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!

Category: Interviews Page 1 of 11

Among the notable folk that Connie has interviewed (partial list) are: David Morrell (3 times), William F. Nolan, Kurt Vonnegut, jr.; Joe Hill; Frederik Pohl; Anne Perry; Valerie Plame; Vanessa Redgrave; Michael Shannon;; Taylor Hackford; Jon Land and Liv Ullman. The interview subjects might be from the world of Hollywood or simply be much-read authors, but her interviews have run in newspapers for 61 years.

Francis Ford Coppola in Chicago with “Megalopolis” on July 25, 2025

Francis Ford Coppola in Chicago

Francis Ford Coppola in Chicago

As part of my Birthday Tour (7/23), I purchased tickets to see “Megalopolis” (for the second time) with Francis Ford Coppola in attendance. He was coming to the Chicago Theater in downtown Chicago. I was in town celebrating a big birthday, with tickets to see Caitlin Clark play on Sunday (probably injured and not playing—and neither is Angel Reese), tickets to a Cubs game on Tuesday, a trip to the Green Mill to hear live music on 7/23, and my second time plowing through “Megalopolis,” which I originally saw at the Last Picture House in Davenport, Iowa—a theater owned by filmmakers Scott Beck and Bryan Woods (“A Quiet Place,” “Heretic”).

I did not review “Megalopolis” when I saw it the first time, shortly after its release on September 27, 2024. It seemed to want to be a commentary on Trump 2.0 and the decline and fall of the Roman Empire came up as a good way to compare the two time periods. Beyond that, the film seemed primarily random bits, as did Coppola’s comments this night, when he appeared onstage to introduce the film and came back at the end to ostensibly take questions from the audience.

The director may deserve criticism for not preparing something more along the lines of “An Evening with Cary Grant,” which recapped that famous actor’s career. Of course, as I headed out to that one, the radio alerted us that Cary had just died of a heart attack (in Davenport, Iowa), so these strolls down memory lane with elderly actors and directors are always fraught with risk. I can’t really compare how Cary did, because I ended up trying to cheer my mother up because my father had just died in his eighties with an ill-timed celebrity outing to someone I had lauded as “still going strong in his eighties.” Francis Ford Coppola’s birth year is 1939, so draw your own conclusions.

Time is the risk. Don’t we all (secretly) know it?

Will Coppola talk about his other films? (A: No).

Francis Ford Coppola at the Chicago Theater on July 25, 2025.

Will Coppola seem on top of his topics? (Yes & No. He rambled, but so did the film.)

Is the film as bad as critics at the time said it was? (A: Again, yes & no. I have a feeling that, like “Heaven’s Gate,” it could well be viewed in a totally different light a decade from now.This one was eventually picked up for distribution by Lionsgate in May of 2025, but they have now dropped it as an offering, so getting to see it at all will become as difficult as seeing the original “Manchurian Candidate” was after the assassination of JFK or as seeing “Heaven’s Gate” became after it bankrupted the studio.)

When Francis Ford Coppola graced the stage, welcoming us to the theater, he said, “When the audience is willing to enter a door that they have not entered before, they may experience something they haven’t experienced before.  I’ll see you again in a few hours.”

I had entered that door over a year ago during the 138 minute-film’s initial release. I was confused by the lack of a coherent story line then, and I had hoped to hear—at the very least—stories from the making of this, his latest film, a project that consumed him for decades. Eventually, Coppola—the director responsible for such iconic films as “The Godfather” series,”Apocalypse Now,” and “The Outsiders” had to sell part of his vineyard to raise the $140 million the film supposedly cost. Touring with it to a variety of cities (6, initially) is another way to offset his financial loss, since the film has only had a worldwide gross of $14 million, to date. The director is now suggesting he will recut the film to add even more dream sequences and other “weird” things. (Good luck with that.)

There is one point in the film where the lights come up and a “live” person comes out and has a brief discussion with its lead, Adam Driver as Cesar Catilina. That did not happen when I saw the film at the Last Picture House in Davenport, Iowa, but it apparently happens on the tour, as it happened in New Jersey and happened again in Chicago.

I was hoping against hope that Coppola would offer more behind-the-scenes stories from the shooting in Georgia and more personal anecdotes from a lifetime of revered films, but that didn’t happen. Part of it was the fault of the star of the evening, FFC, and part of it was the poor preparation to ask questions by the audience. I have read that Coppola’s original speech post film had 10 points, which he then reduced to 7 points. We made it through 5 points. They had to do  with how our society deals with time, work and money, among other things, all somewhat random and disjointed. Along the way, he would introduce random information, such as the fact that both he and DJT attended the same New York Military Academy (New York Military Academy; Francis Ford Coppola played the tuba there.)

Factoid shared randomly:  “Marlon Brando once told me that the secret for actors is, “You can’t care, or they’ll see it on your face.” Not sure I understand that bit of wisdom, but, then, not sure I understand most of “Megalopolis.” (Was hoping for further illumination on that very topic; did not happen.)

Random Factoid #2:  “I’m alternately rich and then broke…I’d rather have one million friends than one million dollars.” Along with the concept of being “alternately rich and broke” came a story of giving his kids quasi credit cards, which came with rules for usage. Could not be used to make money.  Could not be used to buy sex or love. Could not be used to purchase violence against another. Could not be used to buy gifts.

Random Factoid #3:  “We are one human family–homo sapiens.  We think we’re 300,000 years old. You are all my cousins.” He went on to proclaim us all geniuses, when compared to other species.

Question #1 from the audience revealed a problem with the way this was going to work—or not work. FFC had difficulty hearing the question(s) and the questioners did precious little forethought when struggling to gain the microphone to ask a question. A better method for selecting questioners could be found. (I’d recommend the SXSW method, myself).

The first questioner, a young man, did not really have much of a question for the legendary director. He just wanted to know if it was true that Marlon Brando, who had been urged to lose weight for his role in “Apocalypse Now,” when badgered to do so, instead went out in a canoe and ate a bunch of hamburgers. If that question makes no sense and seems like a waste of all of our time, you are right. FFC dismissed it as one he couldn’t hear and seemed irritated, at points, that so few women were managing to gain microphone time. (Again: get a better system).

Second question was slightly better: “What are you the most excited about right now?”

This brought forth reflections on family and life: “We will evolve so that we will live in a beautiful world.  All I care about is the kids.” He went on an extended reverie about playing with his grandkids and great grandchildren and said that he felt much is learned from play and from playing with youth.

At one point the actress who played Vesta Sweetwater in the film (Grace VanderWaal) shared with us that she wrote the songs she sings while suspended from a swing, supposedly shilling (in the film) for millions to support her in her quest to remain virginal—although she is really 23 and not virginal. Grace sang two songs and my mind instantly flashed back to a poetry workshop I once went to in Washington, D.C., where an elderly Mickey Rooney sat in a fancy Robert Louis Stevenson chair while his wife sang. (And that was the entire program!) Mickey and I ended up in the same elevator at one point (his mistake) and he barely came up to my shoulder. And I am only 5′ 2.”  Random factoid for you right there!)

Question #4 from Nate dealt with what lessons Coppola might have learned while making the film. The questioner had referred to this particular film as ” a passion project” and FFC said, “Every movie is a passion project.  Take away the lesson that you don’t have to play by someone else’s rules.”

During the second of Vesta Sweetwater’s two songs, I left and walked around outside of our mezzanine section seats, because the leg room in R was less than on the most crowded plane I’ve ever been on. (Seats started at $65, but these, with an unobstructed view, were in the $80s. However, there was no mention of the potentially crippling lack of leg room.

We had now been sitting, watching the film, for over 2 hours (138 minutes) and there were also the introductory remarks and FFC’s comments as he rejoined us (“I even put on a tie”). [I think I would have been permanently crippled if I had remained in my seat much longer without getting up. We arrived at 6:30; it was over 4 hours later.

People were beginning to drift away from the marathon viewing now. FFC was not nearly done and shared more random factoids, always promising to circle back to another mentioned topic:

Random factoid:  FFC wanted to be able to tap dance as a young boy. He was somewhat mistreated by fellow classmates and he always envisioned himself climbing atop the lunchroom table and tap dancing expertly. (Didn’t happen).

Random factoid:  Francis Ford Coppola’s father was a classical musician and played First Flute in the NBC Symphony Orchestra, directed at the time by Arturo Toscanini. Music in films has come from the Coppola clan. This time it is courtesy of Osvaldo Golijov, with Mahai Malaimare, Jr. as cinematographer.

More random topics to follow in further posts.

I’m writing this from the road. My Birthday Extravaganza has not (yet) ended, and won’t until the month ends. A very nice African American lady at the DMV in Chicago told me to always celebrate your birthday for the entire month.

Let the games continue!

 

 

 

 

The Experts Weigh In On Stephen Colbert’s Firing

Stephen Colbert

Stephen Colbert.

The Washington Post (Emily Davies) asked some prominent authorities in the field of television about the likelihood that the cancellation of Stephen Colbert’s Late Show was just based on financial considerations, as Paramount maintains. The experts aren’t buying it; neither should we. Forty-eight hours after Colbert called the $16 million payment to Trump by Paramount a bribe on his show, one designed to help facilitate the sale of CBS to Skydance, Colbert was fired, despite being #1.

“How often does the No. 1 guy get canceled? You can analyze this 100 different ways, but Colbert has the No. 1 show in late night and they’ve canceled him. If it walks like a duck, it’s a duck,” Rob Burnett said. “I don’t know the ins and outs of what’s going on up there, but I just don’t think if Stephen Colbert isn’t saying the things he’s saying that this happens.” Rob Burnett ran things at the Tonight Show for 19 years as David Letterman’s producer.

Burnett conceded that revenue is down in late night: At its peak, during Johnny Carson’s long stint as host, NBC’s time-slot champion “Tonight Show” drew 17 million viewers, according to Adweek, whereas Colbert’s top-rated “Late Show” has averaged about 2.5 million viewers this year. All the late-night shows now share digital excerpts online. That allows fans to consume an episode in pieces whenever they choose, and younger viewers choose to do that. But YouTube doesn’t offer nearly the same ad revenue as television. Still, the lock on late night viewers is no longer the pull it was for older generations. Viewers under 35 might not watch any of the late night hosts.

Merrill Markoe

Merrill Markoe

Merrill Markoe

Merrill Markoe, who was the head writer on Letterman’s show during its early-1980s incarnation on NBC before he went on to launch “The Late Show” and moved to CBS in the 1990s, said she “had nightmares” after she heard the news about Colbert.

