
Well, I put it off for as long as possible--fifteen years, as a matter of fact. But in the quest to discover the mysterious origins of my deep vein thrombosis, my doctor insisted it had to be done. So I finally gave in.
I had the colonoscopy.
(No really, the leg is doing much better now! Can't we just put it off for another fifteen years?)
I finally decided that I was being a scaredy cat and I needed to get an accurate assessment of my health for my family's sake (as well as my own). So I emptied out my gut and my colon smiled for the birdie.
The results? A few stray polyps (that my GI man didn't seem too worried about), but more seriously:
Ulcers.
This was kind of a surprise. I haven't had much of a problem with spicy foods; peppers don't bother me and I like my sushi with Wasabi. But, weirdly enough, I've had bad reactions to both AFTER the colonoscopy. (It's as if the procedure scraped off a protective coating around the ulcers...) I'm taking Prilosec for the next month, but I think I need to rethink my diet in general. That's not going to be easy.
***************
In between all the medical drama, I've caught up on some recent notable movies and TV miniseries and my reactions ranged from wild applause to total disgust (with a few milder opinions in between). Let's break it down:
The Good Stuff
I already raved about Oppenheimer in a previous post, so I'm not going to repeat myself. It won all the Oscars it deserved to win. Same goes for Poor Things (directed by Yorgos Lanthimos), a brilliant deconstruction of the Victorian mindset (which persists--in many ways--to the modern world). Emma Stone is amazing (of course), but she almost gets the movie stolen out from under her by Mark Ruffalo, as a would-be Bohemian cad who isn't nearly as free from his era's social conventions as he thinks he is. (It's just pure evil fun to watch as Bella's quest for personal liberation completely strips him of his self delusions, leaving him a gibbering wreck.)
The makeup, costuming and production design combine to create a thoroughly believable steampunk alternate late 1800s and Lanthimos handles this expanded pallette with confidence and flair. If I have one complaint about the movie--and maybe this is just me--it's that Bella's logical, empirical methodology creates a bit of an emotional distance between the audience and the character. You root for her (because, yes, she's that awesome), but you don't get a lot of warm moments with her. (You get one between Bella and the courtesan in the Paris brothel, but I would have liked a little more.)
Pay no attention to my nitpicking. This movie is great. And we have another Emma Stone/Yorgos Lanthimos team up all ready to go? I'm there!
I've heard descriptions of Beau Is Afraid (written and directed by Ari Aster) ranging from "technicolor nervous breakdown" to "the world's longest Jewish mother joke." I think the closest I can get to classifying this very bold, very long, very weird movie is the counterculture novels of Terry Southern (like Candy or The Magic Christian), where a naive protagonist would go on a surreal, satirical journey through modern society--a bildungsroman on acid. But since Aster is a horror director, this movie is more like an anti-bildungsroman--the deeper he goes, the more he realizes he's always been fucked.
Whether you're willing to sit through a three hour anxiety attack depends on whether you liked Ari Aster's previous movies (Heredity and Midsommar) and how much you like Joaquin Phoenix. But, love it or hate it, give Phoenix credit--the man commits. His Beau is a vibrating mass of jangled nerves, constantly on the verge of helpless tears or outright implosion. It's a version of Phoenix we've rarely seen before--softer, intensely vulnerable--and he capably guides us through Aster's narrative circus act until the bitter, bitter end.
Is this movie for everyone? No. A lot of people will give up halfway through, muttering "self indulgent crap". But I loved it. It was John Waters' favorite movie of last year. (Have we ever steered you wrong?)
Should Have Been Better
I've been a fan of Nicole Holofcener for awhile now, admiring her idiosyncratic romantic comedies, like Enough Said (starring Julia Louis Dreyfus and the late--sniff!--James Gandolfini) or her screenplays for The Last Duel and Can You Ever Forgive Me?
Holofcener's latest, You Hurt My Feelings, teams her up with JLD again, but the movie just isn't as sharp as their previous outing, and the central conflict--semi-famous author discovers husband doesn't like her novel--comes off as rich people's problems and relatively slight. There are mentions throughout the movie of the author's abusive childhood, but Holofcener doesn't put much emphasis on past trauma, perhaps afraid it'll spoil the warm, relaxed vibe.
The big problem with the movie, though, is that it's not very funny. It's witty and well-observed (as usual for a Holofcener joint), but the big laughs (mostly) aren't there. The exception is a series of riotous scenes with David Cross and Amber Tamblyn as a married couple receiving no help from their couples counseling sessions. Cross and Tamblyn (married in RL!) bounce acid comments off each other and their hapless therapist at breakneck speed and it supercharges the whole movie. Maybe next time, Holofcener needs to get a bit more down and dirty.
Feud: Capote and the Swans, detailing Truman Capote's friendship with--and ultimate betrayal of--the ladies of Manhattan society has an incredible pedigree: written by playwright Jon Robin Baitz, directed by Gus Van Sant, and stocked with a-list acting talent (led by Tom Hollander as Capote), it should have been a knockout...
But once the relationship between Capote and his "swans" has been defined--he's both attracted and repelled by the Lifestyles of the Superrich--the drama spins its wheels for the rest of the series. There are occasional breaks in the inertia-- Chris Chalk drops in as James Baldwin, dispensing gay solidarity and hard truths--but no amount of bon mots can disguise the tedium at the heart of the enterprise.
Naomi Watts is superb as practically perfect Babe Paley (wife of CBS chairman William Paley), and Hollander devours Capote like a fine pate de fois gras. I just wish they were in a better show.
Complete Botch
How could they have blown it this badly?
Scott Frank (The Queen's Gambit) and Tom Fontana (Homicide: Life on the Street) take Dashiel Hammett's Sam Spade (Clive Owen) on an adventure to the south of France, where he encounters beautiful scenery, beautiful women, spies, jaded gendarmes and lots and lots of murder. It can't miss.
So why is it so boring?
Frank and Fontana somehow, inexplicably, make every wrong choice. The most interesting characters, like Brigid O'Shaughnessy and Spade's rich and beautiful French wife, Gabrielle? Dead before the first commercial. The main villain, the Sydney Greenstreet of the piece? Lost in the shadows for most of the runtime. Brigid's annoying teenage daughter? Does not shut up.
There is murder at a convent AND a mysterious boy who could be a prophesied messiah AND teams of uninteresting spies working at cross purposes AND much hand-wringing about the French/Algerian war. (An endlessly fascinating topic for American audiences, I've heard.) It's so convoluted that Alfre Woodard shows up in the last 15 minutes(!) and basically tells everybody to go home.
Owen tries his best, but Monsieur Spade is a complete botch from beginning to end. Pray there is no Season Two.