Woodland Enchantress Cross Stitch, Progress Report 8

We're well past due for an update on the cross stitch! Here's a reminder of what it's supposed to look like when I'm finished:

Here's what it looked like the last time I updated, in January 2018:

And here's what it looks like now:

During the Great Blog Burnout of 2018, I stopped keeping track of the hours/days I worked on this project. Bear in mind that I missed 2 updates (in April & July 2018), but I still get the impression that I worked on it a lot more this year than I did last year. I feel like I've made a lot of progress. I know I finished the bottom half around mid-July. That means all that work on the top half has occurred in less than 3 months. I attribute this to the fact that I started taking the project into work with me when I have day shifts. It's much easier to put this down down & pick it back up when the phones are busy than it is to read.

I've already purchased another big cross stitch, which I plan to hang in our bedroom, so I'm feeling extra motivated to finish this one in a more timely fashion!

Note: I'm trying to complete the sky around her head before I fill in the rest of her body because I'm bored to death with those colors (mostly blue-purple, sky blue, and light blue).

Top 50 Actors Project: Overview

When I decided to do the Top 50 Actresses Project, I figured I’d show the men some love by also doing the Top 50 Actors.

As with the actresses, I culled this list from AMC. They provided the list of actors, but I’m the one who chose the movie to watch for each actor. Since this list is voted on by the public, it appears that it can change over time. To avoid confusion, below I’m posting the list as it stood when I copied it down, along with the movies I chose for each actor.

A few notes about this project:

My main concern was that I wanted to make sure none of these films were movies that I previously reviewed, an issue I ran up against during both the AFI Top 100 and the Sci Fi Top 100.

So my general rule was that, if the actor won a Best Actor (not Best Supporting) Academy Award for a role, that is the movie I chose to review unless I previously reviewed it. If he won more than one, I chose which of those movies to review based on personal preference.

If I already reviewed one or all of his Award-winning performances OR if he hasn’t won a Best Actor Academy Award, then I looked at his acting credits and chose one of his movies to review. My choices were largely based on IMDB ratings (typically I chose something in the 7s or higher), coupled with my interest in the film based on its description. I avoided movies from the 1970s as much as possible. I've discovered that I'm not a big fan of 1970s film making.

Very occasionally, I have vetoed an Award-winning film simply because I don’t want to watch it. After watching lots of films I had little to no interest in, I wanted to give myself some leeway. Also, the list is subject to change. Some of these films are surprisingly difficult to get one’s hands on, despite the fact that I have access to an astounding number of ways to see films. Sometimes I may decide last-minute that I just don’t feel like watching the film I previously chose (this happened a few times with the actresses).

Since the focus of this project is more on performances rather than the films themselves, I’ll include a section about that with each review. Additionally, where applicable, I will provide links to other movies of that performer's that I’ve reviewed.

As usual, I will watch the list from the bottom up, beginning with #50 and making my way to #1. At the end of the project, I will provide a master list of reviews & some final thoughts. Here is the list of Top 50 Actors:

1.  Tom Hanks - Philadelphia
2.  Henry Fonda - 12 Angry Men
3.  Humphrey Bogart - The Caine Mutiny
4.  Laurence Olivier - Sleuth
5.  James Stewart - Anatomy of a Murder
6.  Gregory Peck - Twelve O’Clock High
7.  Marlon Brando - The Men
8.  Jack Lemmon - Missing
9.  William Holden - Stalag 17
10. Daniel Day-Lewis - There Will Be Blood
11. Orson Welles - Touch of Evil
12. Paul Newman - Cool Hand Luke
13. Anthony Hopkins - The Elephant Man
14. James Mason - 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
15. Jack Nicholson - The Shining
16. Spencer Tracy - Captains Courageous
17. Cary Grant - Arsenic and Old Lace
18. Peter Sellers - The Return of the Pink Panther
19. Clark Gable - Run Silent, Run Deep
20. Dustin Hoffman - All the President’s Men
21. William Powell - My Man Godfrey
22. Gary Cooper - Sergeant York
23. Michael Caine - The Italian Job
24. George C. Scott - The Hospital
25. Sean Connery - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
26. Charles Chaplin - The Great Dictator
27. Richard Burton - Becket
28. Burt Lancaster - Elmer Gantry
29. John Wayne - True Grit (1969)
30. Sean Penn - Mystic River
31. Sidney Poitier - Lilies of the Field
32. Steve McQueen - The Great Escape
33. Kirk Douglas - Spartacus
34. Russell Crowe - L.A. Confidential
35. Robert Mitchum - Out of the Past
36. Al Pacino - Scent of a Woman
37. Edward G. Robinson - Key Largo
38. Robert DeNiro - Once Upon a Time in America
39. Errol Flynn - The Adventures of Robin Hood
40. James Dean - East of Eden
41. Gene Kelly - On the Town
42. Fred Astaire - Top Hat
43. Buster Keaton - The General
44. Groucho Marx - Animal Crackers
45. Gene Hackman - Mississippi Burning
46. Morgan Freeman - The Shawshank Redemption
47. Denzel Washington - Training Day
48. James Cagney - White Heat
49. Clint Eastwood - The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
50. Johnny Depp - Ed Wood

Top 50 Actresses: Final Thoughts

Following the example of my Sci Fi Movie Project, I thought I would wrap-up the Top 50 Actresses Project with some final thoughts. Before I started the project, I guessed what rating I would give each movie. So first, here are a few stats related to those guesses.