“CBS, Paramount, the merger, the buyout with Trump, all of it came tumbling down like dice and added up to me in a second,” she said. “It hit me in a very hard way. He was No. 1 in his time slot. And a talk show is one of the cheapest forms of entertainment there is.”

As far as what’s next, Colbert still has many shows to produce at CBS before May. Daniel Kellison, another former Letterman producer, doubts he’ll make it. “I just hope he’s going to go all scorched-earth now. There’s no way he’s going to be on the air for nine months,” Kellison said. “He’s such a smart guy, and it would be really cool if he did a slow burn.”

It’s classic authoritarian behavior to forbid criticism, especially if the target is someone as thin-skinned as DJT. Our First Amendment freedoms are  under attack and the Jimmys (Fallon and Kimmel) and other hosts (Jon Stewart, Seth Meyer, Bill Maher, Conan O’Brien, John Oliver) are being bullied into submission, just as our universities, our judges, our elected representatives in Congress and anyone whom DJT has a beef with is being bullied into submission.

How long before our First Amendment Freedom of Speech and of the Press and of the right to assembly are eroded? Our leaders of conscience of any party must stand up for the Constitution and the right of habeas corpus and all of our cherished American freedoms, before DJT and Steve Bannon and the boys completely destroy the freedoms  our citizens have exercised and prized for 250 years.

Some suggest that Colbert ought to run against Lindsey Graham, since they are both from South Carolina. It would be a waste of a top-notch talent we sorely need at these moments of crisis.

Thank you for speaking truth to power, Stephen Colbert, and let’s hope that the venality of the nation’s biggest bully—out there for all to see—gives pause to some of the worst excesses of MAGA land.

FBI Agent Says FBI Is Being Destroyed From Within

David Frum ("The Atlantic")

David Frum (“The Atlantic”)

From David Frum’s podcast entitled “The Wrecking of the FBI,” sub-titled “How President Donald Trump is destroying U.S. counter-intelligence from the inside, published in “The Atlantic” on July 16th comes a disturbing picture of the FBI in Trump 2.0.  The  interview lasted an hour (and can potentially be heard in its entirety on YouTube.) This is only a small segment, with editorial comments.

Frum was a speechwriter for George H Bush who coined the term “axis of evil” and a stalwart in the neo-Conservative movement from Reagan through McCain. In 2016, Frum announced that he was voting for Hillary Clinton and subsequently became one of the founding members of the No Labels movement and a Never Trumper. He is now an Editor at “The Atlantic” and also has a podcast.

Summarized below are some snippets from the interview with former FBI counter-intelligence officer Peter Strzok. As someone who has actually been inside the FBI offices in New York City (as part of a Book Expo America presentation for writers of  crime fiction), the entire interview is informative and absolutely terrifying in its implications. It makes me even more convinced that those born when I was born (Baby Boomers) have gotten the best this country has to offer, whether that means weather, salaries, progress towards equality for all, leadership, or, as in this interview, a competent FBI protecting United States citizens.

The interview led off by admitting that the FBI of the past had some notable excesses, especially under J. Edgar Hoover, as when he pursued Martin Luther King or during the McCarthy Era hearings of the 50s. However, in the 70s, safeguards were put in place, which Frum enumerates. Whether any of those guidelines and rule changes are being adhered to by the current Trump 2.0 group, which seems to feel that no set of rules (including the Constitution) applies to them, is a  relevant question. And one that the interview  answers with a negative slant. These appointees who are spectacularly ill-suited for their job(s) need to be relieved of their positions, whether as Secretary of Defense or as the non-medical person causing measles to come back with a vengeance. (And there are many more…too many to list them all. In fact, during the interview, Strzok did discuss the “play acting” that people like Kristi Noem seem intent on displaying, dressing up in outfits and sharing all with social media—even if what is shared is inaccurate or an outright lie,)

You won’t sleep well at night if you listen to the entire interview…and this is only about 10% of the interview’s content.

former FBI agent Peter Strzok

Former FBI agent Peter Strzok.

Strzok:  “All of those people you see having these different sorts of formal and informal pressure placed upon them to move them out of the way, either by resignation, retirement, firing whatever the case may be,” said Peter Strzok, former FBI counter-intelligence officer, currently involved in two lawsuits against the Department of Justice for unfair firing (much like the daughter of James Comey, Maurene Comey).

Strzok was interviewed by David Frum, the 65-year-old Editor of the “Atlantic” on July 16th on his podcast, and the news from behind-the-scenes on the current state of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not encouraging. Strzok sketched an agency that has lost its experts and is promoting totally unqualified people into top positions, people who Strzok says are unqualified, lazy and have no  idea what they are doing.

David Frum:  This question from Frum made me laugh (and then it made me cry): “The special genius of Kash Patel is he just doesn’t care. He has no regard for the FBI as an institution. No, I mean, if we say there’s a special Nobel Prize for Bobby Kennedy Jr. as maybe the worst Cabinet secretary, not just of this administration but of all time, the most inappropriate, the most “who shouldn’t have the job,” Kash Patel may not quite match a pro-polio secretary of Health and Human Services, but he’s an honorable mention, right?” (And let’s not forget Patel’s truly Crazy Eyes!) Trying to pick the most tragically unqualified among the Trump appointees is difficult, since 90% are so inept. (I had a few moments where I thought Marco Rubio might acquit himself with honor, but those moments passed.) We are now a kakistocracy.

Strzok responded: “And it’s not only malevolence and lack of care; it’s also lack of competence.” He went on to say, “Clearly Donald Trump is the motivating force and at the FBI, it’s Kash Patel and to a certain extent Dan Bongino who are motive force, but there are people around them who are taking care of the particulars or informing them of the particulars to be acted on. But for Kash, it’s not just a lack of caring; it’s an utter lack of knowledge.”

Oh, good. A Know-Nothing is calling the shots at the FBI.

How does that stack up with the mission to keep our country safe that the FBI  faces?

Strzok:  “There are not enough FBI agents and analysts and investigators to counter all the threats of terrorism, counterintelligence, white-collar crime, public corruption, gangs—all of it. You name it, there’s not enough. So it is very much, one, you’re having to prioritize which threats you do work, and it is essentially very much a zero-sum game. If you take people off of one topic, you’re putting them on another, but you’re losing somewhere else…Look—if we move these people to work immigration, you’ve got to understand we’re going to not be working on this or not be working on that, and your exposure and your threat in those areas, your call at the end of the day, but if you do this, this is the cost that you’re gonna have to pay in the way that trickles out down the line.”

Oh. Great, (she said sarcastically.) So, with Iran mad as a wet hen about our bombing of their nuclear facilities, the FBI is not fully staffed and not totally on  alert for terrorist actions aimed at U.S. cities and U.S. citizens?

Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic book cover by David Frum

Trumpocracy: The Corruption of the American Republic book cover by David Frum

Frum soldiered on, asking the question we should all be asking about all of the agencies that DOGE and DJT have attacked and attempted to destroy. “What is the state of our counterintelligence facilities? There are a lot of reports that suggest there have been important resignations, that there are less qualified people running counter-terrorism. How does that look to you?”

Strzok:  “Well, I think there is very much a greater vulnerability than there was prior to Kash Patel showing up…The people who arrive, traditionally, at the senior level of the organizations have gone through a variety of assignments, both in the field as an investigator, as well as at headquarters doing a variety of things to gain expertise, to run larger programs, to interact with the inter-agency community and to understand, say, you’re a counter-terrorism agent.”

As you can imagine, this former counter-intelligence agent thinks the current crop of agents is woefully under-prepared and, on top of that, they may be lazy. (That rumor has actually gained credence with Bongino, the former podcaster, complaining about how “hard” the job is.)

Strzok: “I don’t want to turn this into a gripe session about the senior management of the FBI—Dan Bongino goes on Fox News and he acts astonished that everything we face is a 10 out 10, like the nines out 10, we don’t even hear about. And says ‘I barely get home to see my wife and it’s like we’re divorced.’  Dude, what the hell do you think has been going on for the past 20, 30, 40 years by all the people at the FBI and you’ve been on the job for five minutes and you’re complaining?” (Italics Frum’s).

Strzok:  “Yeah, and I think they’re fundamentally lazy, and I’m talking about Kash Patel and Dan Bongino. I think Kash Patel has spent the entirety of his life cozying up to political figures that he could hitch his wagon to, whether it’s Devin Nunes and then Donald Trump and otherwise selling God knows what on various podcasts, whether it’s, you know, things that are not of substantive value.”

Buttressing the basic argument that the current crop of agents may not be the most qualified or experienced is this further Strzok quote:  “And so by the time it gets to the point where you’re on that senior staff advising the director and deputy director what to do, you’ve had probably 20 years of various experience learning this and doing this. Well, when you come in with purges, and you’re Patel and Bongino and trying to get rid of everybody so you can bring in (loyalist) people…The deputy director of the FBI traditionally has always been an agent—Dan Bongino is the first in memory who isn’t—who has a deep understanding of how the bureau works and an accomplished track record within that organization.”

BEE GONE book by Connie Wilson

BEE GONE book by Connie Wilson

So, who’s minding the FBI store?

Strzok: “We are supporting in many ways Israeli efforts against Iran—that when it comes to a potential Iranian response, whether that’s through proxies, whether they have sleeper personnel here, whether they have visitors capable of coming into the United States, whether they have established capabilities out of the Iranian intersection or the mission to the UN. The people who know that, the people who are on the street who have that knowledge, one, at a senior level may be gone; two, at a street level, may have gotten pulled to go work elsewhere (and declined a reposting to Alabama, in Frum’s example).”

The expertise drain, either through re-settlement as a form of firing, or by actual firing of qualified agents (see the Maureen Comey story this week) is hurting the FBI.

Strzok:  “Part of what you do is, there’s a continuum of that sort of lesson as a baby investigator, as a probationary agent learning to understand what things are worth doing and what things are kind of spinning your wheels.”

But things are improving, right? We don’t have to lose sleep at night about the FBI being completely ineffectual?

Strzok: “And the problem is: If you don’t have that expertise, you are going to tend to flail. And if you’ve gotten rid of all the other people who can act as sort of wise consiglieres to tell you, Look, boss—it sounds bad, but this really is probably not what we should be focusing on. Let whoever run this out. Here are the things that you really need to focus on. Those people, those voices don’t exist anymore. And there’s only so much you can do to reach down and pluck somebody up—again, there are a lot of really great agents and analysts, but they just, they don’t have that benefit. You can’t suddenly bestow on somebody an extra five years of senior experience. You can’t do that.”

scales of justice

scales of justice

“All of those things are going on. And so when you say we’re going to take 30 percent of our workforce and move it over to rounding up immigrants, not even violent immigrants—we’re just going to round up immigrants so we can get our numbers up—those people come, not entirely, but one of the places they come from are all those folks who are doing it. So not only do you have,,, a brain drain, particularly at a senior level of people who are getting forced out because a lot of them, by the way, senior counterintelligence people happen to be involved with the investigation of Donald Trump allegedly maintaining illegally classified documents at his place at Mar-a-Lago but you have any number of people who were in some way, shape, or form looking at combating foreign influence in our elections.”

