writing in the past with her diverse topics. Thus I decided to give this series a try. It has just been made into a boxed set on Kindle.

In this multi award-winning series, Tad McGreevy as a boy discovers that he can see auras. At night he dreams of evil people doing evil deeds and he knows that these aren’t just dreams. He doesn’t know if the evil doing has already occurred or will occur in the future. His parents tell him to keep his power a secret. When he turns 8 years old his third grade classmates are invited to his birthday party. His parents hire Pogo the Clown to entertain the children. However, Tad knows right away that Pogo (real name Michael Clay) is really a serial killer. Of course, his parents don’t believe him and even send him to a psychiatrist who does not believe him either. That is until Pogo is arrested.

Fast forward to Tad as a young adult, In the second book ‘Red Is For Rage’, Tad tries to control his power more. He doesn’t want to end up back in a hospital under a psychiatrist’s care. His best friend Stevie Scranton goes missing. To top that off, Pogo (aka Michael Clay), the serial killer clown, escapes from prison. Tad teams up with a retired policeman and others to try to find out what happened to Stevie. Will they be too late?

Then there is the teenage aghast of Tad and his friend, not to mention that of Stevie’s poor parents during the 9 month ordeal while their son is missing.

The third book, ‘Khaki=Killer’ picks up where the second book leaves off. Melody Harris Carpenter was rushed to the hospital due to an accident when cheerleading at her college. We find out what happened to her. There are budding romances, more people disappearing, and Michael Clay is on the hunt for Tad.

Okay, so even from what I just described, it is clear it isn’t the type of book I would normally read. In fact I would usually stay far away from. However, I must say that I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed this series.

Connie Corcoran Wilson really amazes me with her pen.She can write both non-fiction and fiction effortlessly, or at least it seems the case to me. Will I go out of my way to read more paranormal thrillers? Probably not, but I am glad I read this. I also know that she is working on a fourth, (perhaps final?) book for the series and I will certainly read that.

I recommend you pick up a copy of The Color of Evil series and experience it as well!

PRAISE for THE COLOR OF EVIL SERIES

By Connie Corcoran Wilson

‘The book has all the elements of a compelling mystery and an inventive paranormal twist. One must credit Wilson for treating her teenage protagonists with respect, as they face adult dilemmas and resolve them with maturity and grace.”- Kirkus

“Connie Corcoran Wilson weaves a deftly fine scalpel in an age where a crude blade is more the norm. Her work is a smooth, subtle hybrid mix of science fiction, thriller, and horror that realizes a unique and pointed vision in the great tradition of Phillip K. Dick and Ray Bradbury. Her voice is a wonder to behold, at once dark and somber while maintaining a glimmer of hope that shines in the hearts of her heroes, who cling to the light. Like Stephen King, nothing escapes her discerning eye, the result of which is tale after tale that bleed life onto the page, both literally and figuratively.”–Jon Land, bestselling author of the Caitlin Strong Series

“Wilson’s characters come alive on the page. Comparisons to Stephen King, Dean Koontz and Philip K. Dick aside, Wilson has spent 35 years teaching students in this age range. She knows what she is talking about.”–Gary Braver, author of “Flashback” and 8 other thrillers.

“Mother:” Darren Aronofsky & Jennifer Lawrence (It’s Not Nice to Fool Mother Nature!)

By Connie Wilson

On September 15, 2017

In Local, Movies, Of Local (Quad Cities') Interest, Reviews

Darron Aronofsky’s new film “Mother!” looks to be a re-imagining, perhaps, of “Rosemary’s Baby” from its trailers. After Aronofsky films like “Black Swan,” “The Wrestler” and “Noah,” you come out of this one feeling slightly bilious—partially from Matthew Libatique’s hand-held close-up camera work—and partially because the film, (allegorical though it may be), just leaves you saying, “What the hell just happened here?”

For the first one-half to two-thirds of the film we have a normal story of a couple living in a remote house in the woods (Javier Bardem and Jennifer Lawrence). He is a poet who has writers’ block and she is his loving, much younger and very supportive wife. [They don’t have names in the film, so I’ll simply refer to them by the actor’s names.]

As a would-be writer myself (30 books, to date),the depiction of how the publishing industry works was ludicrous, but it gives us a chance to see how Lawrence feels that she is not the Most Important Person in Bardem’s life, as he shows her his (finally, belatedly) completed manuscript, she cries and calls it beautiful. Immediately the phone rings and we learn that Bardem’s agent in New York (weirdly enough, played by SNL’s Kristen Wiiig) has already seen the manuscript. [Uh—-okay, folks. Not the way REAL publishing works, but let’s move on. And good luck on living on a poet’s income; better he should write horror novels or screenplays, like this film appeared to be from the trailers.]

I want to warn anyone reading this that there will be potential spoilers in my remarks, so look elsewhere if you don’t want to know some specific details about the film. However, to quote the critic in “Time” magazine, “It tries so desperately to be crazy and disturbing that all we can see is the effort made and the money spent.” That observation is not mine and seems a bit harsh, but my remark to a fellow critic as I left the theater was, “This one will not do well at the box office once word gets out.” So, a few details are here, but, no, I won’t give you the entire plot, blow-by-blow, (one of my biggest beefs about those who review my short story collections.)

So, what “word” am I suggesting will get out?

The word that the film makes minimal sense while trying to comment on a host of current topics as varied as the chaos in the world where refugees from any of a myriad list of countries are fleeing for their lives (Syria, almost anywhere in Africa, Afghanistan, et. al.), how we are destroying the Earth (Mother Earth—get it?), how artists both need fans, but also resent the rabid ones who won’t leave them alone, and egoism as demonstrated by those artists, etc.

True film buffs will see “Mother!” and be glad to have seen Aronofsky’s latest film. Word out of TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival) was that people came out of the viewing either loving it or hating it, but definitely talking about it. I heard that, at one film festival screening (Cannes, I think) it was both booed and received a 5-minute standing ovation, so opinions come down on both sides of the issue.

IMHO, I don’t think the average couple who want a night out on the town without the kids will like it. They’d prefer a story that made sense. This one does not. It reminded me of Terrance Malick’s “Tree of Life” in that there was a story present that could have been told on a “normal” plane, but things quickly spiraled out of control on that front. “Tree of Life” went wild with great cinematic images, but the story suffered a quick death.

Don’t look for too much of that Malick touch here. The hand-held, close-up camerawork is all zoom-y and jerky. I found it really annoying on the big screen. I feel I have seen every pore on Jennifer Lawrence’s face. I think that is probably the movie’s strength: Jennifer Lawrence in her prime.

The sound is also quite good, and some of the early spooky shots in the old basement made me think of the film “They Come At Night” earlier this year in 2 respects: the shadowy spooky lighting and the fact that nobody ever really came at night and patrons were quite upset at being suckered in by the title and the trailer that seemed to portray a standard horror story. [I hope this isn’t the second instance of misleading advertising in film trailers this season, in the fans’ opinion(s).]

As for the secret room in the basement that is never properly explained or the bloody hole in the floor that I was sure was going to give way when someone walked over it, or the constant influx of strangers whom husband Bardem will not get rid of: not as enchanting or as well-explained.

Bardem ultimately becomes a religious figure (Satan? The Devil?) and Worst Husband & Father Ever.

The story makes sense for a while, but ultimately: “things fall apart, the center cannot hold.”

At first, we have the couple in the woods ( I was reminded of the house used one season on “American Horror Story”) with the wife trying to (literally) re-build the house to please her husband, because, (we learn in an aside), it was his childhood home. We are also told that a fire destroyed it and killed his mother. All Javier has left from the wreckage is a precious piece of glass that he keeps on display on a pedestal. It gets broken, of course, but nevermind about that right now.