Out of the 50 movies reviewed for this project:

4 movies, I guessed my rating accurately

15 movies, I was within a quarter star (plus or minus)

15 movies, I was within half a star (plus or minus)

9 movies, I was within three-quarters of a star (plus or minus)

3 movies, I was within 1 star (plus or minus)

4 movies, I was within 1+ stars (plus or minus)

Biggest difference in the positive: It’s a 3-way tie between The Country Girl (I guessed 3, gave it 4), The Killers (same as Country Girl), and Ball of Fire (I guessed 3.5, gave it 4.5).

Biggest difference in the negative: The Quiet Man, which I guessed I would give 4 stars. I gave it .25 star. I still really hate that movie. Even remembering it makes me angry.

I was more likely to guess low than high. Of the movies in which my guesses were inaccurate, I gave 26 a higher rating than I guessed. That means I gave only 20 a lower rating than I guessed.

I feel that I was more accurate than not. I think guessing within half a star is pretty good. 34 of my guesses were either spot on, or within a half star. Only 16 were wrong by more than half a star.

I enjoyed this project and felt that it was very successful. In fact, out of 50 movies, I gave 27 a rating of 4 stars or higher. That means I felt that 54% of the movies were excellent. That’s far better than any other movie project I’ve undertaken. The Oscars project is a distant second, with a current percentage of 43% of films rated 4 stars or higher.

I attribute this huge jump in enjoyment to the fact that I got to choose which films I watched, and I gave myself a lot of flexibility in those choices. While I tried to watch Oscar-winning performances, if there was a film I simply didn’t feel like watching, I chose something else. I do feel that there were some actresses who didn’t belong on the list (ex: Barbra Streisand, Marilyn Monroe, Julia Roberts). Since it was a publicly generated list, it was, to some extent, a popularity contest.

However, in a general sense, I thought it was a pretty solid list. I liked the aspect of watching the films in order to focus on a specific performance. In the end, I felt like I got to see a lot of great films & become acquainted with some performers with whom I was previously unfamiliar.

I’m looking forward to doing the same for the Top 50 Actors, which will be my next project.

Top 50 Actresses: Master List of Reviews and Scores

Here it is, my full list of scores and reviews. The list goes from my favorite to my least favorite. In cases where films share the same score, I’ve listed them based on personal preference. Special weight was given to how I viewed each actress’s performance in her respective film, so these rankings have more to do with that than with how much I enjoyed the film as a whole. For example, the first 4.5 star review you see is my favorite of the 4.5 star performances.

Note: As I was compiling the list, there were some movies/performances that I could no longer recall very well, which led to me placing them lower on the list, even though I may have really liked them when I originally wrote the review. I figure, if I don't remember it, it couldn't have been that great of a performance.

1.  Marlene Dietrich - Witness for the Prosecution, 4.5
2.  Judi Dench - Philomena, 4.5
3.  Halle Berry - Monster’s Ball, 4.5
4.  Judy Garland - A Star Is Born, 4.5
5.  Barbara Stanwyck - Ball of Fire, 4.5
6.  Vivien Leigh - Waterloo Bridge, 4.5
7.  Mary Pickford - Stella Maris, 4.25
8.  Susan Hayward - I Want to Live!, 4.25
9.  Olivia de Havilland - The Heiress, 4.25
10. Shirley MacLaine - What a Way to Go!, 4.25
11. Angelina Jolie - Changeling, 4.25
12. Meryl Streep - Sophie’s Choice, 4.25
13. Joan Fontaine - Suspicion, 4.25
14. Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side, 4.25
15. Julia Roberts - Erin Brockovich, 4.25
16. Elizabeth Taylor - Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, 4
17. Kate Winslet - The Reader, 4
18. Cate Blanchett - Blue Jasmine, 4
19. Bette Davis - Jezebel, 4
20. Reese Witherspoon - Legally Blonde, 4
21. Grace Kelly - The Country Girl, 4
22. Ingrid Bergman - Gaslight, 4
23. Natalie Wood - Splendor in the Grass, 4
24. Myrna Loy - The Thin Man, 4
25. Joan Crawford - Mildred Pierce, 4
26. Carole Lombard - To Be or Not to Be, 4
27. Ava Gardner - The Killers, 4
28. Audrey Hepburn - Wait Until Dark, 3.75
29. Greta Garbo - Ninotchka, 3.75
30. Claudette Colbert - Since You Went Away, 3.75
31. Jean Arthur - The Devil and Miss Jones, 3.75
32. Rita Hayworth - Gilda, 3.75
33. Nicole Kidman - The Hours, 3.5
34. Jane Fonda - Klute, 3.5
35. Katharine Hepburn - The Lion in Winter, 3.5
36. Deborah Kerr - The King and I, 3.5
37. Lauren Bacall - To Have and Have Not, 3.5
38. Doris Day - Pillow Talk, 3.25
39. Mae West - My Little Chickadee, 3.25
40. Ginger Rogers - Kitty Foyle, 3.25
41. Sally Field - Norma Rae, 3
42. Natalie Portman - Black Swan, 3
43. Sophia Loren - Two Women, 3
44. Marilyn Monroe - The Misfits, 3
45. Barbra Streisand - Funny Girl, 3
46. Jodie Foster - Inside Man, 2.75
47. Diane Keaton - Reds, 2.75
48. Julie Andrews - Thoroughly Modern Millie, 2.75
49. Jean Harlow - The Public Enemy, 2.25
50. Maureen O’Hara - The Quiet Man, .25