“And so whether it was 2016, whether it was things like the Hunter Biden laptop, perhaps it was whether or not the Chinese were or weren’t trying to influence our election, the people who had the expertise and knowledge to do that are getting forced out. Units are getting disbanded. In the case of foreign influence, there’s an entire task force that was disbanded with a corresponding set of folks at DOJ reportedly that were all reassigned somewhere else. And so you’ve got both expertise loss, and on the ground you’ve got investigative-manpower loss. And so those things, there’s no question in my mind that we are more vulnerable than we were.”

 

Was 2024 Rigged? More Strange Days Ahead.

trio of Elon Musk, Donald Trump and Peter Thiel

trio of Elon Musk, Donald Trump and Peter Thiel

Has it ever occurred to you that Elon Musk, with his Starlink expertise, may well have “fixed” the vote for DJT in 2024? I’m sure it has. Certain irregularities were noted in some of the swing states. Investigation of this has been ongoing and a Substack writer has assembled the article below. If I could find the writer’s name, it would appear here. I filled in the blank for being on the receiving end of further articles, but the name of the actual investigator/writer was MIA, as far as I can tell. Maybe that is for purposes of safety.  You either get credit or blame. If you’ve watched “Good Night and Good Luck” that showed recently on CNN, you know that speaking truth to power is the rule to protect our democracy.

Is the article below well-researched enough to be labeled as “truth?” You can be the judge of that. I’m not vouching for it or its writer, but I am sharing it, because it confirms the suspicions that many of us harbor about the 2024 presidential race.

Again, do your own further research and—if you find the name of this Substack writer—I’ll happily give full credit (or blame?) to that individual, but I was not quite ready to sign up for $55. I was ready to consider this individual’s thoughts on what may have happened. I still am. I’m not swearing on a stack of Bibles that this is the truth, but it certainly has a lot of food for thought.

So, chew on this.

****************

A Power Cord Becomes a Backdoor

In March 2021, Leonard Leo—the judicial kingmaker behind the modern conservative legal machine—sold a quiet Chicago company by the name of Tripp Lite for $1.65 billion. The buyer: Eaton Corporation, a global power infrastructure conglomerate that just happened to have a partnership with Peter Thiel’s Palantir.

To most, Tripp Lite was just a hardware brand—battery backups, surge protectors, power strips. But in America’s elections, Tripp Lite devices were something else entirely.

They are physically connected to ES&S central tabulators and Electionware servers, and Dominion tabulators and central servers across the country. And they aren’t dumb devices. They are smart UPS units—programmable, updatable, and capable of communicating directly with the election system via USB, serial port, or Ethernet.

ES&S systems, including central tabulators and Electionware servers, rely on Tripp Lite UPS devices. ES&S’s Electionware suite runs on Windows OS, which automatically trusts connected UPS hardware.

If Eaton pushed an update to those UPS units, it could have gained root-level access to the host tabulation environment—without ever modifying certified election software.

In Dominion’s Democracy Suite 5.17, the drivers for these UPS units are listed as “optional”—meaning they can be updated remotely without triggering certification requirements or oversight. Optional means unregulated. Unregulated means invisible. And invisible means perfect for infiltration

2024 VOTE 

On Monday, an investigator’s story finally hit the news cycle: Pro V&V, one of only two federally accredited testing labs, approved sweeping last-minute updates to ES&S voting machines in the months leading up to the 2024 election—without independent testing, public disclosure, or full certification review.

These changes were labeled “de minimis”—a term meant for trivial tweaks. But they touched ballot scanners, altered reporting software, and modified audit files—yet were all rubber-stamped with no oversight.

That revelation is a shock to the public.

But for those who’ve been digging into the bizarre election data since November, this isn’t the headline—it’s the final piece to the puzzle. While Pro V&V was quietly updating equipment in plain sight, a parallel operation was unfolding behind the curtain—between tech giants and Donald Trump.

And it started with a long forgotten sale.

ELECTION FRAUD?

BallotProof: The Front-End for Scrubbing Democracy

Enter the ballot scrubbing platform BallotProof. Co-created by Ethan Shaotran, a longtime employee of Elon Musk and current DOGE employee, BallotProof was pitched as a transparency solution—an app to “verify” scanned ballot images and support election integrity.

With Palantir’s AI controlling the backend, and BallotProof cleaning the front, only one thing was missing: the signal to go live.

September 2024: Eaton and Musk Make It Official

Then came the final public breadcrumb:
In September 2024, Eaton formally partnered with Elon Musk.
The stated purpose? A vague, forward-looking collaboration focused on “grid resilience” and “next-generation communications.”

But buried in the partnership documents was this line:

“Exploring integration with Starlink’s emerging low-orbit DTC infrastructure for secure operational continuity.”

The Activation: Starlink Goes Direct-to-Cell

That signal came on October 30, 2024—just days before the election, Musk activated 265 brand new low Earth orbit (LEO) V2 Mini satellites, each equipped with Direct-to-Cell (DTC) technology capable of processing, routing, and manipulating real-time data, including voting data, through his satellite network.

DTC doesn’t require routers, towers, or a traditional SIM. It connects directly from satellite to any compatible device—including embedded modems in “air-gapped” voting systems, smart UPS units, or unsecured auxiliary hardware.

From that moment on:
– Commands could be sent from orbit
– Patch delivery became invisible to domestic monitors
– Compromised devices could be triggered remotely

This groundbreaking project that should have taken two-plus years to build, was completed in just under ten months.

Elon Musk boasts endlessly about everything he’s launching, building, buying—or even just thinking about—whether it’s real or not. But he pulls off one of the largest and fastest technological feats in modern day history… and says nothing? One might think that was kind of… “weird.”

Lasers From Space

Elon Musk

Elon Musk.

 

According to New York Times reporting, on October 5—just before Starlink’s DTC activation—Musk texted a confidant:

“I’m feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.”

Then, an hour later:

“This isn’t something on the chessboard, so they’ll be quite surprised. ‘Lasers’ from space.”

This wasn’t a theory. It was a full-scale operation. A systemic digital occupation—clean, credentialed, and remote-controlled.

The Outcome

Data that makes no statistical sense. A clean sweep in all seven swing states.
The fall of the Blue Wall. Eighty-eight counties flipped red—not one flipped blue.
Every victory landed just under the threshold that would trigger an automatic recount. Donald Trump outperformed expectations in down-ballot races with margins never before seen—while Kamala Harris simultaneously underperformed in those exact same areas.

If one were to accept these results at face value—Donald Trump, a 34-count convicted felon, supposedly outperformed Ronald Reagan. According to the co-founder of the Election Truth Alliance:

“These anomalies didn’t happen nationwide. They didn’t even happen across all voting methods—this just doesn’t reflect human voting behavior.”

They were concentrated.
Targeted.
Specific to swing states and Texas—and specific to Election Day voting.

And the supposed explanation? “Her policies were unpopular.”

Let’s think this through logically. We’re supposed to believe that in all the battleground states, Democratic voters were so disillusioned by Vice President Harris’s platform that they voted blue down ballot—but flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket?

Not in early voting.
Not by mail.
With exception to Nevada, only on Election Day.
And only after a certain threshold of ballots had been cast—where VP Harris’s numbers begin to diverge from her own party, and Trump’s suddenly begin to surge. As President Biden would say, “C’mon, man.”

In the world of election data analysis, there’s a term for that: vote-flipping algorithm.

Billionaires and Tech Giants Pulled Off the Crime of the Century

Why? There wasn’t just one reason—there were many.

Elon Musk himself hinted at the stakes: he faced the real possibility of a prison sentence if Trump lost. He launched his bid for Twitter—at $20 billion over market value—just 49 days after Putin invaded Ukraine. That alone should have raised every red flag. But when the ROI is $15 trillion in mineral rights tied to Ukraine losing the war and geopolitical deals Trump could green light, it wasn’t a loss—it was leverage.

It’s no secret Musk was in communication with Putin for over two years. He even granted Starlink access to Russian forces.

Then there’s Peter Thiel and the so-called “broligarchs”—tech billionaires who worship at the altar of shower-avoidant blogger Curtis Yarvin. They casually joke about “humane genocide for non-producers” and have long viewed democracy as a nuisance—an obstacle to their vision of hypercapitalism and themselves as the permanent ruling elite.

Well, what is the elimination of Medicaid if not “humane genocide”—and does anyone really wonder why his 40-year-old protégé and political rookie, JD Vance, is Vice President? With this technology in place, if the third-term legislation were to pass, it would hand Vance a minimum of twelve years at the helm of Thiel’s regime.

And of course, Donald Trump himself:
He spent a year telling his followers he didn’t need their votes—at one point stating,

“…in four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.”

Trump was facing eighty-eight felony indictments—he was desperate to avoid conviction and locked in a decades-long alliance with Vladimir Putin. An alliance that’s now impossible to ignore—look no further than his policy trail.

He froze aid to Ukraine and has threatened to place sanctions on them, while planning to lift sanctions off Russia. He openly campaigned for anti-EU candidates, and sided with Russia in multiple key United Nations votes related to the Ukraine conflict.

[Comments on the interview above]

(*Note that Elon testifies that DJT did not seem concerned about 2 so-called “assassination attempts,” one of which supposedly hit his ear, which, miraculously, healed almost overnight leaving no trace of such an injury.) Elon’s assertions about illegals being bussed to swing states are unverified and have no basis in fact. Conversely, Musk’s antagonistic attitude towards people of color, a product of his South African heritage, is well-documented as is that of his father before him. The purpose of “no ID to vote, says Musk, is “obviously” to influence elections when there are other viable explanations, but identification to vote has never been something that Democrats oppose. Elon lays out which 6 states need to be targeted late in the interview and note the many “obviously” affirmations, which are not “obvious” at all.

His admission that Pete Buttigieg did a good job is to his credit, but contentions that billionaires are “for sure” more in the Democratic camp are debatable.  The attack on the media as biased is, again, a GOP and Russian staple. Court comments are also part of the Communist playbook. Elon worries that “everything is on the side of the Dems” and denigrates Kamala Harris’s candidacy, saying that nobody voted for her. (Kamala was part of the elected ticket in 2020.)

