Day: December 18, 2019

Now and forever Donald Trump, the racist, ruthless and sociopathic crime boss and would-be Mussolini, has joined Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson as one of only three U.S. Presidents to be impeached by the House of Representatives. Eleven counts of impeachment were brought against Johnson, but his primary sin was a violation of the Tenure of Office Act. Clinton was impeached for lying about getting a blowjob, and apart from his Jeffrey Epstein association I don’t think many people regard him as a necessarily heinous or shameful character. History will record that Trump is easily the most odious of the three.

Read more

Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, Democratic representative from Hawaii, declined to vote in favor of Donald Trump‘s impeachment this evening. Instead she voted “present” — neither for nor against — regarding both articles of impeachment. She’s the only Democratic member of the House of Representatives to have voted present.

What a coward, what an equivocator, what a cipher, what a bowl of equivocating mush.

“After doing my due diligence in reviewing the 658-page impeachment report, I came to the conclusion that I could not in good conscience vote either yes or no,” Gabbard said in a statement. “I could not in good conscience vote against impeachment because I believe President Trump is guilty of wrongdoing.”

Last night I sat and watched Tom Hooper‘s Cats (Universal, 12.20), but I paid as little attention as possible. I figured that was the wisest policy. Just sit there and tough it out and take what comes, and then tap out whatever comes to mind.

I knew Hooper’s film would have no story (as the musical play never had one) and I still haven’t the first clue what “Jellicle” means. It refers to a kind of cat fraternity or community of some kind, I realize, but it’s so bizarre listening to the cast sing “Jellicle” over and over and over.

Cutting to the chase, I just wanted to watch this calamity without feeling bored. Alas, that’s exactly what I was grappling with for 110 minutes. In-and-out, off-and-on feelings of boredom. But there were portions or more precisely slivers in which I wasn’t bored but half-diverted, mildly amused, placated, vaguely touched, etc.

Set in the Trafalgar Square region of London, Cats is never more than a fanciful and story-less medley of tunes and dance moves, performed by some CG-augmented feline impersonators, but — I’m slightly diverting from the scornful mob here — it’s not altogether awful. Some of it is okay. It’s mostly lame, yes, and probably not worth the price of admission, okay, but I didn’t completely hate it. It didn’t make me furious, and that means something.

I’m sensing that fans of Andrew Lloyd Webber‘s show (and remember that it opened in London nearly 40 years ago) may drag their kids or attend as families or whatever.

Then again the Rotten Tomatoes aggregate is now 15% and the Metacritic is 32%. Industry pally: “The biggest critical pile-on since Gigli?”

It really boils down to “how do you like this cat or that one?” Or “to what degree do you find the CG cat makeup alluring or fetching, and to what extent were you charmed and pleased by the various tunes and performances and whatnot?” That’s all you can talk about.

Example #1: “Oh, I found James Corden‘s obese cat more amusing than Rebel Wilson‘s.” Example #2: “Did they have to make their performances entirely about their beach-ball bods?”

My favorite cats were Francesca Hayward‘s Victoria (the pretty lead character) and Ian McKellen‘s Gus the Theatre Cat. True, Hayward doesn’t get you emotionally (she wears the exact same faintly amazed, obliquely smiling expression throughout the film) but she’s lithe and quick and pleasant to hang with. McKellen does get you emotionally, and I was feeling momentarily grateful that he was cast, at least. (If not given the greatest role.)

I was also down with Judi Dench‘s Old Deuteronomy as far as it went.

Read more

This morning a filmmaker who gambles wrote that he saw Uncut Gems last night, and that Adam Sandler‘s sports betting is inaccurate. “I just am shocked that Kevin Garnett would be in the film and that somehow the NBA allowed their footage to be used in the film,” he said. I asked him to concisely explain what’s wrong. Here’s his reply:

“The last bet Sandler makes is a three-way parlay. That means he makes three different bets, but they all have to happen for him to win. The good news is that if you win a three-way parlay you get paid six times your bet.

“However, in this particular parlay Sandler makes a ‘proposition’ bet. That means he is betting on the individual performance of a player (Garnett). The problem is that betters are never allowed to have proposition bets in the mix of a parlay.

“Casinos do not just smilingly give you over one million bucks, just like that. There is a long process that almost never includes cash. And there are tax forms and such to fill out.

“Finally, there is almost no such thing as a bookie who takes bets these days. Everything is online (outside of casinos). And the days of sending goons to beat people up is also anachronistic. This would have made more sense if the film was set in the mid 80s.”

Agreements or disputes from other gamblers?

SPHE’s Once Upon A Time in Hollywood 4K Ultra HD/Bluray Collector’s Edition arrived a couple of days ago.

It’s pricey ($75) and over-sized, as the below comparison shows. Doesn’t fit on the shelf like the others do, but there’s the audacity. I’d previously leafed through the Mad magazine “Bounty Law” parody, but it’s cool to own it. I love the 45 vinyl record with the yellow plastic turntable adapter. And I love the additional 7 scenes. Thanks to the Sony promo gang.

Sidenote: I’ve seen OUATIH in theatres two or three times, I’ve streamed it on HD and now I’m watching the 4K version, and dp Robert Richardson chose to shoot with a strangely subdued screen-door or mosquito-net visual effect. And I”m sorry but my eyes are annoyed by this. Richardson never allows you to look at the images without this odd scrim in the way. It’s less evident in open-sunshine scenes (Pitt fixing the TV aerial on the roof) but it keeps returning.

All through the arduous debate over whether or not President Trump deserves impeachment, Republicans have stood by a fundamentally revolting position or viewpoint, which is that the Constitutional provision for impeachment means nothing, that there is no rule of law, that we all live in a realm of haphazard moral chaos and that all U.S. Presidents have pulled slippery shenanigans so what’s the big deal?

This country is nothing without the rule of law, and only a sociopath would argue that standards for Presidential impeachment haven’t been satisfied by the facts uncovered and testified to about the Trump-Zelensky-Giuliani-Ukraine mishegoss. The President of the United States is a liar, a criminal, a would-be Mussolini, an instinctual bullshitter, a bloviater in a china shop and a flatulent animal governed only by arrogant self-interest and jungle-boogie instinct. The Ukraine thing became an impeachment issue because he got caught. It is what it is.

Read more