Even Ethan Hawke, author of “A Bright Ray of Darkness”, is concerned about Khmer Rouge terror. So I guess it’s not just me and my paranoid imaginings…whadaya think?

I was friendly with Julia Phillips starting around ’94 or thereabouts. Friendly in a certain sense, I mean. I loved her caustic wit and candor and big blue eyes, but I didn’t much care for Julia discharging me from time to time, depending on whatever shortcoming I’d been accused of (or was admittedly guilty of).

I’ve never written this or even admitted it privately but the first stage of our relationship was about Julia having a certain romantic interest and my not being as receptive as she would’ve preferred. Okay, not receptive at all. That resulted in all kinds of bile and battery acid. I tried to be cool and mellow and easy about it, but rejection is rejection.

We gradually became friendly on a mutually respectful palsy-walsy basis. I gave her a lot of notes about her 1995 novel, Driving Under The Affluence, which was more or less a sequel to You’ll Never Eat Lunch In This Town Again (’91). We were reasonably good friends for a couple of years (she was living in a cool Benedict Canyon bungalow at the time), and then we were friendly off and on until…oh, roughly a year before she passed in ’02.

I remember her telling me over the phone one day that she’d been diagnosed with terminal cancer, and my not knowing what to say or feel…I tried weeping but it didn’t come. I was stunned. I’d never known anyone who’d been handed a death sentence.

Julia passed on January 1, 2002. I attended her memorial on the roof of the Empire West condos (1100 Alta Loma Road) and found out that she’d occasionally “fired” other friends from time to time, so I felt a little better in retrospect.

Julia’s hair was dark and smooth and tomboy-ish when The Sting won the Best Picture Oscar in the spring of ’74. Her hair was silvery and glistening and closely cropped when I knew her.

Vogue has published a big cover story and photo spread about Angelina Jolie and her six kids living in their big century-old home (formerly owned by Cecil B. DeMille) in Los Feliz.** Jolie’s sit-down with Vogue editor Edward Enninful actually happened three months ago. Long lead times, etc.

At one point Jolie is asked if she’s “at a happy stage in your life.” First of all, nobody is in a happy stage right now…nobody. Not with a gray pandemic cloud hanging over everything. But that aside….

Jolie: “I don’t know. [Translation: No.] The past few years have been pretty hard. I’ve been focusing on healing our family. It’s slowly coming back, like the ice melting and the blood returning to my body. But I’m not there. I’m not there yet. But I hope to be. I’m planning on it.”

After frolicking, cohabiting, birthing and adopting for several years Jolie and Brad Pitt got married in 2014. She filed for divorce in 2016. They’ve been arguing about custody arrangements and whatnot for four and a half, going on five years. Anyone who can’t settle up and come to some kind of equitable arrangement with an ex-husband or ex-wife is not a stable, centered, fair-minded person. Not by my understanding of the term. And you know who pays the price when mommy and daddy fight? The kids do. Any parent who’d rather win the fight against an ex than make things cool for the kids is an ego monster.

It’s always been my suspicion that Angie is the neurotic hard case and that Brad is the comme ci comme ca cool cat. But what do I know?

** Tatiana and I visited and took snaps in August 2018.

Here are Hollywood Elsewhere’s suggested nominations for the 26th annual Critics Choice Awards. All nominating ballots are due no later than 6 pm Pacific on Friday, February 5th. The awards telecast (CW Network) will happen on Sunday, 3.7.21. Taye Diggs will once again host. Film and television awards will be covered.

I decided upon these nominees because they struck me as the best efforts in their respective categories. I don’t judge creative efforts in a political light. Or because this or that artist has never won before. Or because someone’s life came to a sudden and tragic end. You vote for the work, period.

I wish the CCA organizers had asked for five nominees in the major acting categories, instead of just three. For the Best Supporting Actress category, I could and would have included Candice Bergen‘s performance in Steven Soderbergh‘s Let Them All Talk.