Late-in-the-interview comments about not becoming a one-party elite ruling class are ironic; that is exactly what Elon’s infusion of cash was intended to create. The fact that Elon Musk denigrates Harris, (who was a woman of great achievement prior to her election as VP), is also telling. He puts her down continuously while ignoring the “marionette” nature of DJT’s public remarks. Many of Trump’s public statements make no sense at all lately, so comparing the remarks of the two candidates word-for-word as to eloquence would be interesting.

Musk claims that billionaires are terrified that their support for Harris’s candidacy might come out, which seems to be simply his view, again unsupported by fact. Epstein’s name comes up late in the interview, which is interesting considering how he later announced that Trump’s name would appear on the Lolita Express rolls and that he was involved, which has been previously reported. “If Trump wins, we can do some housecleaning and shed light on things. Adhere to freedom of speech within the bounds of the law” are remarks made late in the interview, which is also ironic, as there has been little effort to stay within the bounds of the law but extreme efforts to do the opposite. Elon notes that he fears a Harris win would put “X”—which he had recently bought and which he had semi-ruined—out of business. He mentions a lawsuit against “X” regarding hiring permanent residents or citizens. He mentions a lawsuit against Space X for trying to hire asylum seekers. He also mentions Stalin’s chief enforcer, who is mentioned in the recent documentary “Mr. Nobody Against Putin.”  Elon admits that he fears a Democratic majority might shut his businesses down. Obviously, he decided to back the candidate who would shine on his pursuits.

Elon’s remarks about freedom and opportunity open the door to interpretation about the freedom and opportunity that he has bought for himself and his own pursuits. Talk about “improving the liberty of Americans” ignores his future role as the DOGEfather, firing people willy-nilly with  chainsaw tactics.

Musk’s remarks about over-regulation have merit, but doing away with all regulatory agencies is folly. “There are so many different regulatory agencies and so many different regulations that we won’t be able to get anything done.” Some truth in those remarks, but let’s not forget that the developer of the Titan ignored regulations in pursuit of deep-see tourism to the wreck of the “Titanic” and we all know how that ended (good documentary about it streaming now.) He also touches on vaccination. “I don’t enjoy hurting other people. I have a hard time imagining, ‘Why would someone do that?'” (This from the man who literally ruined many careers with his DOGE antics.)

“There’s a small % of Americans who have anger management issues that cause them to hurt other people. If you don’t incarcerate them, they will hurt other people.” This leads Musk to talk about empathy for the victims, rather than the perpetrators. In examining anger management issues, Musk might have looked closer to home to the man he supported who has been on an 8-year-long crusade for retribution and is now exercising his power as president to “punish” all who defied him. (The law firm where Kamala Harris’s husband worked was one target, among many). 

There is an interesting Tucker Carlson reference to Minneapolis as being a nice city “pre George Floyd.” This was before Vance Boelter (on left) began systematically trying to wipe out all elected Democrats in the city in pre-dawn raids. Musk further decries the deterioration of modern American cities, which Carlson terms “ubiquitous.” Musk says, “I’ve got to lead by being compassionate” and then goes on a Trump-designated stampede to literally ruin the careers and lives of many in the sights of DOGE. (Shakes head.) Musk’s axe-murderer example is pretty far out and leads Tucker to call this “anti-civilization.” Movement to de-criminalize crime is brought up and seems to point most notably to the MAGA crowd that attacked the Capitol on January 6th and were subsequently found guilty, sentenced and then pardoned wholesale with no real attempt to pardon in any kind of reasonable, sensible, logical manner (which also seems to be true of most DOGE initiatives.)

Near the end of the interview, Musk comments on Europe, saying that the birth rate is declining (Musk has 14 kids by multiple women, one of whom is trans-gender and hates him) and that that needs to be addressed. He also rails against censorship in Europe. Those of us who reside in Austin are watching Musk’s assembling of a sort of harem of his offspring and their mothers, which isn’t going too well, so far. It is also designed to help with the housing shortage for new Tesla employees. He then begins talking about the decline of religion and the increasing secular nature of society.  Work takes the place of religion, says Musk. (Someone please remind the GOP of the founding fathers wish that there be separation of church and state.) “For me, I’m culturally Christian but also went to a Hebrew pre-school. I didn’t fall for believing all of these religious stories. I try to understand as much as possible about reality. In physics you’re not supposed to believe everything absolutely. If your rocket is designed with physics in mind correctly it will get to orbit, or otherwise it will not.” (Lately, more “not” than “will”). 

“We definitely went to the moon. How about Mars? It was a remarkable piece of technology for 1969 and it was an important ideological battle with Communism, because they couldn’t put a man on the moon and capitalism could.”

 

Tariff or Not-to-Tariff: That Is the Question

ships in LA harbor (photo by Maggie Shannon)

ships in LA harbor (Photo by Maggie Shannon)

From the New York Times reporters Tony Romm and Ana Swanson on 5/29/2025, comes this introduction to a day that has seen its share of pronouncements that could significantly impact the U.S. economy, with a Maggie Shannon photo of ships in harbor waiting to unload:  “A head-spinning series of court rulings over President Trump’s signature tariffs left Washington, Wall Street and much of the world trying to discern the future of U.S. trade policy on Thursday, including whether import taxes would fall meaningfully or if the administration would get the legal green light to upend the global trading system.

Less than 24 hours after the U.S. Court of International Trade blocked steep tariffs that Mr. Trump had imposed on trading partners using emergency powers, a separate court temporarily paused that decision, sowing even more chaos on a day filled with economic uncertainty.”

The CNN headline on my afternoon “breaking news” chyron  was federal appeals court restores Trump’s ability to levy tariffs with “emergency powers.” Administrative stay by the Federal Appeals Court. (Apparently the original ruling was in response to suits brought by the Attorney Generals of various states and possibly the Democratic Governors, whom Illinois Governor Pritzker has been attempting to rally as a cohesive whole.)

AZ Attorney General Kristin Mayes

AZ Attorney General Kristin Mayes

The Democratic Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes said the first court “invalidated all of the tariffs, which are really taxes on our families. They have the capacity to crush small businesses.” Kristin was a Republican who won by only 280 votes as a Democrat. She is only the third “out” lesbian office-holder as Attorney General and changed parties from Republican to Democratic in 2019, because of Donald J. Trump.  Her office indicted 18 people in connection with the attempt to install an illegal slate of presidential electors and, therefore, overturn the election of Joseph Biden in 2020.

 

The White House is saying “they have a work-around,” a remark  delivered by Peter Navarro, whom Elon Musk denounced as “as dumb as a box of rocks.” (* Be sure to catch Elon’s Farewell Press Conference on TV tomorrow, 5/30/2025.)  Said Ms. Mayes: “For the first time ever, the attorney generals of America agree with Rand Paul, who says the power rests with Congress.” 

Arizona’s Attorney General said: “I believe the United States Supreme Court agrees with the rule of law and that they’re gonna’ say, ‘Look. Wait a second. This is a vast expansion of presidential powers that goes far beyond what Congress delegated to the executive branch. I think we’re going to win at the end of the day. We’re hearing, especially from our small businesses that they are having trouble ordering things like coffee from Mexico for a coffee shop. We have small businesses who don’t know how extensive the costs are going to be once the imports make it through L.A. ports. I think we’re very worried about people in Arizona and other states to gain access. This is not good for our economy; it has the potential to wreck our small businesses.”

I was hopeful that the few Republicans who seem to retain a brain and a heart would seize upon the first ruling to say (to DJT), “Well, the court says you don’t have the power to arbitrarily set tariffs, so we have to stand by that.”

Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana

Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana

Right now, Senator John Kennedy of the Republican Judiciary Committee is speaking and is saying, “The only good tariff is a dead tariff.” Speaking from Madisonville, Louisiana: “If these tariffs lead to higher prices that’s gonna’ create a political problem for us in the mid-terms.” He is saying Trump represented hope versus Harris’s hurt but has just noted that the White House goes from zero to “screw everyone” in short order.

Kennedy, who was first elected in 2017,  is considering the backlash from the voting public.  He is saying, “We gave that authority (to enact tariffs) to the President, for better or worse.” He says he doesn’t feel that Trump has exceeded his authority.  He is being asked about the “big beautiful bill” to which he said, It’s not as beautiful as it can be.” He is now endorsing tax cuts. $4.3 trillion increase in the national debt is being mentioned as bad, a very negative effect of DJT’s budget.

 

 

Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana.

“I want to cut spending until we run out of votes. I want to renew the tax cuts.” (John Kennedy on Trump’s tax bill.)

Trump posted a screed attacking the courts, which, of course, is detrimental. Timothy M. Reif and Leonard Leo are now in Trump’s sights and he is requesting that the Supreme Court weigh in.

Peter Navarro:  “The tariffs remain in place.  The courts have told us, ‘Go do it another way.’ Even if we lose, we will do it another way.”  Ironically, Trump’s trade advisor commented on the lack of trust in “rogue judges,” despite the fact that Trump appointed the judge in question.

Brandon Gill (R, Tx))

Brandon Gill (R, Texas) is the youngest Republican member of Congress at age 30.

Congressman Brandon Gill (R, Texas) immediately began talking about usurping the President’s authority, calling it “a huge problem. I don’t agree with the ruling. I agree with the President. The American public can see that we have a large problem with large trade deficits and Trump is taking action to alleviate that problem. Just a few months ago the Senate took up the question of whether the President had the authority to institute tariffs and they said he did.” (This was alluded to by Louisiana Senator John Kennedy in previous statements on CNN .) Congressman Gill also endorsed codifying the DOGE cuts that Elon Musk made, including eliminating NPR.

“It’s chaos now in the courts,” said the CNN commentator on Anderson Cooper’s 5 p.m. (CDT) program.

Nancy Gertner, Senior Lecturer at Harvard Law School, said Trump cannot keep his mouth shut. “It’s quite clear what is going on here. He wants to control Harvard and the institutions that could be the source of opposition to him. It’s an over-reach for what he is trying to do.” 149 suits have been launched against DJT  in his time in office for his overreach, versus 6 for “W” and 8 for Obama in 8 years of their presidencies. John E. Jones III, President of Dickinson College, said “Trump is a lawyer’s nightmare because he can’t stop talking. His own words will give the lie to his stated objections. They turn out to be pretext for what he wants to do.”