After we woozily (those close-up shots and hand-held photography) watch Jennifer run to the bathroom to periodically bolt glasses of a yellow liquid that she mixes on multiple occasions, I wanted to know what it was she was drinking. The film never said. I read (elsewhere) that it was some kind of migraine medication. It would have been nice to have known that, somehow, from the dialogue. I don’t have migraines, have never heard of a yellow powder that people take for it, and was trying to figure out if Lawrence was a closet drug addict or trying to abort an unwanted pregnancy, since there is a conversation in the film where random guest Michelle Pfeiffer tells Jennifer that she (Michelle) can tell that Jennifer doesn’t want kids.

First guest to disrupt the couple’s solitude is Ed Harris, who tells Javier that he is an orthopedic surgeon at the hospital in town and suggests that he was told this was a bed and breakfast where he could stay. Once he finds out that Bardem is the famous poet Harris admires, Harris is invited to stay at their house by Javier as long as he likes. This disturbs Jennifer as she was not consulted.

Then, Ed’s wife (Michelle Pfeiffer) shows up. Later, his two warring sons (real-life brothers Brian Gleeson and Donheel Gleeson) arrive and a violent fight breaks out about their father’s imminent demise and the money he will leave. [We have learned that old Ed is coughing up a lung because he is terminally ill.]

MOTHER NATURE

Let’s examine some of the themes/allegories that Aronofsky has laid out for us, or why I feel they are there. What is my support for my interpretation, in other words? When it comes to the Mother Nature reading, in addition to the film’s title, we need only pay attention when Jennifer says she wants to make the house “a Paradise” for her husband. And there is this line: “I gave you everything. You gave it all away.” Then, of course, there are the lines of the song that plays over the credits: “It’s The End of the World As We Know It, it ended when your love left me.”

RELIGIOUS SYMBOLISM

Believe me, you won’t miss this. Gifts brought to the child born under chaotic circumstances. Preacher-like figures and small votive candles. Adoring worshippers. Small photos of the object of their adoration everywhere. And we all know what happened to the first son of God in The Good Book, so don’t look for a happy ending here.

EGOISM

“Vanity Fair”cited “the fevered insecurity of an artist who fears the attention of his public as much as he does their abandonment.” It is undeniably true that a writer or artist of any sort is dependent on an adoring public for both ego gratification and sales. Still, it’s taken to the limit here. Jennifer’s constant desire to have her husband make the unwanted guests go away made me think of a story she told tonight on Seth Meyer’s Late Show. She described being asked to pose for a selfie in a bar after a hard day on a shoot (and a few too many beers) and turning the young man down, whereupon he used the “f” word and went away mad. Not as mad as Jennifer, however, who describes dousing him and his luggage with beer because he wouldn’t leave her alone.

You get the feeling that the character Jennifer Lawrence portrays in “Mother!” would dearly love to give every character in the film except Bardem the old heave-ho, but nobody listens to her polite requests that they not sit on the still unmoored kitchen sink counter or simply get the hell out of her house. She is telling them what to do both politely and, ultimately, ragefully, just as Mother Nature has been warning us about weather crises to come for decades, but we just don’t listen. And, just like the 2 recent hurricanes in Texas and Florida within 4 days of one another while vast parts of the west are going up in flames, things are getting wildly out of hand now, because milder warnings given early on were completely ignored.

The film is crazy and disturbing and, in Lawrence’s words on television tonight, “horrifying” but it’s not your normal horror film with an ending that wraps things up for you, with or without a twist ending, so if you hated “They Come At Night” because you thought there was actually going to be something coming at night, you will probably think this film has done a bit of false advertising with its trailers, too.

Doesn’t mean you can’t watch it to try to decode the layers of meaning and enjoy Aronofsky’s skill as a writer/director, but I liked “The Wrestler.” It made sense from beginning to end.