Top 50 Actresses, #1 - Bette Davis: "Jezebel" (1938)

Movie Stats:
Released 1938 (USA)
American, in English (minor, non-translated French)
Director - William Wyler
Stars - Bette Davis, Henry Fonda, George Brent

Plot Summary:
In 1850s New Orleans, headstrong Julie Marsden (Davis) likes to play games with her suitors, resulting in both personal disappointment & shared tragedy. Fonda co-stars as Julie’s suitor, Preston “Pres” Dillard & Brent as another suitor, Buck Cantrell.

Warnings:
Minor violence.

Bad Stuff:
I could’ve done without the racist slave caricatures.

The story is a bit inaccessible. There’s a lot going on. There’s southern social dynamics, the north/south divide (already contentious in the 1850s), and a yellow fever epidemic. Little of that is relatable to a modern audience.

The constant insinuations that all Julie needs is a good beating raised every one of my hackles.

Good Stuff:
Julie is a complex heroine. On the one hand, she’s mean & genuinely awful to everyone around her. On the other, you kind of get why. I mean, [SPOILER] her fiancé breaks up with her because she wears a red dress (instead of virginal white) to a party, which is pretty stupid. [SPOILER] She’s a woman ahead of her time, and that frustrates her, which makes her lash out.

Henry Fonda is very good.

Loved the costuming. Gorgeous!

About the Performance:
Davis is great, of course. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a performance of hers that I haven’t liked. She’s so expressive. Even when Julie is behaving her worst, Davis plays her in such a way that you can feel the inner pain & frustration that cause her to act like that. It’s very masterfully done.

Other performances of Davis’s I’ve reviewed: About About Eve

The Verdict:
I didn’t particularly care for the subject matter, but I thought it was well done. Most of the acting was excellent. I particularly enjoyed how Fonda played it — you could practically feel him seething with rage, rage that he never expresses because it’s not the gentlemanly thing to do. Also, shout out to Spring Byington, as Davis’s aunt, who alternately amused and annoyed me with her fussing and nitpicking. Although I didn’t find the ending believable, I liked it. It felt very poetic, and as open endings go, it seemed right. I liked that I could decide how it inevitably played out. [SPOILER] I’m a realist, so I think they both died of yellow fever. [SPOILER] There’s a lot of nuance to this film, in the dialogue, the subject matter, and the performances. The more I think about it, the more I liked it.

I give it 4 stars.

Up with U.S. Geography: Wisconsin

State Name:
Wisconsin

Capital:
Madison

Date of Entry:
May 29, 1848

Maps:

Map of USA. Wisconsin outlined in dark ink &
with name written on it.

A close-up of Wisconsin & its neighbors.

Neighbors:
Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota

Water Borders:
Lake Superior, Green Bay, Lake Michigan, Mississippi River, St. Croix River

Total Area:
65,498 square miles

Five Largest Cities:
Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, Kenosha, Racine

Famous Geographical Point:
Lake Winnebago

State Nickname:
The Badger State. According to this website, the nickname came about due to the miners who dug in the hills for lead ore, but it's also the official state animal.

Famous Person:
Les Paul, musician, inventor, electric guitar pioneer

Book Set In/About:
Shotgun Lovesongs by Nickolas Butler

Five men who grew up in the (fictional) small town of Little Wing, WI come back together as adults to share their lives.

Movie Set In/About:
"Lars and the Real Girl" (2007), directed by Craig Gillespie

A socially awkward young man in a small Wisconsin town purchases a realistic sex doll that he presents as his girlfriend, much to the consternation of his brother.

Headline of the Day:
"Dairy Feedlot Appeal Will Proceed in Waukesha, Not Madison" in U.S. News & World Report

Top 50 Actresses, #2 - Barbra Streisand: "Funny Girl" (1968)

Movie Stats:
Released 1968 (USA)
American, in English (very minor, non-translated French)
Director - William Wyler
Stars - Barbra Streisand, Omar Sharif

Plot Summary:
A biopic, of sorts, of famed Ziegfeld Follies comedienne Fanny Brice (Streisand), specifically focusing on her relationship with Nick Arnstein (Sharif).

Warnings:
Implied sexy times.

Bad Stuff:
I’m sure I’ve complained about this before, but there’s something about the way many 1960s movies were filmed or produced or whatever that they always feel like 1960s films, no matter the time period they’re portraying. I find it super distracting.

I was really disappointed that the film focused so heavily on Fanny’s relationship with Nick. I was more interested in her career. I particularly disliked how it romanticized that relationship (in real life, he was a con artist & a crook). Also, he was her second husband. The film not only fails to mention that, it implies that Nick took her virginity.

I watch a lot of old films, so it’s not as though I’m unused to seeing misogyny, but it seemed particularly rampant in this.

Good Stuff:
It has some genuinely funny moments.

Streisand is a delight.

I loved the big musical numbers set in the Ziegfeld Follies.