It looks, to those of us without legal degrees (on the outside, looking in), as though the MAGA administration is shopping for courts that DJT may have stacked. If he doesn’t like the decision by one court, he moves to another and counts on delay. (Trump has a lengthy history of launching lawsuits and has recently been suing CBS over a “Sixty Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris and has been involved in a dispute with ABC—which ponied up—over a remark on George Stephanopoulus’ Sunday morning talk show.)

Sir Keir Starmer, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

Sir Keir Starmer, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

One of the judges Trump blasted, Leonard Leo, has a long history of trying to shift the court to the right in his many years on the bench.  The declaration of an emergency is the problem with the way the tariffs were enacted, says Justin Wolfers, Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan. “The right thing for any country to do now is to sit on their hands,” rather than negotiate, said Wolfers, noting that the bottom line is that being publicly humiliated the way Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer of Britain was during his recent visit,  is not a very appealing prospect for the leader of any country.

Putting a malignant narcissist who has a well-known reputation for dishonesty and corruption in office is turning out to be a not-very-good decision for the welfare of the United States economy, which seems to be in limbo at the moment.

 

 

How’s the Insurrection Coming Along, Then?

by Mark Gimein, Managing Editor of “The Week”

“Am I the sucker? For as long as I can remember I thought that the United States stood for democratic values and individual liberty.  These were supposed to be the guiding lights of American foreign policy, even if the principles might not always be absolute or the path to them always direct.  Critics of the U.S., both external and internal, insisted that this was a delusion at best, and more likely simply a lie.  Yet for most of the post-World War II era these ideas served the U.S. very well.  To put it bluntly, Thanks to them, we won the Cold War.

OR SO I THOUGHT.

But obviously President Trump and those who have Trump’s ear think differently. He never had much interest in the “suckers and losers” (his words about the American soldiers who died in France) who bought all that stuff about defending democracy.  Trump, like Vice-President J.D. Vance and others in his orbit, prefers a hard-nosed realpolitik.  If Ukraine shares its wealth, we might help in its defense.  Or we might not.

JUSTIFICATIONS

Trump justifies this by calling Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, a dictator and saying Ukraine started it all anyway—making mincemeat of the truth and decades of U.S. foreign policy goals in a single tweet. The idea that Russia is not to blame for the Ukraine war is not original to Trump.  University of Chicago political scientist John J. Mearsheimer has been saying that for over a decade, starting with the  paper titled “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault.”  The “realists” like Mearsheimer urge us to drop talk of freedom and principles and see the world as just the sum of the great powers’ spheres of influence.

THE GREAT POWERS

This is how Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping see the world.  They would like nothing more than to sit down with Trump and carve up the globe—taking a nibble of Latvia, tightening the noose around Taiwan. (*If you were paying attention during the Oscars last night, the Latvian team that collected their Oscar for “Flow” referenced the fighting already going on on one of their borders, which the world does not hear about.)

Jan 6 siege of the Capitol

Jan. 6 siege of the Capitol

Each bargain might make sense to a deal-maker like Trump.  But eventually losing our principles will mean losing our influence.  And, in the end, it will be the U.S. that looks like the sucker at the table.”

POST SCRIPT

Later, within the magazine he manages, we learn from Charles P. Pierce (“Esquire”) that Trump specifically fired the lawyers charged with resisting illegal presidential orders.  Nor was it reassuring when Hegseth explained that the JAGs had been fired to stop them from being “roadblocks to anything that happens.” Paul McLeary in “Politico” said that the former Fox News host promotes a swaggering “warrior ethos” that rejects the Geneva Convention(s).

Trump’s purge, said Tom Nichols in “The Atlantic” is “the next step in his pursuit of total power.  After capturing the intelligence services, the Justice Department, and the FBI, the Pentagon is the last piece he needs to establish the foundations for authoritarian control of the U.S. government. With his generals in charge, Trump can start building a military that is loyal to him and not to the Constitution. And the Black general that Trump recently fired, Gen. Charles Q. Brown, Jr., was replaced by a man he met while on a trip to Iraq, three-star general Dan “Razin” Caine. a white retired three-star general (retired and has to be brought back from retirement) who met Trump while wearing a red MAGA hat and said, “I think you’re great, Sir. I’ll kill for you, Sir.”

And if he wouldn’t, there are always the recently-released-from-prison Proud Boys.

Scott Beck & Bryan Woods Talk “Heretic”

One of the most interesting and well-scripted films out now is “Heretic,” a horror/suspense thriller written and directed by the boys from Bettendorf (Iowa), Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, who gave us “A Quiet Place” back in 2018. During  my interview with them at SXSW on March 10, 2018,  I wrote, “I’m predicting ‘A Quiet Place’ will take off like a rocket, helping Beck and Woods receive even more deserved recognition.” That prediction is holding up well with this third film from the dynamic duo. The film earned back its production costs in its first weekend. It was sitting at $22 million in revenue, worldwide, as of November 14, 2024 for a film that cost less than $10 million.

“Heretic” depicts two Mormon missionaries, Sister Paxton (Chloe East of “The Fabelmans”) and Sister Barnes (Sophie Thatcher of “Yellowjackets”) accepting an invitation to share their faith with a seemingly kindly older gentleman named Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant). He tells them his wife is busy in the kitchen baking a blueberry pie, when inviting them into his house.  Since missionaries from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would not enter his small home if there were not a woman present to chaperone their discussion, the rest of the film becomes a game of cat-and-mouse, belief and disbelief, control of the two girls by a man who may or may not be diabolical.

Scott Beck, Connie Wilson, Bryan Woods (L to R) in Austin at SXSW 2018.

(Left to Right) Scott Beck, Connie Wilson and Bryan Woods at SXSW (Austin, TX) on March 10, 2018.

When “A Quiet Place” opened SXSW in 2018, I interviewed Scott Beck & Bryan Woods in Austin. We talked about our mutual hometown area and how it contributed to the phenomenal success of creating “A Quiet Place” and then handing off their creation to John Krasinski (who contributed to the script). Beck & Woods have moved on to give us another wildly original and well-plotted current film, “Heretic,” starring Hugh Grant. Two young female Mormon missionaries pay a call on Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant) and place their lives in danger while discussing their faith.

Anyone who has seen “A Quiet Place” knows that, dialogue-wise, it is spare. The creatures might hear you and come for you, so mum’s the word. The 2023 sci-fi outing “25” that Beck & Woods did last, starring Adam Driver, was also more action, less talk. This one is dialogue heavy and Hugh Grant pulls it off beautifully.

Hugh Grant in "Heretic."

Hugh Grant in “Heretic.”

SCRIPT

With “Heretic,” Beck & Woods have created an original script for a film that is a very in-depth talk about religion and life-after-death. It’s all couched within a horror movie concept. Talk—and deep concepts—dominate the movie. As Scott Beck told Matt Grobar of “Deadline”: “Heretic was something that Bryan and I had just been scratching at—the idea of religious ideologist Trojan horsing into a genre movie—for years and years.”

Bryan Woods: “We started writing the film 10 years ago, and got to the young missionaries meeting Mr. Reed.  They sit down with him.  Mr. Reed opens his mouth, and immediately we kind of stopped dead in our tracks, because he has a genius-level IQ. He has studied all the world’s religions, and we felt like we had not done that work yet.  We’ve been interested in religion and cults our whole lives, but we hadn’t sat down and read the Quran or the Book of Mormon.  We hadn’t filled our heads with enough information.  So we spent the last decade just enriching our point of view—speaking with a lot of people, sitting down with missionaries, reading a lot of atheist thinkers and ingesting their points of view.  The reason we picked up the script again and kept writing wasn’t so much that we reached a point of, ‘We did it! We’ve solved religion! or, ‘We’ve read enough to understand Mr. Reed.’ It was actually a confluence of personal and professional events.”

Woods said, “Every time we’d write a line, we’d have to stop and then go to Wikipedia to research something.  It just felt inorganic, and so we did some fun research over the course of 10 years so that it could be a first language once we got further into writing Reed.” Woods told the “Hollywood Reporter” (David Brians, Nov. 9, 2024), “We also set out to make a movie that was deeply personal in terms of our relationship with the subject matter of belief and disbelief and what happens when you die.  So, after pouring out all our neuroses and spilling our guts into this movie, it’s very exciting to see it connect with audiences, to say the least. We read interesting thinkers like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins.  It wasn’t rigorous research every night at the library, but we read a lot of atheist thinkers and contemporary philosophers, as well as holy books we’d never read like the Book of Mormon or the Quran, just so that it could be a first language once we got further into writing Reed.”

GENESIS

Sophie Thatcher & Chloe East in "Heretic."

Sophie Thatcher & Chloe East in “Heretic.”

Sophie Thatcher (L) and Chloe East in “Heretic.”

Woods: “It was just in our lives we had hit this emotional low point where it seemed like everything was going wrong.  At that low point, my father passed away unexpectedly from esophageal cancer…It was that kind of pain and depression. Confrontation with these large questions of, ‘What happens when you die? Is there something? Is there nothing?’ It was that moment where we were like, ‘It’s time to finally pick up the script and write it.’ Because we were feeling so raw emotionally.  We always felt that “Heretic” needed to be one of those projects that’s just embarrassingly personal, and we’ve always dreamed of doing a movie like that. It was time to express all of our fears and anxiety about what happens when you die and the mystery of death. So that’s where it came from, and once we sat down to write the script in earnest, it just poured out of us.”

 Scott Beck: “We wanted to swing in the opposite direction of “A Quiet Place” and “65”, two films that are void of dialogue and are straightforward thrillers.  For “Heretic” it was all about how we could weaponize dialogue and ideas about theology to create something that hopefully feels as scary a ‘A Quiet Place.’ There’s a line in the movie that goes ‘The more you know, the less you know’ and the older we get (they are 40), we find ourselves gravitating to the philosophy that life is a mystery.  And what happens when we die is the greatest mystery, but there’s something beautiful in not knowing.  There’s something beautiful in the pursuit of the truth of knowing, while also embracing the fact that you won’t know until it’s too late.” As the young men pointed out in various interviews, almost every horror movie has fear of death as a catalyst and plot point.

The pair told the University of Iowa alumni magazine, “Every scary movie is about the same thing.  It’s about our human fear of death and this question of what happens when you die.  We wanted to turn that conversation that we’ve been having since we were eleven years old (when the pair began making small films in the Iowa Quad Cities) into a movie.”

Bryan Woods and Scott Beck.

Bryan Woods (left) and Scott Beck at SXSW in Austin (TX) on March 10, 2018.

 

FILM FINANCING

 

Scott Beck: “I think it’s our responsibility as filmmakers not only to think creatively about the story, but to think creatively about how do we get movies made in this landscape right now, especially coming from the viewpoint that we love movies that aren’t based on anything else and ostensibly are original stories.  I think about ‘Heretic’ the same way I think about ‘A Quiet Place.’ When working on the script for these movies we didn’t think either were necessarily a home run, meaning we needed to protect ourselves to just have the means to make each movie.  So each movie was written in the spirit of, can we make this for $50,000 in our home state of Iowa? And best case scenario, can we get it made at the studio level with proper resources? ‘Heretic’ was certainly something, because of the content of having a theological debate in the vessel of a thriller, that we felt it may not be a home run, But, if so, a home like A24 could incubate that in a responsible way, both creatively and financially.  I think it’s in our interest, also, when creating these movies, to make sure that it feels like there’s a demand to see the movie in a theater.  So, while certain people have compared ‘Heretic’ to a stage play, we’re very adamant about the fact that it’s a piece of cinema. (It should be noted that the pair now owns “The Last Picture House” theater in Davenport, Iowa, where “Heretic” premiered on November 8th with one of the film’s stars, Chloe East, in attendance.)

The Last Picture House in Davenport, Iowa.

“The Last Picture House” in Davenport, Iowa.

Bryan Woods:  “There is a conversation, though, right now, that we’re picking up on in movie culture right now, this feeling of, ‘Oh, if only movies were cheaper then they would be more financially responsible and, therefore, more successful.’ It’s an interesting question to be asking, but, also, we would caution against that a little bit because you do want to preserve this feeling of spectacle, this feeling of going to a theater and seeing something special.  Big movies and studios that spend a lot of money on movies, that’s a great thing.  I think what’s not a great thing is just how boring it’s all gotten.  It’s gotten too easy to make white noise, and so taking risks on a big level, for us, it is a great thing.” Woods added, “With movies, they haven’t quite replicated that experiential feeling of going to a cinema, watching a piece of work with 200 strangers.” (to Matt Grobar, “Deadline”).

HUGH GRANT AND OTHER IMPOSSIBLE GETS

"Heretic" movie poster

“Heretic” movie poster

Scott Beck:  “We feel like one of the movie’s secret weapons is Hugh Grant. Hugh Grant is an actor who has charmed worldwide audiences with his romantic comedies, and yet this movie, we kind of weaponize that good will that he’s formed with an audience.  Partly because of that, the movie keeps you guessing.  ‘Am I in a dangerous situation or am I just perceiving danger that’s not really there?’”   Beck & Woods shared this marketing tactic with the University of Iowa alumni magazine in an interview.  Grant, himself, during an appearance on ‘Late Night with Seth Meyer,’  said of this uncharacteristic role, “I spent months building up a huge biography for the character. I don’t know if it helps at all, but it seems to calm me down. It’s better than Lorazepam. He (Mr. Reed) is not exactly charming. What’s so fabulous about this is that it’s so different.  What I was aiming for was a kind of groovy professor—a bit of a twat is the word.  He’s a prankster who just, for some reason, is not very popular so he over-compensates by being a bit too fun.”

Chloe East & Sophie Thatcher approach Mr. Reed's house in "Heretic."

Chloe East (L) & Sophie Thatcher (R) in front of Mr. Reed’s (Hugh Grant’s) house.

Commenting on his co-stars, Chloe East as Sister Paxton and Sophie Thatcher as Sister Barnes on “Late Night,” Grant praised their performances, saying, “They are properly good and very three-dimensional and likeable.  It could have happened that they came off as zealous Mormon boors.” As Beck & Woods have acknowledged, “Much of this movie is about dialogue and philosophical thoughts and ideas, a man who’s talking, almost mansplaining, but also two women who are trying to basically have a conversation between each other just on their faces.  Learning about how much people say when they don’t say anything has always been a good tool to have in our writing toolbox.” The two told me back in 2018 that it was a class in American sign language on campus at the University of Iowa that sparked “A Quiet Place” and, once again, the 2007 graduates of the University of Iowa in communication studies credit a class they took at Iowa on nonverbal communication with helping to  inspire their storytelling style. Both of the female leads grew up Mormon.

Both Steven Spielberg and Steven King have weighed in as admiring “Heretic.” Spielberg called up producer Stacey Sher, because Spielberg had cast Chloe in “The Fabelmans” and wanted to see where she had gone in her career. Beck & Woods asked Sher, producer of “Pulp Fiction,” to help them get permission to use all of the cultural touchstones they wanted in the movie, such as the rights disputes between Radiohead, Lana Del Rey and the Hollies.  There were also references to games like Monopoly. Said Bryan Woods, “There was no back-up plan! We were terrified. When we wrote that scene, we were elated and so proud of it, but then that feeling was instantly followed by: ‘This will never get off the page. We will never get Monopoly cleared.  We will never be able to air Radiohead’s dirty laundry.’ So it became a depressing moment, and that’s when you pick up the phone and you ask Stacey Sher to please help produce this movie with us. We asked her to help us do what felt like the impossible, which was get all of these pop cultural touchstones into the movie, so there was absolutely no back-up, and we were sweating it even up until three weeks ago.  There was some last-minute wrangling about rights,” Bryan Woods told Brian Davids of “The Hollywood Reporter.”

OTHER CAST

Hugh Grant as Mr. Reed.

Hugh Grant as Mr. Reed.

Chang-hoon Chung, the man who shot “The Handmaiden” and “Oldboy” did great work cinematically with the interior of the house. Topher Grant (“That 70s Show,” “BlacKkKlansman“) portrays Elder Kennedy. Also a huge help to the film’s success was Phil Messina, production designer and art director. Messina had worked on “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” (2013) and “The Hunger Games: Mockingjay” (2015) and “Mother” (2017). As Woods told Matt Grobar of “Deadline,” “We’re very visual writers, and I mean that literally.  Like, our script for “A Quiet Place” had certain pages that were completely blank, and then just had one word on it to emphasize a certain sound effect, or would have images and diagrams to help sell the concept of a modern-day silent film.  With “Heretic” we’re using the Monopoly board images in the script. We’re putting them in, how we see them all lay out. And to that end, the house layout as Scott and I are writing, we’re diagramming and drawing up the bad version of what the house looks like and how it connects.  It’s funny.  We write in a kind of dream logic, and there’s two of us.  There’s two brains, and sometimes we wonder if we’re like right and left brain, and then the two of us equal one brain.  It’s funny how, when we write, Scott will diagram something out.  He’ll have a door be on the left side and I’ll be like, ‘Oh, interesting.  I always saw it on the right side.’ So a big part of our process is drawing and diagramming so that we’re imagining the same movie.  Then you bring in someone like Phil Messina and he elevates it and helps us clarify some of the dream logic.” The house is like a Mobius strip and plays an important role in the plot.

THE ENDING

Chloe East in "Heretic."

Chloe East in “Heretic”

Chloe East as Sister Paxton in “Heretic.”

Beck:  “How do we finalize this ending and communicate an ambiguity, but an intentional ambiguity, so that it can anchor in people’s interpretations of the movie, in terms of their relationship with either being religious or non-religious, and the way they see the world. The butterfly felt like it was a proper symbol for that.” The open-ended interpretation of what happens (or doesn’t happen) reminded me of  “Twelve Monkeys,” which was able to be interpreted in more than one way and set off many discussions among fans and critics. The pair told CinemaBlend’s Eric Eisenberg:  “Well, the ending, the mark was always to present a larger question that’s a take home for the audience.  Our ambition with this film is that it’s a conversational starter.  Everybody has their own relationship to belief or disbelief, atheism, to being staunchly religious.  And it felt like this movie, if anything, can hold a mirror up to the questions of like, ‘Why do we believe what we believe?  How do we come to our own convictions?’  The end of the film presents, I think, that question in a very ambiguous way, but may be very overt.  There can be three, four, five different interpretations of how you walk away from that movie.  And the hope is that your interpretation of that reflects upon your own contradictions or your own reasonings to why you believe what you believe.”

WHAT’S NEXT?

“We have movies at different scales and passion will win out. And we love writing things that we don’t direct. So I hope it’s not going to be, we’ve got five great projects and only one of them comes to life. The next one we’re directing will probably be whatever scares us the most,” said Bryan Woods to “Deadline.” “We were terrified of making ‘Heretic’ because the whole conceptual framework of ‘Heretic’ is, can you replace the jump scare that we had been bored with and became our usual bag of tricks.  Can you replace that with a philosophical idea? Can a line of dialogue about religion be just as scary as the monster that’s hiding under your bed?  A movie that’s wall-to-wall talking, that’s still somehow engaging, felt really hard to do. So, I think whatever we do next is going to be something that we look and go, ‘This is insane.  Nobody’s going to want to make this movie, especially us.  That’ll probably be the one.”

Director Antonio Piazza Discusses “Sicilian Letters” at 60th CIFF on October 20, 2024

Antonio Piazza

Writer-Director Antonio Piazza (“Sicilian Ghost Story”), who spoke with me one-on-one on October 20, 2024.

Directors Fabio Grassadonia and Antonio Piazza, who directed “Sicilian Ghost Story” in 2017, return to the screen with “Sicilian Letters,” the story of an attempt to capture real-life Mafia crime boss Matteo Messina Denaro. The crime boss known as the last godfather was hunted for 30 years and was finally captured January 16, 2023 outside a medical facility in Palermo where he was seeking treatment for colon cancer under an assumed name.  Over 100 police were involved in his apprehension that day. He was transferred to a prison with a cancer medical facility, where he died 8 months later (September 25, 2023), after slipping into a coma on September 24, 2023. At the time of his death, aged 61, it was estimated that Matteo—who had been sentenced to life in prison in absentia for the death of Giuseppe DiMatteo in 2012—was worth $4 billion dollars.

Lucia Rasso (Barbora Bobulova) with whom Matteo hides in “Sicilian Letters.”

Matteo, portrayed by Elio Germano, was known to be a cold-blooded adversary. He once killed a rival (Vincenzo Milaggo from Alcamo) and then strangled the man’s pregnant girlfriend. Matteo had been familiar with guns since the age of 14. At one point, he tells the woman harboring him (Lucia Rasso, played by Barbora Bobulova) that he was responsible for avenging her husband’s death and that he murdered the killer when he was only 17. Matteo also bragged, “I filled a cemetery all by myself.”

We see this early descent into savagery in the film’s opening scene, when Matteo steps up to murder a goat under the direction of his father, upstaging his older brother and foiling the attempts of his sister to grab the knife herself. Matteo’s father, Francesco Messina Denaro, known as Don Ciccio, died in November of 1998. By then, Matteo had been on the FBI’s Most Wanted list for 5 years, after a string of bombings in 1993 that killed two prosecutors, Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino.

PLOT

The film begins by saying “Reality is a point of departure, not a destination.” In other words, as with most films, a certain amount of poetic license has been taken with real life. But, as Director Antonio Piazza told me in a conversation on August 20th, most of the story is true.  In order to capture the last godfather, the police attempt to turn the former Mayor and Headmaster Catello Palumbo (Toni Servillo), who was Matteo’s godfather, into a trusted go-between. Catillo has just spent 6 years in Cuneo prison. The police tell him, “Our meeting is your chance to get back in the game.” They want him to help capture the arch criminal, who has been on the loose for 30 years. and Catello suggests that writing notes (“pizzini”) might be the way in. It is known that Matteo likes to read and Catello offers up the truism that incarcerated prisoners might be the last real readers on the planet. (Sad, but potentially true).

Catello & Matteo face off

Catello Palumbo and Matteo Messina Denaro in “Sicilian Letters,” screening at the 60th Chicago International Film Festival.

Catello—an odd-looking individual with his comb-over hairdo—has  returned to his long-suffering wife Elvira, who seems to take a dim view of her spouse. Catello’s hotel project is in jeopardy; it’s illegal because it’s in a nature preserve. His wife, Elvira (Betty Pedrazzi), is fed up with the circumstances the family has been reduced to during Catello’s incarceration. His daughter Latizia (Dalila Reas) is pregnant by the janitor at Catello’s old school, (a part well-played by Giuseppe Tantillo as the “simple and sweet” Pino Turino.) Elvira does a good job of defending Pino from Catello’s put-downs, but there were other instances in the screenplay where women are demeaned, but none stand up to their abuser. It was definitely a sign of those early 2000 times. One such scene has a male investigator, Captain Schiavon (FaustoRussi Alessi), screaming in the face of female investigator Rita Mancuso (Daniela Marra). There is a line in the screenplay that says,”It’s the men who make decisions at home.” Rita definitely seems angry and upset most of the time.

The police embrace Catello’s idea of using letters to ferret out Matteo’s location. The letters—known as “pizzini“—were small folded-up notes used to communicate with other members of the Cosa Nostra in order to avoid phone conversations. They look very quaint in the era of e-mail and pagers blowing up in Gaza. The pizzini remind of notes passed from student to student in schools from the forties through the sixties, now an anachronism. The idea is to use Catello’s relationship with Matteo as his godfather and the trust Matteo might have in Catello to “Let him hear his father’s voice from beyond the grave.” It seems to work—or does it?

TRUST & CORRUPTION

Investigator Rita Mancuso (Daniela Marra) and Catillo Palumbo (Toni Servillo) join forces to find Matteo in “Sicilian Letters.”

The issues of corruption and trust were huge in the film. One scripted line, “In this village we all spy on one another.”  Matteo at one point executes a friend (Nando) who is suspected of stealing cocaine and tells him at the moment of truth that the issue is not the value of the drugs but that “It’s an issue of trust.” The female investigator Rita Mancuso (Daniela Marra) early in the investigation tells Catello not to trust the other investigators on the case. She suspects (correctly) that there is so much corruption that the police don’t really want to catch Matteo.  Sicilian singer-songwriter Colapesce even composed a song for the film, “La mal vagita seve al mondo intero” which means “evil serves a purpose for the entire world.” Matteo is the center of an entire world using him for their own greedy purpose.

THE GOOD

The plot is complicated and there are quite a few characters to follow. The acting is compelling. Elio Germano, who plays Matteo, actually moved to Palermo for a short period of time to pick up the dialect and the culture (and some Sicilian mannerisms). The part of Catello’s wife (Elvira, portrayed by Betty Pedrazzi)) was particularly interesting. She was one woman of the era who spoke up. Elvira seems very fed-up with her ex-convict husband and says so. The comic touches helped lighten the mood, as when we learn that Catello’s nickname is “Straight-shitter,” which has to do with the circumstances of his arrest. Some found Catello’s odd hair-do and the comic touches distracting, but  they were well-done and necessary to prevent a grim film from becoming too depressing. There is the jab at Matteo’s sister’s “taralli,” a pastry that Matteo warns is as hard as cement. The cinematography and music also served the film well.

 SPEAKING WITH  DIRECTOR ANTONIO PIAZZA

Matteo’s father takes his 3 children to kill a goat for the holiday meal in an early scene from “Sicilian Letters.”

The significance of the small statue described as being the most valuable in the town’s small museum was explained to me by the director, Antonio Piazza. Not only is it true that the statue was very valuable, but it demonstrated how the Mafiosa ripped off antiquities of the country for their own benefit. The statue was called “pupu.” As Director Piazza explained, the word has different meanings in Sicilian.  It can mean “puppet” and it can mean “child.”  Said Antonio, “In a way Matteo is a puppet and a child.” The director explained that the existence of the “Pupu” statue was absolutely true. As Director Piazza noted, “Reading the notes left behind in Matteo’s hide-out and seeing the personal items left behind opened up a whole world to us.” The puzzle in Matteo’s hide-away was one way  he passed the time while in hiding for 30 years. The real Matteo actually did write a letter to the puzzle manufacturer complaining about the missing puzzle piece. Matteo also read voraciously and watched such television shows on DVR as “The Sopranos” and “Sex and the City,” plus reading an Andre Agassi book, Baudelaire, and Dostoyevsky.

CHARACTERS

Pino Turino (Giuseppe Tantillo)

Pino Tumino, well-played by Giuseppe Tantillo, is the only character in “Sicilian Letters” who comes off as pure.

“Pino Turino (who is married to Catello’s daughter) is the only character in the movie who comes out pure,” said Antonio.   “Somehow he was able to read the context, which protected him morally.”  Police investigator Rita Mancuso, Antonio explained, “really wants to capture the fugitive.  She’s honest and idealistic and blinded by her obsession to capture Matteo.” Asked about the accuracy of other names in the film, Antonio said that only Matteo’s name was true to life; most others were changed.  We discussed the state of women at this time in history and in the world. Antonio agreed that Matteo’s sister would have been pissed off that she was a woman living in a man’s world at a time when, as the script says, “It’s the men who make decisions at home.”

Matteo was very close to his father, who died in 1998. However, his father was not the womanizer that Matteo chose to be. One small change that Antonio acknowledged was that the illegitimate child is said to be a son. In reality, the child who wrote the Father’s Day essay about her MIA father, was a girl. Matteo’s sister really did feel that Matteo should acknowledge his daughter, but the film—with its father-and-son dynamic, worked better with the child being male.  The second-class citizenship of girls is made clear from the opening scene of the three children with their father and the goat. I wondered if the sunglasses perched on the small child’s head (Matteo’s illegitimate son, in the film) was meant to show a passing of the torch to the next generation in the film. Director Piazza acknowledged that the RayBan sunglasses were definitely Matteo’ signature and became iconic. Photos of him on driver’s licenses, old and young, show him wearing  RayBan sunglasses. (Think Tom Cruise in “Risky Business.”)

CONCLUSION

Matteo’s father, Francesco Messina Denaro (Don Ciccio) on his deathbed in “Sicilian Letters.”

The primary themes of “Sicilian Letters” concern evil, corruption, and trust. Director Antonio Piazza said, “Your reading of the film is very much true.  We are asking the audience, ‘How is all this possible?’” This continued exploration of Cosa Nostra in Sicily and the 30-year search for Matteo Messina Denaro, the last godfather, was an engrossing, well-written, well-plotted, well-acted and well-directed outing which I thoroughly enjoyed.

 

 

 

 

 

Harris/Walz Sit for CNN Interview on August 29, 2024

Kamala Harris

Presidential nominee Kamala Harris.

Kamala Harris and Tim Walz sat for a joint interview at Kim’s Cafe in Savannah, Georgia on August 29, 2024. It was Harris’ 7th trip to Georgia and it is 68 day from the presidential election.

The Republicans have been making a Big Deal out of the fact that Harris (and Walz) had done no sit-down interviews, despite the fact that she just spoke about her vision for America from the DNC stage in Chicago and has been vocal about her views for a long time. One might point to the fact that Donald J. Trump goes off-script and offers bromides about windmills and toilets when he is onstage, which is not particularly helpful in trying to determine his true mind-set about a second term. It appears that his policy playbook would be “All Retribution All the Time.” He has grudges against a lot of people and is still proclaiming the untenable position that the 2000 election was stolen from him, Only his most loyal and blind-to-the-truth supporters even attempt to repeat that falsehood—the Kari Lakes of the party.

For the rest, it is a given that Trump lost in 2020 and Joe Biden has been President of the United States ever since. Only his decision to step away from the Oval Office at the end of his term and pass the torch to a new generation has vaulted Harris to the national prominence that she now enjoys, but she has been the acting Vice President (and the pivotal key vote in the Senate to break ties) ever since 2020. The GOP seems intent on painting a gloomy picture of the future and of being personally insulting to the woman who once served as Attorney General of the State of California. Trump has even gone so far as to say his 78-year-old orange out-of-shape self is “better looking” than the attractive Democratic candidate.

CNN’s Dana Bash asked Kamala Harris:

ON DAY ONE?

Tim Walz

Tim Walz at the DNC in Chicago

  • If you are elected, what would you do on Day One in the White House? (Some of her answer is paraphrased below):

“I would do what I can support the American middle class….People are ready for a new way forward. .People are fueled by hope and optimism, but the former President is pushing an agenda that is about diminishing the character and strength of Americans. I would be implementing my plan for an opportunity economy (bring down the cost of daily goods, invest in families, extend family tax credit to $6,000, investing in the American family on affordable housing.)

Walz, asked about his agenda for a term as Vice President said his goal would be: “Inspiring  Americans to what can be. We did it in Minnesota and diminished childhood poverty by 1/3.”

WE’RE NOT GOING BACK

  • “We’re not going back.” What if some of the Americans want to go back to DJT’s presidency when things were cheaper? (Bash’s second question.)

“When Joe and I came in our highest priority was to rescue America. Inflation is now under 3%. I have been dealing with price gouging. We need to bring down the cost of housing. (Credit of $25,000 for first-time home buyers.) First of all, we needed to recover as an economy (which is why, she says, she has not done more of this program previously). We capped insulin at $35 a month. When we do the work of bringing down the cost of prescription medication in the first year of being in office, cut child poverty down by as much as 50% this will benefit the American middle class. There’s more to do, but that’s good work.”

FRACKING

  • Banning fracking. Energy. “Do you still want to ban fracking.” Harris’ answer: I made that clear on the debate stage.” In 2020 she was against fracking.  However, in 2024, she says, ” I will not ban fracking.”  She also spoke out about the need for work on climate change:
    “We have a clear crisis in terms of the climate. We created over 300,000 new energy bans.”

THE BORDER

Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota, the Vice Presidential candidate of the Democratic party.

  • Why did the Biden/Harris wait 3 and ½ years to enforce sweeping border restrictions?

A:  “The number of immigrants coming from that region (Central America, Kamala’s chief job as VP to negotiate with leaders of those countries to reduce the flow) has actually been reduced. Joe Biden and I worked with members of the United States Congress and a bill was crafted by some of the most Conservative members of Congress. The bill would have put 1500 new border agents on the border. That bill would have allowed us to seize more shipments of fentanyl. I will make sure it comes to my desk and I will sign it.”

Decriminalizing the border? “We have laws that have to be followed and enforced. I’m the only person in this race who actually served a border state as Attorney General.”

CHANGES ON POLICIES

  • How did you come to change your  mind on policies?

A:  “The most significant part of my policies is that my viewpoints and values have not changed. Climate change: Set deadlines and goals. We need to set certain goals and meet them.  My values have not changed and 4 years of being VP…traveling the country…I believe it is important to build consensus and to find a common point on which we can build agreement. …I would put a Republican in my administration.” (*This is not particularly revolutionary. After all, Ray LaHood—my former neighbor—served as Secretary of Transportation in Obama’s administration and has endorsed the Harris/Walz ticket, although his son, Darren, spoke glowingly of DJT.”)

TO TIM WALZ:

Tim Walz, Gus Walz and Hope Walz

Hope, Gus and Tim Walz at the DNC.

  • Service in the National Guard:  “I’m incredibly proud of my 24 years in uniform.  ..I’ll never demean another member’s service. I never have and I never will.” Walz spoke of his son Gus’ emotional outburst at the DNC in a positive way and only GOP nay-sayers have demeaned the 17-year-old who proudly declared “That’s my Dad” when Walz was onstage.

Walz was asked about his 1995 arrest for DUI:  “I’ve been very public. My students come out and vouch for me. I think people know who I am. I’ve taught thousands of students. The contrast could not be clearer between us and our opponents.”

When Kamala Harris was asked about the non-issue of whether she had identified as Black before now, she simply dismissed the comment as being “Same old tired playbook.”

GAZA ISSUE

Gaza: would you do anything differently. “I am unequivocal in Israel’s defense and its ability to defend itself. 1200 people were massacred. Women were horribly raped. Israel has a right to defend itself and so would we. How they do so matters. We have to get a deal done about getting the hostages out, get the cease fire done. We have to get a deal done…the significance to the families, to the people living in this area. I remain committed to a two-state solution.”

JOE BIDEN’S CALL TO HARRIS

Just 39 days ago that Joe Biden dropped out of the race. Before he told the world, he called his VP as she was making pancakes and bacon for her nieces. She spoke very positively of President Biden.

CNN Discussion Post-Interview:

DAVID AXELROD (DNC STRATEGIST)

David Axelrod. (Photo by Lauren Gerson.)

 

“Kamala exuded a sense of confidence and calm. She was very connected to her words She seemed like someone who could be President of the United States. She handled the issue of her changes or perceived changes in policy pretty well. The idea that her values were the thing that has remained constant was a good one.  As she spoke, I thought it showed a certain character. She didn’t run away from Joe Biden. She gave him his due. It was elevating to me in a way that was unexpected. Today, it showed that she can really do it. Hers is a consistent story of growth.

I think Biden deserves a lot more credit for guiding the country through the pandemic and the economic disaster he walked into,. To the degree that they are saying that she is going to continue to do exactly the same thing that Biden did, it is going to be a challenge for her. (But. he noted, it is the President who has the final say on policies, not the VP.)

If I were advising her, I would say make him (Trump) seem small.  We know what his habits are. She should have a conversation with the American people about the way forward she sees, not engage with DJT.”

SCOTT JENNINGS (GOP STRATEGIST)

Scott Jennings,

Scott Jennings, Columnist, LA Times, Daily Mail, Gannett:  “If I were the Trump people I would be salivating over her failure to show remorse” (for things she and Biden achieved or in Jennings’ opinion, botched.) (*He was critical of the Afghanistan withdrawal, but, finally, a President got us OUT of Afghanistan after many years of hearing it as a goal from others.)

Jennings claimed Harris said she was  the last person in the room on Afghanistan. A disagreement arose between Axelrod and Jennings  on what that meant. Axelrod pointed out that Harris was the Vice President, not the President, and the policy decisions were ultimately the President’s, not hers.

Others, such as Astead Herndon of the Podcast “The Run-Up” commented that Harris “is a homework do-er. You can see this in her preparation” and, also, that she is ready to be on the defense. Trump is preparing using Tulsi Gabbard who has debated against Kamala Harris.

 

 

 

 

 

“Audrey” Has World Premiere at SXSW 2024

Jackie VanBeek as Ronnie in "Audrey".

“Audrey” at SXSW 2024.

First-time Australian feature director Natalie Bailey has crafted a tale of a dysfunctional family from a Lou Sanz script. It had its World Premiere at SXSW on March 10th, 2024. The synopsis for the film : “Self-appointed Mother of the Year, Ronnie has given her daughter Audrey everything, so when Audrey selfishly falls into a coma, Ronnie has no choice but to keep their dreams alive by assuming her identity.”

BACKGROUND

Some background for what initially sounded like a comedy: Ronnie Willis Lipsick is the married mother of two daughters, Audrey and Norah. Norah, the youngest, has cerebral palsy. Audrey, the eldest, is a rebellious teenager who has a poor relationship with her mother.

Ronnie, portrayed by New Zealand actress Jackie VanBeek, won awards appearing as a young actress in  “Jillaroo.” That was 18 years ago. Now, Ronnie seems to be attempting to live her life over through  her daughter, Audrey. It isn’t going well.

Audrey (Josephine Blazier) , rather than appreciating her mother’s helicopter parenting, is a surly, sullen teenager with a bad attitude. Audrey’s rebelliousness brings comments from Mom like, “I don’t want you diddling away your time with boys,” Or, “The future is not something you find in the back seat of a car.” Audrey is fairly representative of 50% of American teenage daughters. (Trust me on this; I raised one).

AUDREY VERSUS NORAH

Norah and Audrey in 'Audrey."

Norah and Audrey in “Audrey” (SXSW, 2024).

Audrey says things to her mother like, “You’re a shit actress, and you know it. You just quit before anyone else realized it.”  Audrey also posts a video on her social media account ridiculing Mom that goes viral. It reduces Ronnie to tears.

Since Norah  (Hannah Diviney) is confined to a wheelchair with muscular dystrophy, she is  left alone by Mom. That may be why she comes off as the more likeable of the two sisters. Although Norah has her moments, as evidenced by her behavior when she sits bedside next to her comatose older sister in the hospital. Norah doesn’t express any affection for Audrey, even when encouraged by Mom.

Dad Cormack (Jeremy Lindsay Taylor) initially seems to be almost a non-factor in the family dynamic. As the plot progresses, Audrey falls from the roof and ends up in a coma; (not sure I’d use the adjective “selfishly.”) Cormack’s part takes on surprising new dimensions beyond the role of grieving father. He seems to be sexually out-of-control, in a kind of creepy fashion.

THE GOOD

Lou Sanz’s script had some great lines. My own personal favorites were: “If there’s one thing your Mom can do, it’s make a killer lemonade,” and “I’m going to take care of you, like any good mother would.”

The cinematography by Simon Ozilin is equally good, especially in the climactic scenes when the camera cuts from Ronnie playing Medea onstage (“Oh, doomed children of an unloved mother…”) to what is going on back at the house between Audrey and her friend Max.

THE BAD

“Audrey” and Mom Ronnie in the Australian film “Audrey” at SXSW.

The adult Ronnie misrepresents herself as her teen-aged daughter at an audition. That presents obvious problems. For Ronnie, trying to portray ages 13 through 25 is a stretch. Initially, I thought this would be addressed with an all-out comic tone.

However, the plot, described as “an exploration of the human psyche” never really goes for funny. It goes for (more-or-less) serious with a few comic situations. Again, not sure I’d say someone “selfishly” fell off a roof, but that sort of adjective choice in the synopsis led me to think this was going to be a funny movie.

TONE

For me, the subject matter didn’t really go far enough in either direction. It’s either going to be a light-hearted examination of the mother/daughter relationship when the daughter is difficult (think “Lady Bird”) or it’s going to be a serious, touching drama that examines the statement, “We need to take the time to acknowledge that our lives aren’t always as we would wish.” (“American Beauty”). It tries to keep a foot in both worlds.

I was at a performance of George Carlin’s in Chicago when Carlin was performing a sketch about suicide. (In his defense, it was near the end of his career and his health was not good.) The attempt to make comedy out of such a serious subject did not work. It caused many in the audience to streak for the exits.

The resolution of “Audrey” has the same problem. Despite some great scripted lines from Lou Sanz, when I asked Director Natalie Bailey about the film’s tone, she responded, “Morally, you have to choose where you stand. “ An interesting position, which reminds of this line from the script: “The world’s a broken place these days.”

CONCLUSION

Audrey's parents at the hospital after she falls from the roof.

“Audrey” at SXSW 2024.

I could relate to the situation the film explores. I’m the mother of a teenaged daughter (and was once a rebellious teenager, myself). However,  I couldn’t embrace Ronnie walking away Scott-free at film’s end. Just as the audience for Carlin found his comic premise unacceptable, while I enjoyed the acting and the expert execution by this first-time feature director (especially the finale), I was disappointed by the moral position the film chose to take.

Maybe the recent court case in my home town area where a mother was found to have stuffed the dead body of her elementary school-aged son in a trash can in the garage for months played into my moral position. To say it was shocking is putting it mildly. The resolution of that case (in Rock Island, IL) did not point to child abuse or murder, however, as the death itself seems to have been an accident that the mother was made aware of (child playing with gun) only after the fact. She wasn’t even home when it happened.  Still, respect for life and protecting one’s child  at all costs and—if the worst happens—providing a decent burial or decent treatment for the youngster seemed the least a parent (no matter how shocked or unprepared for the event) should do. Somehow, a different ending for this one seemed like a better (or more acceptable?) idea.

(Whatever happened to happy endings?) 

Page 1 of 11

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén & Blogarama - Blog Directory Best Entertainment Blogs - OnToplist.com