BEST PICTURE
1. Nomadland
2. Judas and the Black Messiah (excellent ’70s Lumet film, great LaKeith Stanfield performance)
3. The Trial of the Chicago 7
4. The King of Staten Island
5. The Father

BEST ACTOR
1. Anthony Hopkins, The Father
2. Riz Ahmed, Sound of Metal
3. LaKeith Stanfield, Judas and the Black Messiah

BEST ACTRESS
1. Carey Mulligan, Promising Young Woman
2. Andra Day, United States vs. Billie Holiday
3. Michelle Pfeiffer, French Exit

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
1. Sacha Baron Cohen, Trial of the Chicago 7
2. Paul Raci, Sound of Metal
3. Frank Langella, Trial of the Chicago 7

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
1. Amanda Seyfried, Mank
2. Olivia Colman, The Father
3. Ellen Burstyn, Pieces of a Woman

BEST YOUNG ACTOR/ACTRESS (Under 21)
1. Idrahima Gueye, The Life Ahead
2. Helena Zengel, News of the World
3. Drawing a blank

BEST ACTING ENSEMBLE
1. Trial of the Chicago 7
2. King of Staten Island
2. Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom

BEST DIRECTING
1. Chloe Zhao, Nomadland
2. Emerald Fennell, Promising Young Woman
3. Aaron Sorkin, Trial of the Chicago 7

BEST SCREENWRITING (Original Screenplay)
1. The King of Staten Island
2. The Trial of Chicago 7
3. Sound of Metal

BEST SCREENWRITING (Adapted Screenplay)
1. The Father
2. I’m Thinking of Ending Things
3. French Exit

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
1. Mank
2. Tenet
3. Nomadland

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN
1. Mank
2. News of the World
3. Midnight Sky

BEST EDITING
1. Trial of the Chicago 7
2. Nomadland
3. The Father

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
1. Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom
2. Mank
3. United States vs. Billie Holiday

BEST HAIR & MAKEUP
1. Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom
2. United States vs. Billie Holiday
3. Promising Young Woman

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
1. Tenet
2. Greyhound
3. Midnight Sky

BEST COMEDY
1. King of Staten Island
2. Borat 2
3. On The Rocks

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
1. The Life Ahead
2. Another Round
3. La Llorona

BEST SONG
1. “Everybody Cries” / The Outpost
1. “Io Is (Seen)” / The Life Ahead
3. “Fight For You” / Judas and the Black Messiah

BEST SCORE
1. News of the World
2. Mank
3. Minari

YOUR NAME AND OUTLET: Jeffrey Wells, Hollywood Elsewhere

There’s nothing sad, much less tragic, about a great actor‘s life ending after 95 years.

Hal Holbrook didn’t really get going as an actor until the early 1950s, when he was in his mid to late 20s. His first performance as Mark Twain happened at age 29. His film debut was in Sidney Lumet‘s The Group (’66), when he was 41 or 42. Holbrook had just turned 50 when he played Deep Throat in All The President’s Men. He played Abraham Lincoln twice, and delivered stand-out supporting performances in Julia (’77), The Fog (’80), Creepshow (‘82), Wall Street (’87), The Firm (’93), Hercules (’97) and Men of Honor (’00). His kindly older guy in Sean Penn‘s Into the Wild (’07) resulted in Oscar and SAG noms for Best Supporting Actor. His performance in That Evening Sun (’09), playing what Variety‘s Joe Leydon called “an irascible octogenarian farmer who will not go gentle into that good night”, was a milestone.

95 robust years, and roughly 70 of them as an actor in good standing.

When I think of Holbrook do I hear the twangy, crackling, sandpaper voice of Samuel Clemens? No, I hear the vaguely testy, whispery voice of Deep Throat. Less was more.

…begins with a single sentence, the first Kindle page, the first whiff. Or, speaking practically, with a careful scanning of the chapters to come. I’ve walked this path and merged with this man many times before…different forms, different narrators…so I feel free to hop around and parachute into this or that chapter at will. Call it a Citizen Nichols approach, co-written in a sense by Mark Harris and Herman J. Mankiewicz.

Hollywood Elsewhere won’t be able to stream Rebecca Hall‘s Passing until Wednesday, 2.3. But I’m reading and hearing things. Based on a same-titled 1929 book by Nella Larsen and mostly set in 1920s Harlem, Passing is about a married woman of color — Ruth Negga‘s Claire Kendry, whose blonde hair and half northern-European features allows her to pass for white, which was deemed desirable 90-odd years ago.

Claire’s racist husband Jack Belew (Alexander Sarsgard) believes her to be as white as Calvin Coolidge. This, I’m told by a colleague who’s seen it, is a stumbling block. The story focuses on the reunion of Kendry and Irene Redfield (Tessa Thompson) and a subsequent attraction that kicks in and leads to tragic consequences.

Friendo: We’re supposed to believe that Skarsgard, Negga’s very racist husband who uses the N-word freely, is completely oblivious to the fact that his wife may have some black ancestry. He believes he married a 100% white woman.
HE: But Negga, though light-skinned and wearing a blonde wig in the film, is obviously mixed race to some degree. Just ask those scurvy racist crackers in Loving — they did everything they could to break up her marriage to Joel Edgerton. Oh, and I love that Passing was shot in black and white.
Friendo: The film is very well made, but its biggest flaw is the implausibility I mentioned. There is no way a racist husband would not realize that Negga has at least some African-American blood. He even mentions that he hates “them” even if they have a small fraction of non-white DNA.
HE: Jessica Kiang’s Variety review was unqualified in its praise. In her view, the movie is nothing short of heavenly.
Friendo: I assume Coda, Summer of Soul and Passing will all be winning something by the end of the festival.

Tessa Thompson (l.), Ruth Negga (r.) during filming of Rebeca Hall’s Passing.

N.Y. Times, filed 15 or 20 minutes ago: “Senator Mitch McConnell said on Monday that the “loony lies and conspiracy theories” embraced by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene amounted to a “cancer” on the Republican Party, issuing what in effect was a scathing rebuke to the freshman House Republican from Georgia.

“’Somebody who’s suggested that perhaps no airplane hit the Pentagon on 9/11, that horrifying school shootings were pre-staged, and that the Clintons crashed JFK Jr.’s airplane is not living in reality,’ McConnell said. ‘This has nothing to do with the challenges facing American families or the robust debates on substance that can strengthen our party.'”

Politico, 8:30 pm eastern: “Top House Democrats are moving to force Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene off multiple committees this week — with or without Kevin McCarthy’s help.

“House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer delivered an ultimatum to McCarthy on Monday: Either Republicans move on their own to strip Greene (R-Ga.) of her committee assignments within 72 hours, or Democrats will bring the issue to the House floor.

“The Democrats’ move, while highly unusual, comes amid intense fury within the Democratic Caucus over Greene’s long record of incendiary rhetoric, including peddling conspiracy theories that the nation’s deadliest mass shootings were staged. Greene also endorsed violence against Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats before she was elected to Congress.

“Last week, Greene was officially awarded seats on the House Education and Labor Committee and the House Budget Committee.

“Greene has shown zero contrition for her past actions, tweeting over the weekend that she will “never apologize.” She also took a jab at Hoyer on Twitter Monday and revealed plans to travel to Florida “soon” to meet with former President Donald Trump, who she said supports her “100 percent.”

HE to Demian Bichir (sent on 1.15.21):

Greetings, bruh. Long time, hope you’re good. I was very moved by your sad Deadline essay about poor Stefanie. I’m so sorry for what befell her. Very few of us seem to acknowledge, even privately, how tenuous and fragile our hold on stability or safety is, much less happiness. I’m so sorry.

By the way I liked you a lot in Robin Wright‘s Land, which I saw last night. I’m glad Robin chose you, believed in you. Your humanity came through. I didn’t think it was dramatically satisfying or appropriate for your character to [spoiler info]. I liked your character and valued his presence, and so I felt irked and cheated by [spoiler info].

But I also have to say that while I respect Wright’s attempt to offer some kind of comment about soul-cleansing isolation and to carve out some kind of naturalist ethos, I really didn’t care for her character, Edee Mathis, at all. Robert Redford‘s Jeremiah Johnson was human and relatable — Edee isn’t. What a profoundly stupid, self-involved, slow-to-awaken woman…she loves her isolation and her general disdain for other people too much. She doesn’t even keep her SUV near her cabin in case there’s an emergency? Idiot!

When you and your sister (Sarah Dawn Pledge) found Edee lying on the floor of her cabin, starved and half-frozen and near death…I’m sorry to share this but on another level I’m not. When you found her like that I was thinking “this idiot did this to herself out of flat-out stupidity and arrogance, and so by the laws of nature and natural consequence”…I probably shouldn’t say this but I was thinking that if she passed it would be more interesting than if she’d lived.

There’s a moment in which Edee looks at your character and says with a slight tone of suspicion, “Why are you helping me?” After you and your sister have literally saved her form the jaws of death, she looks you right in the eye and asks why, and with a vaguely snippy tone to boot. When a viewer feels this negatively about the central character in a film…well, it’s not a good thing. Even a nominally “bad” character can enlist audience sympathy if the film is handled right. I felt more emotionally supportive of Michael Corleone in The Godfather, Part II than I did for Edee Mathis. I felt more compassion for Boris Karloff‘s monster in The Bride of Frankenstein.

If Edee had died in her cabin I would have said to myself “tough break but just desserts…this is the law of life and survival…now Edee will never have to deal with another human being ever again.”

Nothing matches the excitement of being half-buried by a perfect white snowscape, and the cozy pleasure of staring at falling snow from inside a warm home. I’m generally less transported when a big snowfall starts melting but until that point, it’s like I’m eight years old again.

The life and career of the dynamic Rita Moreno is given a proud upward spin in Mariem Pérez Riera‘s Rita Moreno: Just a Girl Who Decided to Go for It. It streamed last Friday (1.29) at the Sundance Film Festival, and the tone of it is very “go, Rita… we love and cherish you”, etc. Which is great — it’s what every positive-minded doc about a long-haul, never-say-die actress should be like.

But it also says “poor Rita, poor girl…the sexist, male-dominated entertainment world of the ’50s treated you like an exotic piece of meat…it failed to foresee the advent of Women’s Liberation of the late ’60s and the #MeToo movement of 2017 and beyond…it refused to see beyond the borders of the ’50s and failed to honor you for the spunky, spiritual being that you are now and always have been, and so it failed you. And we’re sorry for that but at least you’re still kicking it at age 89. And we love you for that.”

I’m basically saying that as buoyant and impassioned as Riera’s doc is, it plays the victim card over and over. It ignores the way things were when Moreno was coming up in the ’50s, and it tips in the direction of instructional 21st Century progressive feminism. It’s totally infused with “presentism” — judging the past by present-day standards.

It’s not about how Moreno’s life unfolded on a moment-to-moment basis when she was coming up and making her name and building her career, but about how badly she was treated and what assholes the various men were. Which they WERE, of course, but the ’50s were not a time of enlightenment as far as recognizing the full value of women in any realm was concerned. Moreno had a tough time because of that, but she came through anyway and look at her today…unbowed, feisty, still plugging.

Yes, the film industry was sexist, exploitive, insensitive…unable or unwilling to see Moreno as a unique Latina with her own identity amd contours. Yes, it was a bad place in many respects, but then again she was close to the top of the industry in the ‘50s. How many dozens or hundreds of other Latina actress dancers were hungry to be cast in the roles that she landed? How many others were as talented? Or making as much money? (There was a reason that she got the Anita role in West Side Story rather than Chita Rivera, who played thee spitfire character on Broadway). How many Puerto Rican-born actresses were hanging out with Marlon Brando in the ’50s and early ’60s and running in that heavy company? Or attending the 1963 Civil Rights March? And having a side affair with Elvis Presley and rubbing shoulders with almost everyone who mattered back them?

Yes, she really got going as a stage and character actress in the ‘60s, ‘70s and beyond. Yes, she was on The Electric Company and Sesame Street and Oz. Yes, she’s costarring in the Norman Lear reboot of One Day At A Time, etc.

It’s a bit curious, by the way, that Riera decided to ignore Moreno’s big scene with Jack Nicholson at the end of Mike Nichols‘ Carnal Knowledge (’71). It’s one of her hallmark moments of that era, and yet Riera dismisses it because…you tell me. She also ignores Moreno’s Elvis Presley affair, which was basically about making Brando jealous. (And she succeeded in doing that.)

The narrative is only about how cruel and insensitive and oppressive the industry was to Moreno. Which it WAS, of course. But it also afforded her fame, fortune, access, opportunity….all kinds of drama and excitement and intrigues. Obviously hard and demeaning and ungracious, but also door-opening. The doc only tells you how oppressive things were and what pigs the men were. Or what control freaks they were. Which they WERE, of course, but when wasn’t life hard or challenging for saucy actresses, especially in the bad old days? What people haven’t been disappointing in this or that way?