About the Performance:
As I said above, Streisand is so much fun to watch in this. She truly commands the screen. However, at no point does she actually “feel” like a woman from the early 20th century, especially not when she wisecracks. I never forgot that I was watching Barbra Streisand playing a character. I’ve only seen a few of her films, but I don’t recall getting that impression of her from the others I’ve seen, so I’m not maligning her as an actress in general. However, I’m not convinced this was her strongest performance, and I certainly don’t consider it worth the Oscar she won for it. (IMDB tells me she tied with K. Hepburn for her performance in The Lion in Winter. K. Hepburn was robbed.)

Other performances of Streisand’s I’ve reviewed: none.

The Verdict:
I had a lot of problems with it. Most of them are listed above. I’ll add another: it’s way too long (nearly 3 hours). Look, I like Streisand. She’s funny, she has a commanding presence, she lights up the screen, and her singing voice is phenomenal. But I didn’t find her believable as Fanny Brice, and I didn’t find the film believable as a portrayal of early 20th century America. I’m glad I saw this in a “got that famous film checked off the list” sort of way, but I doubt I’ll ever feel compelled to watch it again.

I give it 3 stars.

Top 50 Actresses, #3 - Ingrid Bergman: "Gaslight" (1944)

Movie Stats:
Released 1944 (USA)
American, in English
Director - George Cukor
Stars - Ingrid Bergman, Charales Boyer, Joseph Cotten

Plot Summary:
Ten years after the unsolved murder of her aunt, Paula Alquist (Bergman) returns to the woman’s home with her new husband, Gregory Anton (Boyer), a man with a secret. Cotten co-stars as Brian Cameron, a police employee who’s suspicious of Gregory. If you’ve ever heard the term “gaslighting,” it comes from this story.

Warnings:
Very minor violence.

Bad Stuff:
[SPOILER]
Gregory’s plot seems overly complicated. Once it was clear that Paula didn’t have the rubies, why all the mind games? Her house was vacant, why did he have to marry her to sneak into it? Who waits around 10 years to get his hands on some jewels? He must be the most patient criminal ever.
[SPOILER]

I didn’t find Brian’s motivation for getting so involved in the situation particularly believable.

Good Stuff:
The acting is excellent. I particularly enjoyed Boyer, Angela Lansbury (as the Antons’ impertinent maid, Nancy), and May Whitty (as the Antons’ nosy neighbor, Miss Thwaites).

I like how intense it is without the use of jump scares or physical violence.

Really enjoyed the costuming, set design & score.

About the Performance:
Bergman’s isn’t my favorite performance of the film, but she’s still very good. It’s rather heartbreaking to see her go from a deliriously happy young woman in love to a person questioning her own sanity, all in the space of a few months. Her confusion and emotional pain are palpable through the screen. I thought she chewed some scenery during the final confrontation scene, but apart from that, it was a fine piece of acting.

Other performances of Bergman’s I’ve reviewed: Notorious; Casablanca.

The Verdict:
This section will contain SPOILERS. I liked this film a lot. It’s not an easy watch. Gregory’s psychological and emotional torture of Paula is as difficult for the viewer to endure as it is for her. I really hated him, which is exactly what I was supposed to feel. I rooted hard for Brian to help Paula, for Paula to realize that Gregory was the problem, and for Gregory to get his comeuppance. I was engrossed. My husband came in partway through the film and, much to my surprise, became engrossed as well. Apart from my issues with the plot, my only problem with the film is I wondered if it was more thrilling before the term “gaslighting” became widespread. For me, it was never a question whether Paula was crazy. I knew that Gregory was the bad guy. Was that obvious back in the 40s? It’s difficult to say. Still, it’s a well-acted, tense movie.

I give it 4 stars.

Out and About: Bernardo Bay Trail (Lake Hodges)

A couple of weekends ago, my husband & I were thinking about taking a day trip but instead ended up choosing to do this hike in Escondido. The route we took was very easy (no elevation) and relatively short (perhaps 1 hour). It was a chilly morning, absolutely perfect for a hike. We enjoyed it immensely.

Beginning of the trail.

Hills in the distance.

Cactus "garden."

Lake Hodges perhaps doesn't look impressive to those of you who live in non-desert climates, but a friend told me recently that every time he's done this hike, there wasn't any water at all:

I loved how green the hills were. Come Fall, nothing will be green anymore. We've probably had just about as much rain as we're going to get this year:

Final shots:

Rocky hill.

A greener view of the lake.

Pretty trail shot.

Afterward, we drove over to Encinitas to ruin all the karma we built up during the hike with a visit to Betty's Pie Whole. If you're ever in SD county, I highly recommend it.

Top 50 Actresses, #4 - Olivia de Havilland: "The Heiress" (1949)

Movie Stats:
Released 1949 (USA)
American, in English (minor, non-translated French)
Director - William Wyler
Stars - Olivia de Havilland, Montgomery Clift, Ralph Richardson

Plot Summary:
In 19th century America, socially awkward heiress Catherine Sloper (de Havilland) seems destined for spinsterhood until she’s swept off her feet by the handsome, suave Morris Townsend (Clift). However, Catherine’s father, Dr. Austin Sloper (Richardson), believes that Morris is a fortune hunter.

Warnings:
None.

Bad Stuff:
The ending is rather abrupt & Clift's acting in that scene leaves much to be desired.

Good Stuff:
I liked that it didn’t try to present Catherine as undesirable because of her looks. I was worried it was going to try to force me to believe that Olivia de Havilland was an ugly woman. While they do make her look plain (quite well IMO), it’s more about how Catherine is shy & “unaccomplished,” one of the greatest sins for a lady back in the day.

It’s a lot more complex than it appears on the surface. It’s not just about whether or not Morris’s feelings for Catherine are genuine. There’s Austin’s contempt for his daughter, the emotional abuse Catherine endures, and her journey to becoming a strong, confident woman.

Everyone is really good, but I thought Richardson was particularly impressive as an outwardly loving father who truthfully loathes his daughter so much that he makes her into the very thing he loathes.

About the Performance:
The story calls for three distinct aspects of Catherine’s personality to be depicted: first, the shy, socially awkward girl who doesn’t know how to relate to her peers; second, the young woman in love; and lastly, the wounded adult, steely with resolve and strength. De Havilland is very believable in each of the film’s acts. I thought she was fantastic & felt a newfound sense of admiration for her.

Other performances of de Havilland’s I’ve reviewed: Gone with the Wind.

The Verdict:
I expected to like it, and it was even better than anticipated because it was far more complex. I thought it would be a simple story of “Is Morris a fortune hunter or isn’t he?” While that is part of the story, and a part that it does well, I think the more interesting stuff is Catherine’s relationship with her father, how she comes to understand that it’s toxic, and how she learns to stand up for herself. The costuming is eye-catching (Edith Head, of course. She won an Oscar for this film). All of the performances are excellent. (I read on IMDB that Clift hated himself so much in the film that he walked out of the premiere. Sometimes I wish I could go back in time & give that man a hug. He was such a tortured soul.) It’s by no means a happy film, or even particularly fun to watch—except for the part where Catherine & Morris are falling in love, which made me smile—but it’s fascinating. I couldn’t tear my eyes away from it.

I give it 4.25 stars.

Top 50 Actresses, #5 - Audrey Hepburn: "Wait Until Dark" (1967)

Movie Stats:
Released 1967 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Terence Young
Stars - Audrey Hepburn, Richard Crenna, Alan Arkin

Plot Summary:
Newly blind Susy Hendrix (Hepburn) is terrorized by a group of criminals—including Mike Talman (Crenna) & Roat (Arkin)—who are searching for a doll that is stuffed with heroin.

Warnings:
Violence.

Bad Stuff:
I thought the criminals’ plan was overly complicated. It was difficult to buy into the idea that they would bother with the theatrics when they were already [SPOILER] involved in one murder. Why wouldn’t they just kill Susy once it was clear she didn’t know where the doll was? Or take her hostage and force her husband to look for it? [SPOILER]

I felt that Talman and Carlino (Jack Weston) fell too easily under Roat’s control. [SPOILER] Once they helped him move the body, they could’ve gone back to the apartment and spent a few hours wiping everything down. They knew no one was there. With no body in the apartment, there was no reason for the police to be in there looking for fingerprints anyway. [SPOILER]

It’s not great at explaining things. For example, why does Roat call Carlino “sergeant” and why does he hate it? (I believe the movie implies here & in other places that he used to be a cop.) There were lots of little unanswered questions like this that annoyed me.

Good Stuff:
While I thought the plot was implausible, I enjoyed the cat & mouse quality of the film.

Really loved the costuming & set design, especially the costuming.

Arkin was absolutely chilling.

About the Performance:
I was skeptical of Hepburn playing a blind character, but I thought she did a good job. (It’s perhaps convenient that Susy is recently blind, so anything Hepburn did that seemed like something a sighted person might do could be hand-waved away.) The underlying message of the film is about Susy needing to learn how to take care of herself, rather than relying on others, and I thought she played it right. Susy is sometimes strong, shrewd, creative, and intelligent, and sometimes helplessly terrified, weak, and too trusting. It felt realistic to me, because in real life everyone is a mix of contradictions.

Other performances of Hepburn’s I’ve reviewed: My Fair Lady.

The Verdict:
For the most part, I liked it. Clearly, I feel that it has plot/story issues. It asks you to suspend a lot of disbelief, and I’m not sure that I’m willing to do that. However, I liked the tension that it created. It’s definitely a film that will keep you on the edge of your seat. The performances are very good. Plus, it’s a feast for the eyes. I’m not going to put it on a favorites list, but I’m glad that I saw this classic once.

I give it 3.75 stars.

Music Love: "Finish Line" by Daye Jack

*Explicit lyrics warning*

I heard this song in the first episode of the Netflix show "On My Block" and pretty much immediately went to iTunes & downloaded it. I absolutely love the funky beat, the cheeky sense of cockiness, and the funny lyrics. Also, Jack has a pretty smooth voice. It reminds me of the hip hop music I liked best from the 90s. He's so incredibly talented. I hope he blows up big, as he so rightly deserves.

Top 50 Actresses, #6 - Jane Fonda: "Klute" (1971)

Movie Stats:
Released 1971 (USA)
American, in English (minor, non-translated French)
Director - Alan J. Pakula
Stars - Jane Fonda, Donald Sutherland

Plot Summary:
Six months after the disappearance of his best friend, John Klute (Sutherland) is hired by the man’s wife to find him. The only lead is Bree Daniels (Fonda), a New York City prostitute.

Warnings:
Sexy times; brief female nudity (breasts only); blue language; drug use (marijuana); violence.

