MOVIE REVIEW: My Week With Marilyn

Thinking of the slender Williams as the voluptuous Monroe was not something I would have considered.

My Week with Marilyn was based on a couple of non-fiction books first published in the late 1990s. The Wife and I saw the film last Saturday at the Spectrum Theatre in Albany, NY.

In 1956, Sir Laurence Olivier (Kenneth Branagh) is directing and starring in the movie ‘The Prince and the Showgirl’ in London. He hires American film icon Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams) to costar with him. The 30-year-old MM, accompanied by her new, third husband, the playwright Arthur Miller (Dougray Scott), is a sensation to the crowds in England. But artistic differences make the filming frustratingly slow for the director, and stressful for the actress. Marilyn befriends the third assistant director, essentially gofer, 23-year-old Colin Clark (Eddie Redmayne) and he becomes one of the few people she trusts, and ultimately has the title experience.

Thinking of the slender Williams as the voluptuous Monroe was not something I would have considered, but she pulls it off, in no small part, based on an interview I read in EW, of getting The Walk. Interestingly, at the beginning and end of the movie, largely removed from the storyline, Monroe/Williams performs a couple of songs, and she looks even more full-figured.

This was a slight, but sweet story of an actress who was instinctively good at her craft, but wanted to get more skilled, but on her own terms. It was also clear that “Marilyn Monroe” was a role she played, which made her extremely popular but also trapped her. I would be surprised if Michelle Williams was not Oscar-nominated as Best Actress.

Kenneth Branagh may also get a Best Supporting Actor nod as the frustrated director. I was tickled by this casting since both Olivier and Branaugh starred in and directed movie adaptations of Henry V, the Shakespeare play, in 1944 and 1989, respectively.

My Weekend With Marilyn is a surprisingly sweet, even somewhat chaste film, given the subject matter. I enjoyed it.

Allowing Ex-Felons to Vote QUESTION

What is the possible benefit of disenfranchising a whole class of people? Even Santorum notes its racial aspect.

 

There were some discussions among Republicans recently about whether ex-felons should be able to vote. Rick Santorum favored allowing felons to vote after they’ve served their prison sentences. Mitt Romney said he didn’t think people who have committed violent crimes should be allowed to vote again. You won’t hear me say this much, but I agree with Santorum.

I used to believe ex-felons should have the right to vote restored because they had served their time. NOW, I believe ex-felons should have the right to vote restored because not doing so essentially criminalizes them for life, making any chance of reintegration into society even more difficult, possibly aggravating the recidivism problem.

Also, if a law is unfair or unjust – that HAS been known to happen – those who might have been convicted under it would have no real say in overturning it. This article addresses that aspect, and shows that NOT allowing them to vote isn’t even a common position among the states; adding restrictions would be a retrograde move.

And not all crimes are equal. A 19-year-old guy having sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend could get him on a sex offender list as a felon in some states. Chaos at an Occupy demonstration could give someone a permanent police record.

What do you think? What is the possible benefit of disenfranchising a whole class of people? Even Santorum notes its racial aspect.

No Time

post I wrote about murderabilia in this blog some time ago is scheduled to appear in the newsletter of the New Yorkers for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (NYADP) this spring,

I found that this past week or so, I’ve had no free writing time to post to this blog. Part of it was self-inflicted. I saw parts of four football games this past weekend, though I did record them all and fast-forwarded through a lot of them – GO, NEW YORK GIANTS! (The key to pulling that off without accidentally getting the scores is to avoid all media – standard, such as TV and radio, as well as social, such as e-mail and Twitter.)

I also saw two movies with my wife last weekend, including a Golden Globe winner, and read one book (THAT book, Jaquandor), none of which I’ve had time to review. I had an article due for my church’s newsletter. I am also the compiler of a sermon evaluation team, which is part of one of my pastor’s educational requirements.

So I got nothing. Well, you could read my current Flashmob Fridays post about Cleveland, a posthumous book by Harvey Pekar, or the previous posts about Walt Disney’s Donald Duck: Lost in the Andes or The Survivalist by Box Brown.

