Paul Levinson's Blog: Levinson at Large, page 154

August 4, 2019

The Rook 1.6: Family



Myfanwy meets her sister in The Rook 1.6 - assuming she is her sister, real family.  This in contrast to Checquy, who act as if they're her family.  Checquy is certainly as dysfunctional as many families, we'll give them that.  (I like how each of the Checquy pronounces their name slightly differently, you notice that?)

By the end of the encounter, we and Myfanwy are convinced that her sister is her sister.  She tells Myfanway how the Checquy ripped her apart from her  family when she was 12 and her EVA powers manifested.  More convincingly, Myfanway feels something she recognizes when she feels her childhood bedcover, and this leads to other memories.  Yeah, the sister is likely her real sister, and Checquy are likely monsters.

The Home Secretary is beginning to learn the monster part, the hard way.  Farrier's super powers have convinced the Home Secretary that her success resides in working with rather than against Farrier. She instructs Conrad to rehire her.

And this at the same time as Myfanwy, after thanking her sister, tells Gestalt that Farrier caused all the recent damage - the bridge executions, the memory wipe, all of it.  Of course, she knows this mainly because Nazim told her, and is there any reason she should so value his information.

But Farrier, who apparently caused some real damage to the Checquy, is back in that family fold.  Which only shows, again, how dysfunctional that family really is.

See also:  The Rook 1.1: Dickian Pastiche ... The Rook 1.2: Live Details ... The Rook 1.3: Gestalts ... The Rook 1.4: The Bristol Stomp ... The Rook 1.5: The Home Secretary


They're coming out into the open, for the first time in centuries .... Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 04, 2019 21:48

August 3, 2019

Years and Years 1.6 (Finale): Power



Years and Years had an especially powerful finale last Sunday.  In part because it was, in effect, a two-part finale.  In part because each part was so strong.

The first had to do with a happy ending to the dystopian near future which was the political part of the narrative.  This near future Britain was worse and better than our Trumpian America.   Worse in that the BBC was forced to close down, and undesirables were not only rounded up but killed.  Events as massive as the atomic attack on the Chinese island were taken by an increasing number of the public as fake news.

But, in the end, the power of the people rose up and swept Vivian Rook and her totalitarian system from office.   Which is not to say that a new demagogue might not ever arise - Trumps and Rooks are always never far from center stage - but at least, for the time being, freedom and truth won the day.

The second had to with a happy ending to the science fiction in the story.   Uploading yourself to a computer as a way of cheating death and achieving immortality has long been a trope of a science fiction (see my review of Charles Platt's Silicon Man from 1991, eight years before The Matrix).

On Years and Years, the personality and memories are downloaded (to water) rather than uploaded.  But Edith, who absorbed a slowly lethal dose of radiation in that atomic blast, is able to survive, sans flesh, in that aquatic digital fluid.   As neat and satisfying a science fictional solution (sorry, I can never resist a pun) as has come along on television in a while.

A great ending to a great success of a little series that couldn't be more relevant to our dangerous world.

See also Years and Years 1.1-1.4: "Democracy ... Worn Out" ... Years and Years 1.5: The Disappeared


Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 03, 2019 19:44

August 2, 2019

Once Upon a Time ... In Hollywood: Masterful Alternate Reality



My wife and son and I just saw Quentin Tarantino's Once Upon a Time ... In Hollywood at our son's invitation. He's an even bigger Tarantino fan than I am, and my wife liked a couple of his earlier movies too.

The latest is among the best three Tarantino ever made - right up with Reservoir Dogs (in a class by itself) and Jackie Brown, which was just an all-out brilliant movie.  I use the phrase "alternate reality" in the title of this review.  As many of you know, I'm a science fiction author, and a copious reviewer of science fiction television series and movies.  I don't mean to suggest that Once Upon a Time is science fiction alternate reality, in the way that, say, the recently departed Counterpart on television was.   But as the title surely suggests, Once Upon a Time is a fable, neither docu-drama (though it does touch upon many aspects of real history) nor sheer fiction.

And the aspects of reality woven into this marvelous movie that takes place in 1969 Hollywood range from Bruce Lee to Mannix on television to the Playboy mansion to Charles Manson and Sharon Tate.  The fictitious characters are headlined by Rick Dalton (a somewhat washed up 1950s TV Western actor) and his stunt man double, Cliff Booth.  Rick is played by Leonardo DiCaprio and Cliff by Brad Pitt.  I've been saying ever since the two began burning up the screen decades ago that their looks almost made them interchangeable.  It was good to see Tarantino finally build a movie around this.

The movie is chocked full of memorable scenes, including Sharon Tate enjoying her own movie, Cliff getting the better of Bruce Lee in either a fantasy or a flashback, and Al Pacino playing a agent whose name is Schwarz and insists that people don't call him Schwartz (I've known a few people named Schwarz over the years, and have always been aggravated that I couldn't call them Schwartz).  And a plethora of great lines, including Dalton exulting in fried "sour kraut" when he takes a flame thrower to Nazis in an audition for a movie.  (I wouldn't be surprised if Tarantino came up with that line when he was 15, and was just waiting for a chance to write a scene in which he put it into a movie.)  And a full-house of great stars, most of them no youngsters, playing all kinds of bit and bigger parts, as per just about all Tarantino movies.

But the best part - and I won't say more, lest I give too much away - is the ending of the movie, which is why I say this movie is alternate reality (or alternate history, depending on how you look at it).  With so much of our reality animating this fable, Tarantino lulls us into thinking that just about everything will be the same.  It isn't, and that what's wraps up this wonderful package of what will go down as a quintessential Tarantino masterpiece.


real alternate reality, if that makes any sense"flat-out fantastic" - Scifi and Scary

Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 02, 2019 21:25

August 1, 2019

Listen to the Way Pacino (Hoffa) Says "Phone"




This has to be one of the best trailers I've ever seen - for Martin Scorsese's new movie, The Irishman, due out on Netflix and select theaters this Fall.  It stars Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, and Joe Pacino.  It's about Jimmy Hoffa.  How could you go wrong?

But it looks and sounds to be even better than that.  Listen to way Pacino, playing Hoffa, says "phone" (about 28 seconds in).   Pacino's voice and phrasing, the way he bends words just right, like daggers (usually softly) in your heart, has always been one of his strongest suits.  But this "phone" is something else.  Beyond just right.  Sheer acoustic genius.

And De Niro has been subject to a new "de-aging process".   That's something to see, too.  This trailer is like a real window to the past - except the real is the Hoffa story, and the fiction is someone De Niro's current age playing him in a 2019 movie.

Pesci also is in fine form and voice.   I could listen to these three guys all night.   If the movie is anything as good as the trailer, it'll be one for the ages.  Look for my review here in the Fall.

Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 01, 2019 19:48

July 31, 2019

Second 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 2 of 2: Winners and Losers

The headline of the second part of the Second Democratic Presidential Debate, just concluded on CNN, is that Joe Biden did a lot better than he did in the First Democratic Presidential Debate on MSNBC last month. He was still a little inarticulate at times, and a little too prone to let the moderators interrupt him, but he was very impressive.  And so was just about everyone else on stage in Detroit tonight.

Some highlights -

De Blasio is completely right that current, private health care premiums, deductibles, out of pocket expenses, not to mention costs of prescribed medications, are far more expensive than what we would pay in taxes for universal, government-provided heath care.  On the cost of pharmaceuticals, good for Biden for highlighting that these obscenely high costs need to be brought under controlCastro and Gillibrand were right to call on De Blasio to immediately fire Eric Garner's killer, officer Daniel Pantaleo (Harris joined in on this call, too.)Inslee was right to call for end of Senate filibuster.Biden handled criticism of some of his past decisions pretty well.  He explained what he was trying to accomplish at the time, on issues ranging from busing to the Hyde Amendment, and he got support from Gabbard and Bennet.In general, just everyone on stage was sharp and combative when needed.  I'd say the weakest, in terms of ideas and constructive engagement, was Andrew Yang.One point about Harris: she again wrongly contrasted science vs. science fiction in Democratic vs. Republican positions on climate.  Not that the Republican positions aren't fantasy and counter-factual, it's that science fiction is not that, and not the opposite of science.  She did the same thing in the first debate last month.  Here was my response.
The September debate is next up, and there will no doubt be fewer candidates up on stage for that.  I'll be back with an assessment of what should be another exciting, even inspiring, night.

See also Second 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 1 of 2: Winners and Losers
Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 31, 2019 20:07

July 30, 2019

Second 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, Part 1 of 2: Winners and Losers

I thought the first part of the second 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate, just concluded on CNN, was much better than the first part of the first 2020 Democratic Presidential Debate on MSNBC last month.  By "much better," I mean that almost every candidate on the stage expressed her or himself better than what we saw last month.

Among the highlights -

Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were clear, passionate, and outstanding on their view that the avarice of private health insurance means that the best path forward is the government provides all of it.  As Bernie said, health care is a human right.  (I would add, the government protects us from human parasites, why not from micro-parasites and lethal cells?)  And as Warren said, private insurers are all devoted to maximizing profits, which means taking in as much money as possible in premiums, and keeping expenditures for health care to a minimum.  Later in the debate, Rep. Delaney's equation of private pensions and private health insurance was wrong: there is no immoral profit motive in companies providing pensions for employees.Amy Klobuchar was outstanding on the need to finally stand up to the NRA as the only way to get sensible gun reform in America, and stop the massacres.Back to Bernie and Elizabeth Warren: Bernie was better than Warren in wanting to cancel all student debt, in contrast to Warren, who wants to cancel 95% of that debt.  But good for Warren for being better than everyone else on that stage on that issue, other than BernieGood for Pete Buttigieg for insisting that all U. S. military engagements (i.e. wars) get Congressional approval. and that approval have a three-year sunset clause.  Here's a better idea: how about we follow the Constitution, and insist on a Declaration of War (but also with a sunset clause).Buttigieg also put out an important challenge to all Republicans in Congress: do you want to be remembered as someone who didn't speak up about the racism of Trump?Bernie's denunciation of Trump as a "pathological liar" is always good to hear.Especially powerful closing statements by Buttigieg, Warren, and Bernie.As to everyone else in the debate, I thought that Rep. John Delaney spoke the best, and offered the best arguments against Bernie and Warren.  But I didn't agree with him.  And as for the rest, well, I look forward to not seeing them on stage in the third debate, in September.See you here tomorrow night.
Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
1 like ·   •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 30, 2019 19:43

July 29, 2019

City on a Hill 1.7: The Bodies



Jackie continues to get his way in City on a Hill 1.7, squeezing Jimmy to reveal the locations of the bodies from the heist, essential to DeCourcy making a case.

That was the end of the episode.  The beginning also had a body, but one which just managed to survive.  That would Michaela, who winds up at the bottom of a steep flight on Boston stairs, barely alive.   Did Jackie have something to with this, as well?

We know that Michaela's been investigating Jackie.  Did he push her, or have her pushed, down that flight of stairs?   The medical assessment is she fell - but we know how out of touch with reality those can be.   Well, one thing's for sure.  It's not likely Bonnie from Big Little Lies did it.   She's presumably still in California.

But the serious question about Jackie remains.  Would he actually kill someone to protect his vital interests?  I would say if the person was a dangerous criminal, yes.  But a reporter, investigating him?  On balance, I'd say no.  Jackie's sense of morality may not be the strongest, but it's there.  And as a practical matter, killing a reporter could well only invite further investigation.

Even with Michaela surviving, it already has.  Rachel has now taken up Michaela's investigation.  And, as an insider, she has a lot more at her command than does/did Michaela.  In fact, Rachel looks to be the most serious opponent Jackie may encounter on City on the Hill this season.

Which makes it eminently worth watching.

See also City on a Hill: Possibilities ... City on a Hill 1.2: Politics in a Cracked Mirror ... City on a Hill 1.3: One Upping The Sopranos ... City on a Hill 1.4: Enjoyable Derivative ... City on a Hill 1.6: Tony's Mother, Mayhem, and Family

 
Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 29, 2019 11:19

The Rook 1.5: The Home Secretary



The Home Secretary came into focus in The Rook 1.5 last night.  No figure head, she, but a crucial player, who's been having an affair with Conrad, and wants to be Prime Minister.  And she's well played by Gina McKee, whom I first noticed in The Borgias.

But the big news is Farrier, who's not only fired by the Home Secretary, but displays some powerful super powers of her own.  Unless I haven't been paying attention, this is the first time we've seen them.   As this series progresses, it's apparent that there are more EVAs than first met the eye.

I've said the show reminds me of Heroes.  It also has threads of Sense8.  The Gestalts, indeed, are closely related Sense8 clusters - born on the same day, in powerful telepathic connection, the only difference being the Sense8 cluster members are not physical twins.  But the cluster members come from all around the world, and the back story of Nazim brings home the global distribution of EVAs.

The resonances of The Rook with other series - in reviewing it in the past weeks, I've mentioned Heroes, Counterpart, and Sense8 - is actually its great strength.   Because although it bears resemblances to these and other shows, there's something about The Rook that's all its own.  Something in the pacing, or the characters, or both.  Take the Home Secretary, for instance.

She's having an affair with Conrad, and the rules say they either now must break it off or go public with it.   Jennifer (that's her name) breaks it off, because she thinks the Prime Minister is vulnerable and thus open to Jennifer becoming the PM.  So, I'm wondering - is she also an EVA of some sort, and if she becomes PM, wouldn't that be a provocative development?  (Hey, the current Prime Minister in our real world is ... well, let's not go there.)

See also:  The Rook 1.1: Dickian Pastiche ... The Rook 1.2: Live Details ... The Rook 1.3: Gestalts ... The Rook 1.4: The Bristol Stomp


They're coming out into the open, for the first time in centuries ....

Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 29, 2019 10:18

July 28, 2019

The Loudest Voice 1.5: Was Ailes Really All That Powerful?



The fifth episode of The Loudest Voice makes clear what the series has been more than hinting at all along: it was Ailes more than anyone else who put Trump in the White House.  Or, at least, the coming attractions do, after we see Ailes do his utmost to get Obama to lose in 2012.  Ailes blames his failure on that score to the lameness of Romney as a candidate.

I should point out that I'm not a particular believer in any single reason for Trump's winning in the Electoral College. Not the Russians, not Facebook, not Ailes.  All of those contributed in one way or another, but none was decisive, and even all together, those reasons, and those kinds of reasons, don't add up to a factor that was much more important: there were enough racist people in the country, along with people who see their futures eclipsed by what I and others see as progress, like health care for all, that they put Trump over the top.  Because they just happened to be in the right places to do this, given the oddities of our electoral system.

So Ailes, who played a role, was not quite the king maker he's made out to be in The Loudest Voice, and Ailes himself apparently and presumably believed.  A genius for understanding what a significant segment of the American public wanted in its news, yes.  A paranoid conservative with boundless confidence, willing to always act on those beliefs, yes.  A womanizer, yes.   But if he was responsible for Trump, he shares that awful distinction with millions of other Americans.

Back to tonight's episode, it was another powerhouse of docu-drama.   His firing of Brian Lewis, his near destruction of Joe, his groping of Gretchen - all parts strongly played by their actors (Seth MacFarlane, Emory Cohen, Naomi Watts) - not to mention the searing off-the-charts performance of Russell Crowe as Ailes - make The Loudest Voice a show to behold.

See also:  The Loudest Voice 1.1: Fox Launch ... The Loudest Voice 1.2: September 11 and After ... The Loudest Voice 1.3: Prelude to Trump ... The Loudest Voice 1.4: "We Create the News"




Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 28, 2019 21:03

Just Published: Robinson Calculator





They're coming out into the open, for the first time in centuries ....




my new novelette ... not related to any fiction I've published before ... available on Kindle and paper  Paul Levinson's books ... Paul Levinson's music
 •  0 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 28, 2019 11:26

Levinson at Large

Paul Levinson
At present, I'll be automatically porting over blog posts from my main blog, Paul Levinson's Infinite Regress. These consist of literate (I hope) reviews of mostly television, with some reviews of mov ...more
Follow Paul Levinson's blog with rss.