Bad Stuff:
The pace is very slow.

As a character, John Klute is an odd duck. The whole film, he showed almost no emotion. It’s like things happened around him while he simply existed.

I didn’t care for the repetitive use of the audio tape. It got annoying after a while, like, I get it, I heard it 5 times already.

Good Stuff:
I like how it portrayed Bree as a real person with a real life. She has career aspirations (actress/model), she talks to a therapist, her life is a bit lonely. She’s complex and flawed. While I sometimes found it a bit unrealistic, it was a nice change from how prostitutes are normally portrayed.

Fonda is excellent.

It features good, old-fashioned detective work. Klute solves the case through tenacity, determination, and hard work.

About the Performance:
As stated above, I think Fonda is phenomenal in this. In spite of the title, this is really her movie. She’s the main focus, and she carries most of the scenes, whether or not someone else is in them. Bree isn’t an easy person to understand, but Fonda makes her both likable and relatable. I was always rooting for her, even when, by her own admission, she was trying to sabotage things. Fonda really impressed.

Other performances of Fonda’s I’ve reviewed: Barbarella.

The Verdict:
I definitely liked it better than I thought I would. Since it’s a 70s movie, I was prepared to grit my teeth and bear it, but it didn’t annoy me in the way that 70s movies usually do. However, it did have the one fatal flaw I find in all 70s films: slow pacing. Holy cow! When it started, I was really into it. And then it seemed to just drag on and on and on, pulling itself down from a 4-star review into the 3s. I don’t think Sutherland was bad; I think he played the character the way he was supposed to, and I didn’t like the character. Fonda is the bright shining star. I also admire the film for making a prostitute a real, relatable person and for broaching topics that aren’t usually broached with sensitivity and openness. Also, I thought the mystery was pretty good.

I give it 3.5 stars.

Top 50 Actresses, #7 - Barbara Stanwyck: "Ball of Fire" (1941)

Movie Stats:
Released 1941 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Howard Hawks
Stars - Barbara Stanwyck, Gary Cooper

Plot Summary:
With the police on her trail, trying to bring down her mobster boyfriend, nightclub singer Katherine “Sugarpuss” O’Shea (Stanwyck) hides out with a group of professors—including Bertram Potts (Cooper)—who are writing an encyclopedia.

Warnings:
Minor violence.

Bad Stuff:
It’s a little too long.

There’s a fair bit of stereotyping, especially of academics.

One plot line sort of gets dropped/remains unresolved by the end of the film, which annoyed me.

Good Stuff:
I loved the spirit of this film. It’s very wholesome, fun-loving, and positive.

It’s funny & clever.

Everything about it is slick in the best sense. The costumes (especially Stanwyck’s), the set design, the music; all of it makes for a very cool film.

About the Performance:
Stanwyck is great in this role. Sugarpuss is a bit of a rough character. Like stuffy housekeeper Miss Bragg (Kathleen Howard), you don’t want to like Sugarpuss. She’s improper, she’s using the professors, and she leads “Pottsy” on. And yet, even when the character is at her worst, Stanwyck imbues her with a sense of warmth and charm that prevents you from hating her. She’s fun, she’s lively, and she’s on a journey of self-discovery. It’s enjoyable to watch her grow into the good person she’s always been.

Other performances of Stanwyck’s I’ve reviewed: Double Indemnity.

The Verdict:
I fell in love with this movie practically from the opening scene. There’s something about it that’s just so fun. I don’t typically use the word “wholesome” to describe something in a positive manner, but I mean it that way here. This film manages to be thoroughly entertaining, funny, and enjoyable without resorting to any sort of crudeness & virtually no slapstick. There are a few slightly racy jokes that would be considered very tame by today’s standards, but other than that it mostly relies on wit & wordplay. It’s definitely too long for my taste (I prefer my comedies short & sweet) but my other gripes are just that; simply small annoyances. Mostly, I would say that this film is a delight & would encourage absolutely anyone & everyone to watch it.

I give it 4.5 stars.

Up with Geography: Equatorial Guinea

Country Name:
Equatorial Guinea

Capital:
Malabo

Continent:
Africa

Maps:

African continent. Equatorial Guinea is the
small dark mark.

A close-up of Equatorial Guinea & its neighbors.

Neighbors:
Cameroon, Gabon

Water Borders:
Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Guinea, Campo River, Mitemele River

Total Area:
10,830 square miles

Five Largest Cities:
Bata, Malabo, Ebebiyin, Aconibe, Anisoc

Famous Geographical Point:
Mbini River

Famous Person:
Bibiana Martina Olama Mangue, Olympic track athlete

Book Set In/About:
Shadows of Your Black Memory by Donato Ndongo

In the dying days of Spanish rule, a young man in Equatorial Guinea reflects on his childhood, full of conflicts between his African & Spanish roots.

Movie Set In/About:
"Where the Road Runs Out" (2014), directed by Rudolf Buitendach

After the sudden death of a friend, a world-weary scientist returns to Africa to assume his friend's research position. Reviews of this film online are lukewarm, but it's the first-ever feature film to be shot in Equatorial Guinea, so it seemed the best choice.

Headline of the Day:
"Equatorial Guinea: Artist Freed from Prison" on freemuse.org.

He was jailed for six months on trumped-up counterfeit charges, likely because his artwork is critical of the government. Yikes.

Top 50 Actresses, #8 - Deborah Kerr: "The King and I" (1956)

Movie Stats:
Released 1956 (USA)
American, in English (minor, non-translated Thai)
Director - Walter Lang
Stars - Deborah Kerr, Yul Brynner

Plot Summary:
In the late 19th century, widow Anna Leonowens (Kerr) accepts a job as teacher to the King of Siam’s (Brynner) children.

Warnings:
None.

Bad Stuff:
It’s really kind of racist. If I’m to give it the benefit of the doubt, I would still say that it’s rather condescending toward the Thai people.

While I liked Anna, I didn’t find her characterization believable. She was far too independent & outspoken for a British lady of the 19th century. Honestly, even for a woman of the 1950s she came across too modern.

[SPOILER]
The King’s illness & death were weirdly abrupt.
[SPOILER]

Good Stuff:
If I ignore the fact that Brynner wasn’t Asian, I thought he was magnificent.

I loved the play sequence toward the end of the film, where the King's wives showcase their own interpretation of the book Uncle Tom’s Cabin for their British guests. It was absolutely beautiful. Also, I enjoyed how Tuptim (Rita Moreno), who adapted the book for the play, drew the parallel between her own experience & Eliza’s experience.

Underneath all the glitz and glamor, this story is about people learning and accepting each other’s cultures, which is a nice message.

About the Performance:
As I said, I don’t find the character of Anna particularly believable. Given the time period, her station in life, and her age, I don’t think she would be such an ardent feminist. However, that was the material Kerr had to work with, and I thought she did a good job of it. She’s beautiful and graceful, a true pleasure to see and hear. I also admire her ability to effectively act while dressed in such ridiculously large hoop skirts. Plus, her chemistry with Brynner crackled. She’s a large part of what gives the film the charm it needs to work.

Other performances of Kerr’s I’ve reviewed: From Here to Eternity.

The Verdict:
I liked it better than I thought I would. It handles the racial issues with about as much sensitivity one can expect out of a 1950s film, which isn’t much but I’ve seen worse. It’s a feast for the eyes, with its bright costumes and lush sets. The song & dance routines are fun. It’s also funnier than I anticipated (much of the humor is brought by Brynner), with some unexpectedly racy jokes. By no means do I think it was a great movie, but I didn’t think it was terrible either.

I give it 3.5 stars.

Top 50 Actresses, #9 - Vivien Leigh: "Waterloo Bridge" (1940)

Movie Stats:
Released 1940 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Mervyn LeRoy
Stars - Vivien Leigh, Robert Taylor, Virginia Field

Plot Summary:
On the eve of WWII, British officer Roy Cronin (Taylor) reflects on his lost love, ballerina Myra Lester (Leigh), who he met during WWI. Field co-stars as Kitty, Myra’s BFF.

Warnings:
None.

Bad Stuff:
I don’t care for plots that hinge upon a character’s complete inability to communicate properly. It’s a huge pet peeve of mine. If only Myra had been honest with Roy or his mother (Lady Margaret Cronin, played by Lucille Watson) at several key points of the film, she wouldn’t have met her tragic end.

The costuming is surprisingly bad. It’s almost like they didn’t try to make it look like it took place in the 1910s at all.

The racist good luck charm Myra & Roy share is pretty cringe-inducing.

Good Stuff:
I really liked that Myra wasn’t angelic or perfect or quirky or whatever trope you’d like to pick for a female romantic lead. Although she’s a pessimist/realist, she’s still very likable. It’s one of the few times I’ve seen a female lead that felt like a representation of me.

Kitty’s steadfast, unflinching friendship with Myra was very touching to me. She’s a true blue friend.

Loved the score.

About the Performance:
I’m very impressed by Leigh. She’s different in every role I’ve seen her in. As Myra, she has an almost ethereal quality (so different from Scarlett O’Hara). When she meets Roy, she’s already been battered enough by life that she’s not exactly optimistic about the future. Roy inspires that optimism in her again, and it’s a pleasure to watch Myra open up and blossom on-screen. Of course, just as she originally feared, it all comes to a terrible end (perhaps a self-fulfilling prophecy). Leigh is excellent at portraying all the complex layers of Myra’s personality.

Other performances of Leigh’s I’ve reviewed: A Streetcar Named Desire; Gone with the Wind.

The Verdict:
I liked this movie a lot more than I expected to. I thought, like many of the war movies of that era, it would be sentimental and overly dramatic, but it’s not. I wasn’t even bothered by the too-quick romance, because the characters themselves acknowledge that it’s all very rushed (as many war-time relationships were back then). My big problem lies with that old “I’m an adult who’s incapable of communicating” trope. I wish Hollywood would portray people having mature, effective conversations more frequently. I just wanted to shake Myra & tell her to stop being such a dumbass. Other than that, I enjoyed the film greatly. Leigh and Taylor had excellent chemistry. Everything that wasn’t trope-y was great. It was a nice counterpoint to Since You Went Away, showcasing a far less wholesome side of what it can be like for the women left behind during wartime.

I give it 4.5 stars.

Up with U.S. Geography: Iowa

State Name:
Iowa

Capital:
Des Moines

Date of Entry:
December 28, 1846

Maps:

Map of USA. Iowa outlined in dark ink & with
name written on it.

A close-up of Iowa & its neighbors.