Or you can read about my takes on:
No more savings bonds of the paper variety
The Internet piracy bills SOPA and PIPA
Going bald
Why the Postal Service is REALLY going broke

Lefty Brown, who was one of the very first bloggers I followed even before I was writing myself, is blogging again, after a 5+ year hiatus. He’s been doing The Married Gamers with his wife Kelly – I am not a gamer – but now he’s back with his own musings. And he answers some of my questions. (Should be ‘believe,’ not ‘belief.’)

I should note that ABC Wednesday is starting up again (psst, at the letter A) and it’s not too late to join. Though, in fact, you don’t HAVE to start with A. (I started with K.)

Here’s something that’s interesting to me. A post I wrote about murderabilia in this blog some time ago is scheduled to appear in the newsletter of the New Yorkers for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (NYADP) this spring, augmented by an interview with me. And another piece about the death penalty may appear in a later issue.

(Had to post this picture, sent to me, as one of the best examples of constantly wrong spelling I have ever seen.)

There will be a Presidential inauguration one year from tomorrow

What about a third party?

I remember reading in someone’s blog late last year, “Please give me someone else to vote for besides Barack Obama.” It was a plea to the US Republican party regarding the November 2012 Presidential election. So far, that wish has not come true. The Republican base’s fear of Mitt Romney, I believe, is well-founded; his positions seem to follow the wind. The flaws of the rest of the field are too numerous, too exhausting to mention, but certainly including their collective racial polarization, Rick Perry’s sheer ignorance of even his own position on issues, and Newt Gingrich’s hubris.

This is not that I’m that enamored by the incumbent. There are all of the campaign promises he made that not only did not fulfill, he went 180. The recently-signed legislation which would deny suspected terrorists, including U.S. citizens seized within the nation’s borders, the right to trial and subject them to indefinite detention are among the elements that are terrifying to me. But which of his opponents would have taken a different position?

Andrew Sullivan, of all people, does note some of Obama’s accomplishments. I am happy about some of the President’s positions, notably gay rights, and remain cautiously hopeful about the outcome of SOPA. Also like some fun innovations of his administration such as this one.

What about a third party? There’s this mysterious Americans Elect, which is getting on the ballot in a number of states. Since there is no candidate (yet), it’s really difficult for me to gauge what its impact will be. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the nominee is appealing to me, I would have to still weigh the notion of whether the candidate could win enough electoral votes nationally to win, or at least not give the race to someone worse. Since no third party has EVER won the US Presidency, because of the way the system is rigged, it would make it difficult to select that candidate, no matter how attractive.

Meanwhile, I Wish I Had a Super PAC of my own.

It’ll be an interesting year.
***
Belated happy birthday to the FLOTUS, who turned 48 on Tuesday.

 

Avery

An old person dies, and one is burying the past. When a young person dies, one is burying the future.

I’m at my allergist’s office a week ago Monday morning, waiting the requisite 30 minutes after my injection, when I see this story on the TV news about a 21-month-old boy “found dead in a Troy apartment Saturday night. Officials say… Avery James Cahn was left unattended by his caretaker, who police found and brought in for questioning, but was later released.”

My wife and I attended the funeral last Thursday. I go because I KNOW this child. Not well, to be sure, but I’ve seen his hands, not quite tall enough for the snack table, still manage to steal a handful of cookies after church. And I know his mom, again not well, but I’ve heard her read the morning Scripture or the prayers of the people or watched her usher in people; she joined the church not that long ago.

But mostly my wife and I go for our friend Mary, who is the paternal grandmother, a very good friend, who I called when I was on a long train ride to Charlotte, NC after my mom had a stroke last year. And I go for her son, the baby’s uncle, who is turning into a fine, and talented, young man.

The noon service is delayed a few minutes, with the organist continuing to vamp. Was it the difficulty of the day? Or was it the reporter from some local media organization who was turned away by police, as I later find out?

These two men from the funeral home wheel out an it-must-be-a-too-small casket and bring it to the front of the sanctuary.

I won’t/can’t go into the whole service, except to say it was nice, under the circumstances. But it was tough; as someone said, an old person dies, and one is burying the past. When a young person dies, one is burying the future.

Ramblin' with Roger
Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial