The Giver

Year 15, Day 318 - 11/16/23 - Movie #4,589

BEFORE: Meryl Streep carries over from "The Homesman".  It's a bit of an odd year if I haven't seen Streep in two movies already - it's an easy link tonight but I don't think she'll make the year-end wrap-up with only two films.  But hey, it looks like Taylor Swift is going to make the cut for the first time ever.  Is Taylor Swift the new Meryl Streep?

THE PLOT: In a seemingly perfect community without war, pain, suffering, differences, or choices, a young boy is chosen to learn from an elderly man about the true pain and pleasure of the "real" world. 

AFTER: It's far in the future (maybe? how far?) in a country that might have once been America (only, how can you tell?) and everyone lives in the ultimate gated communities, with the Chief Elder keeping an eye on things via hologram.  This is a society where Meryl Streep has somehow become the equivalent of President, and of course I approve that sort of society, however there's a bit of a bait-and-switch here, we're told that this is a utopian future, however be prepared to maybe find out that it's anything but, and might even be a dystopian one. 

Oh, sure, everything seems fine, at first, but everything's in black and white!  There was some kind of event called "The Ruin", which reorganized society - it's unclear if this was a war or a famine or a pandemic, but somehow during The Ruin society lost its color.  Sure, I figured this was just symbolic, and that color represented joy or the emotions that have become forbidden, but now that I read the plot summary on Wikipedia, it appears that this is meant to be taken literally, nobody in this society can see color?  Huh?  OK, I'll give you that we can maybe do away with war in the future, that would be great, and suffering, sure, get rid of suffering.  But CHOICE?  That sounds awful close to giving up freedom, but it appears that's gone the way of the dinosaur also, since nobody can leave their gated community, for safety's sake, apparently.  Now, please, explain to me how eliminating war, suffering, and choice also made colors go away.  I'm waiting...

You can see what I mean, right?  This works on a symbolic level, if we don't have choices or emotions than our lives become drab and emotionless, and therefore SYMBOLIZED by black and white.  To explain joy and emotions to someone who can't experience them would be similar to explaining color to someone who can't see colors, or music to a deaf person, or how something tastes to someone with no taste buds.  It can't be done, or if it can, it would be extremely difficult.  What's worse is that whatever took away all these other things took away all the stock footage - I mean, memories, or for whatever reason nobody remembers the way that things used to be in the past.  Except one person, the Reciever of Memory. 

Look, I get where they were going with this, but it just can't work. Even if everyone willingly forgot about history or was made to forget about what came before, we'd still have books, right?  People could read about the way things were in the past and live vicariously through fictional characters or biographies of real people, right?  Or maybe that's where things started, they banned books and nobody remembered the "Fahrenheit 451" system of preserving them, so with no books then MAYBE somebody had a shot at getting rid of memory, and then with no romance novels love went away, and without scary stories nobody was afraid any more and without MAD Magazine nobody laughed at anything any more.  OK, lesson for the day, banning books is BAD, even if your school library has books about queer people that you don't want your kids to read, tough, deal with it because once you start banning books then we end up in a future where there is no love and also nobody can see color.  Apparently. 

Also, there is no unemployment, because when the 18-year olds graduate, they are assigned jobs like drone pilot or nurturer and then that's their gig until they retire.  Umm, sure, I can see how the elders might be able to figure out who should do what based on their skills, only how can they possibly know that there will be a job opening for them?  Ah, they've got that one sorted out, too, because when people reach a certain age and they retire, they are sent to go live "Elsewhere".  Likewise, only a certain number of babies are allowed to be raised by families, and the babies who don't make the cut are also sent to go live "Elsewhere".  And if you start to think that this "Elsewhere" is really a euphemism for something, well, you're on the right track.  If you've seen "Logan's Run" you might figure out how this future society works.  It's kind of like when your dog or cat goes to live on a farm upstate, only there's not really a farm. 

Jonas is the last person from his class to be assigned a job, and his job is to become the new Receiver of Memory, which makes the old Receiver of Memory into the Giver of Memory.  The new Giver is able to transmit memories of the past society into Jonas' brain, and so Jonas becomes the new only person who knows how the world really works.  So he gets to learn about war and love and all the good things and bad things that no longer exists, also he gets to tell lies, which nobody else is allowed to do, and sure, this system sure seems like it's working just fine, no adjustment needed, hey, we made it this far, so why not just stay the course.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?  Only I guess it's pretty broke - nobody knows how to have fun any more, nobody apparently has sex, all the babies are made in a lab, and there are no movies or TV.  Yeah, some utopia.

What's worse is that most people don't even realize there's a problem, Jonas' father kills babies in the lab because they're not perfect, and then there's the community's retirement plan, where the benefits aren't great.  There are no Social Security checks in the future, either.  Jonas, instead of becoming a millionaire and re-inventing television, chooses to grab his baby brother and drive off on a motorcycle, to make it to the towers that surround the community and hope that somehow this will restore stock footage to the community.  Wait, I mean memories.  

I don't know, this whole story is problematic at best.  It feels like this was all meant to be some kind of metaphor for something, but I'm not sure for what.  Is someone really saying that society can never eliminate war, not without losing everything else that makes us human, like free will?  So, does this mean that it's pointless to even TRY to eliminate war?  I can't believe that could possibly be the case.  And if we got rid of hate, we'd lose love in the process?  Again, I'm not really following that logic, it would be like saying you wouldn't know that winter is cold unless you also understood that summer is hot.  But we're intelligent people (well, some of us...) and we can reason things out and say that these things are good and those things are bad, but somehow we can't just try to get rid of the bad things?  Like the only way to cut down crime and murder would be to take away all of people's freedom and free will?  Have you tried ALL of the other ways?

NITPICK POINT: How come in the future there are bicycles, but not, sleds, or even skateboards?  Even if people forgot what those items are, what would there be that would prevent somebody from inventing them again?  They seem like very simple concepts that people could reason out again, even if everyone was somehow made to forget about them.  Same goes for dancing or singing.

That's all for this week, but my Thanksgiving-themed mini-chain starts on Sunday.  And I just realized that my lead-in to Thanksgiving is titled "The Giver", somehow that ended up being very appropriate. 

Also starring Jeff Bridges (last seen in "Fearless"), Brenton Thwaites (last seen in "Son of a Gun"), Alexander Skarsgard (last seen in "The Northman"), Katie Holmes (last seen in "Touched With Fire"), Odeya Rush (last seen in "Dumplin'"), Cameron Monaghan (last seen in "The Year of Spectacular Men"), Taylor Swift (last seen in "Idina Menzel: Which Way to the Stage?"), Emma Tremblay (last seen in "Wonder"), Alexander Jillings, James Jillings, Renate Stuurman, Thabo Rametsi.

RATING: 5 out of 10 daily injections

The Homesman

Year 15, Day 316 - 11/14/23 - Movie #4,588

BEFORE: I could have watched this one last week, in between "Just Getting Started" with Tommy Lee Jones and "2 Days in the Valley" with James Spader - it would have fit fine there, and maybe I did have it scheduled there at one point.  But moving it to HERE allows me to continue in a direction that gets me closer to my Thanksgiving film chain, which will start on Sunday, 2 films from now.  Getting closer to the end of Movie Year 15 with each film, only 12 left on the docket after tonight.  

Hilary Swank carries over from "Fatale". 

THE PLOT: Three women who have been driven mad by pioneer life are to be transported across the country in a covered wagon by independent-minded Mary Bee Cuddy, who in turn employs low-life drifter George Briggs to assist her. 

AFTER: There's stuff that they just don't teach you in U.S. History class, where 1800's America is portrayed as a land full of opportunity, manifest destiny and all that - as new states kept getting added to the Union, the chances for people to make their mark increased, or so we're told.  John Jacob Astor made money from the fur trade up in Canada, other people invested in land where the railroads needed to be built, others found gold at Sutter's Mill in California, others later drilled for oil in Texas. Or you just needed to pick a location and get out there and work the land, surely good fortune would come your way, it's the land of opportunity, after all!  

But there must have been a fair amount of losers along the way, too - you just can't have everyone being successful and rich, then nothing would have any value, plus who would work at the menial labor jobs, etc.  Capitalism and the free market dictate that whoever got there first, like in the Oklahoma Land Rush, had the CHANCE to be successful - only the chance was guaranteed, not the success itself.  So there must have been people who bought the land where the railroad DIDN'T go, people who made it out to Sutter's Mill only to find all the gold was already found, and people who drilled for oil in Texas and couldn't find any.  History is written by the winners, and we don't ever think too much about the losers.  

This is a film that definitely shows there WERE losers, people who left their cities on the East Coast to strike it rich in Nebraska (or Iowa, or Oklahoma, etc.) and things then just didn't go their way for whatever reason.  You could buy up land for a farm, for example, but then you had no control over the weather, the availability of good farmhands, or seed, and then there were cattle rustlers or bandits or claim jumpers or other no-goodniks ready to mess with your success.  And then even if you DID produce a bumper crop of something, how the hell were you going to get your crops back to the people in the cities that wanted your corn?  Or maybe you grew corn and so did all your neighbors, and there's a glut on the market, so the value goes down?  

So maybe you came all the way out to Nebraska and you find that it's a lot harder than you thought it would be.  Or you can't find good help, anyone willing to work, or even someone to marry you just to make your life on the farm a little easier and more bearable.  That's what happens to Mary Bee Cuddy in this film, the men will come to her house and eat dinner, but that's as far as they're willing to take things, to be platonic companions, because they don't happen to find her attractive, they'd rather import a wife from back East.  Maybe Mary shouldn't propose on the first date, just saying, that's not really how you landed a husband back then.  Or was it?  I have no idea.  Maybe they just found her weird because she played a piano that was not real, just a design on fabric - save that for the second date, that's all.  Also, she's too bossy and independent for these men that she's proposing to - their words, not mine.  But she's 31 and desperate, practically a spinster by 1850's standards. 

Other women were having an even tougher time - one lost three children to disease, another killed her own child because her family was so close to starving, and a third was abused by her husband and had to deal with the death of her mother.  Then on top of that, the isolation on the prairie and a very tough winter made all three mentally unstable - they can barely speak, and they all need a check-up from the neck up, so the local Reverend determines they need to be sent to a church in Iowa that cares for the mentally ill.  The delivery job should have been done by one of their husbands, but Ms. Cuddy took one man's place in the lottery when he refused to participate.  Her name gets chosen, but she'll only do it if she has help, and she finds it by rescuing George Briggs from a noose, he was sentenced to hanging for living in the house of the guy who wouldn't marry Ms. Cuddy.  Hey, it's a small town after all. 

Cuddy tells Briggs she's mailed his fee on to Iowa, so he has to make it to the end of the journey if he's going to get paid - and his fighting skills come in handy when one of the insane women gets kidnapped, and his knowledge of the Native American trails and customs also saves them along the way.  They do make a good team, but Cuddy pulls out the old marriage proposal again, and Briggs also says no. You'd think she'd be used to rejection by now, but she doesn't take it well.  Briggs didn't turn her down because of her looks, though, he just didn't see himself as the farming type.  Still, that was apparently one rejection too many for Cuddy.

There are a few more twists and turns to the plot, but I'm going to stop there - you'll have to watch the film to find out if these travelers make it to Iowa or not.  But just remember this is not necessarily a story about the winners in history, the focus here is on the people who couldn't cut it as pioneers.  Look, I think this is 100% accurate, I know if I ever left New York City and moved to the Midwest, I'd probably go certifiably insane, too.  Like, what do you DO in Nebraska, seriously, even today?  Grow corn, watch college football, read books?  It sounds horrible, I'm not going.  I've visited Texas, Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia and the Carolinas over the last few years, but after a few days down South, I can't wait to come home.  Nice places to visit, and I dig the food, but I can also get good BBQ in NYC.

This film has a sizable cast, however most actors outside the two mains and the three insane women are only in the film for a few minutes each, so essentially everyone from Meryl Streep and John Lithgow to James Spader, Hailee Steinfeld and Tim Blake Nelson are in cameo roles.  It sure makes my linking easier to deal with such a large cast, but if you're a Jesse Plemons fan, say, be aware he's only in the film for a minute or two, as nearly everyone is.  

Also starring Tommy Lee Jones (last seen in "Just Getting Started"), Grace Gummer (last seen in "Jenny's Wedding"), Miranda Otto (last seen in "Downhill"), Sonja Richter, Meryl Streep (last seen in "Don't Look Up"), John Lithgow (last seen in "De Palma"), James Spader (last seen in "2 Days in the Valley"), Hailee Steinfeld (last seen in "Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse"), Caroline Lagerfelt (last seen in "I'll See You in My Dreams"), Tim Blake Nelson (last seen in "Nightmare Alley"), Jesse Plemons (last seen in "Antlers"), William Fichtner (last seen in "Equilibrium"), David Dencik (last seen in "No Time to Die"), Barry Corbin (last seen in "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas"), Evan Jones (last seen in "Den of Thieves"), Jo Harvey Allen (last seen in "Tapeheads"), Karen Jones (last seen in "Boyhood"), Brian Kennedy, Rick Irwin, Richard Andrew Jones (last seen in "Bernie"), Austin Leonard Jones, Lila Brock, Jesi Mandagaran, Autumn Shields

RATING: 6 out of 10 buffalo skins

Fatale

Year 15, Day 315 - 11/13/23 - Movie #4,587

BEFORE: This is just how my weekends go lately - one leisurely day out on Long Island, driving around, getting lunch at a new restaurant, maybe do a little shopping at a discount store, then relaxing at home catching up on TV, then a day working at the theater on the evening shift - yesterday it was a guild screening of "Priscilla", the new movie coming out about Priscilla Presley, and jeez, I just watched that Baz Lurhmann "Elvis' film with Austin Butler about two months ago, and there's another film about the Presleys already?  This one's from an acclaimed female director, and she happened to be there to do a Q&A session.  I'm not allowed to get starstruck any more, instead I just add her to my list of people I've encountered, and that list has probably doubled in the last two years, as a lot of celebrities come through that place.  That alone makes it an interesting place to work, and I fell like eventually I'm going to have to get a real full time job, and then I'll miss out on all the celebrity sightings.  Maybe when I've seen everybody that there is to see, or when it feels right to move on, I just don't know when that will be. 

Denise Dowse carries over from "Eulogy".  

THE PLOT: After a one-night stand, a successful married man finds himself entangled in a cunning police detective's latest investigation. 

AFTER: In addition to a somewhat similar title, this film has sort of the same jumping-off point as "Fatal Attraction", namely that a man decides to have an affair, and then a screenwriter asked the common question, "What could POSSIBLY go wrong?"  I find myself noticing more and more that movie plots seem to come from writers asking this question, because the answer then turns out to be, well, a lot that can go wrong.  Michael Douglas' character in "Fatal Attraction" found out that when he stepped outside his marriage, he created a situation, a woman who wouldn't go away, who refused to be ignored, and things spiraled out of control from there. 

In "Fatale", a successful man who co-runs a sports management agency suspects his own wife of maybe having an affair - she seems to be putting in a lot of late nights and also occasionally seems cold and distant.  This causes her husband to be concerned, I guess maybe his ego couldn't handle the possibility that she just might like working late at her job, or maybe that she prefers her time at the office to spending the evening with him, or even the possibility that over time, people could grow apart or lose interest in each other.  Nah, it must be an affair.  But then he thinks that figuring this out gives him free rein to have one himself at a bachelor party trip to Vegas.  Sure, that should fix things, when has having an affair ever made things worse?  HUH?  What's the logic here, how far does this guy have to bend reality over backwards in order to justify him wanting to screw around?  Even if his wife WERE having an affair, it's not an appropriate reaction to finding that out, to just run out and have one of his own. 

His friend and business partner convinces him to take off his wedding ring for a night, and sure enough, he meets a woman in a bar and before long, they're having sex in her room.  He tells her his name is "Darren from Seattle" instead of Derrick from L.A., just in case, you know, she gets possessive or wants to contact him after their encounter.  You really just can't be too careful about these things, and give out your real first name and the city you live in.  God knows there could only be a few Derricks in the L.A. area, but after going by "Darren", Derrick thinks he's in the clear. 

But after returning home to L.A., and fending off an armed burglar who broke in, his case gets investigated by detective Valerie Quinlan, who sure looks familiar, now where does he know her from?  Right, Vegas!  What are the odds? Well, I guess pretty good if a screenwriter wants to create the worst possible scenario.  There goes that whole brillant Darren/Derrick plan...  But things seem to be OK at first, the detective is a little pissed that she had a one-night stand with a married man AND that she was lied to, but she says she'll keep his secret, because, you know, Vegas. What happens in Vegas is SUPPOSED to stay in Vegas, but apparently sometimes it follows you home.  

There's still the matter of that burglary/home invasion, and Det. Quinlan says that she'll be professional and solve the case, which she does, only Derrick may not like what she finds out.  OR what she wants Derrick to do in exchange for her silence - it turns out she's got a daughter and an ex-husband who has custody, and she comes up with a very outrageous plan to fix her own life, by using Derrick.  And then things start to seem a lot like "Strangers on a Train", or perhaps "Throw Momma from the Train" is more appropriate, since a delusional character thinks that murder is a tool that can be used to foster personal growth, via killing the people who seem to be in your way.  Is it a bit weird that a police detective is so casual about killing people?  And then the solution to the problems created by killing those people is always to kill a few more people?  

And then, after that, if you still have a problem, well it just makes sense - you just didn't kill the RIGHT people.  Who's going to notice a few more bodies at that point?  What a great message to send out to the kids...the kids who suddenly don't have parents any more, that is.  Also, it's an odd message that if you made a mistake and had an affair, the only thing you can do to fix it is to make a whole bunch more, it's a cascading bad decision tree for sure.  And all of this could have been prevented if Derrick had just simply ASKED his wife if she were having an affair - and then dealing with the consequences of that, rather than using his suspicions as justification for going out and having an affair himself.  Yep, still stuck on that, because I'm sure it might happen in the real world, but it sure doesn't make any logical sense. 

Also starring Hilary Swank (last seen in "The Hunt"), Michael Ealy (last seen in "Last Vegas"), Mike Colter (last seen in "Extinction"), Damaris Lewis (last seen in "BlacKkKlansman"), Tyrin Turner, Danny Pino (last seen in "Dear Evan Hansen"), Geoffrey Owens (last seen in "The Paper"), David Hoflin, Sam Daly, Lexa Gluck, Oakley Bull (last seen in "Wonder Woman 1984"), Kali Hawk (last seen in "Bridesmaids"), Lance Stephenson.  

RATING: 4 out of 10 cold cases from 2010