Neighbors:
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota

Water Borders:
Missouri River, Mississippi River

Total Area:
56,273 square miles

Five Largest Cities:
Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Sioux City, Iowa City

Famous Geographical Point:
Ocheyedan Mound

State Nickname:
The Hawkeye State. Named after famed Native American chief Black Hawk.

Famous Person:
Esther Pauline "Eppie" Lederer, aka "Ann Landers," advice columnist

Book Set In/About:
What's Eating Gilbert Grape by Peter Hedges

A young man, trapped in small-town Iowa by numerous responsibilities & dreaming only of escaping, begins to see his life in a new light.

Movie Set In/About:
"Field of Dreams" (1989), directed by Phil Alden Robinson

When an Iowa farmer begins to hear voices, he interprets their message to mean that he should build a baseball diamond in his corn field.

Headline of the Day:
"Iowa State May Dodge NBA Darling Mo Bamba When Cyclones Play Texas in Big 12 Tournament" in the Des Moines Register

Top 50 Actresses, #10 - Claudette Colbert: "Since You Went Away" (1944)

Movie Stats:
Released 1944 (USA)
American, in English (very minor, non-translated Yiddish)
Director - John Cromwell
Stars - Claudette Colbert, Jennifer Jones, Shirley Temple, Joseph Cotten, Monty Woolley

Plot Summary:
When her husband enlists in the military during WWII, Anne Hilton (Colbert) struggles to raise their two daughters Jane (Jones) & Brig (Temple) amid hardships. Cotten co-stars as family friend Lt. Tony Willett & Woolley as Col. William G. Smollett, the Hiltons’ lodger.

Warnings:
None.

Bad Stuff:
It’s too long.

Because it came out during the war, it’s very preachy, often exhorting viewers to do everything they can to help the war effort. Also, it occasionally feels like a non-fiction school film, like, “These are the hardships you may face during war time!”

It’s extremely sentimental.

Good Stuff:
The acting is phenomenal.

It does an excellent job portraying how Jane & Brig grow and mature as people.

I liked that it showed how deeply people yearn for connection. People always yearn for connection, but in times of war, it seems more poignant. One of my favorite scenes was when Jane & her love interest Bill (Robert Walker) have a chance encounter with Hal Smith (Guy Madison). They spend an evening together, becoming friends, knowing that they will never see one another again, as Hal is hours away from being shipped out & isn’t from the area. It really touched me, that Jane & Bill would give a stranger that camaraderie he needed before he went off to possibly die.

About the Performance:
Colbert was fantastic! Anne is a woman who’s never had to do a day’s work in her life. She’s a housewife who’s had domestic help (Fidelia, portrayed by Hattie McDaniel), so she doesn’t even really know how to cook or clean. But she’s not a spoiled person. It’s enjoyable to watch her adapt and persevere with strength, determination, and a positive attitude. I found her quite believable.

Other performances of Colbert’s I’ve reviewed: It Happened One Night.

The Verdict:
I will admit that this movie definitely got on my nerves sometimes, mostly because of how preachy and sentimental it was. It’s sickly sweet and wholesome. However, I appreciated seeing the “other side” of war. Most war films are about the soldiers and/or the countries actively affected by the battles. It was nice to see a different perspective: what it was like for people left behind at home, what sort of privations they faced and how they faced them. Really, though, what makes this film is the performances. I can’t think of a weak link in the bunch.

I give the film 3.75 stars.

Top 50 Actresses, #11 - Greta Garbo: "Ninotchka" (1939)

Movie Stats:
Released 1939 (USA)
American, in English (very minor, non-translated Russian)
Director - Ernst Lubitsch
Stars - Greta Garbo, Melvyn Douglas

Plot Summary:
When Russian special envoy “Ninotchka” Yakushova (Garbo) is sent to Paris in order to complete an assignment, all of her ideals are challenged by the debonair Count Leon d’Algout (Douglas).

Warnings:
Very minor violence.

Bad Stuff:
Ninotchka doesn’t seem so much stern and uncompromising as she does robotic.

One of my biggest problems with romantic films is that people fall in love too quickly. I realize it’s a constraint of film making, but when two people who barely have anything in common spend one afternoon together and then start declaring feelings, I can’t help but roll my eyes.

The stereotyping of both the Russians and the French made me uncomfortable.

Good Stuff:
Garbo and Douglas had great chemistry.

If I ignore the stereotyping, I thought it did a good job of portraying with sensitivity the ideals of someone who was deeply committed to Communism. This movie is pre-Red Scare, so rather than vilifying Communism, it pokes fun at it (it pokes some fun at Capitalism too) while actually explaining the tenets of the economic system.

The witty dialogue is fantastic.

About the Performance:
As I said above, I found Garbo’s performance toward the beginning of the film off-putting. Since I’m not terribly familiar with her work, I don’t know if that’s just her style of acting, or if that was the director’s choice for that portion of the story. Once her character “loosened up,” she was a lot more likable and I felt engaged by the performance. Not my favorite bit of acting ever, but not terrible either.

Other performances of Garbo’s I’ve reviewed: Grand Hotel.

The Verdict:
This is a pretty entertaining movie. It’s light-hearted and funny. I like the idea that two people from different cultures can meet and have a positive influence on one another (Leon also changes; perhaps not as much as Ninotchka, but there is change). I really loved the dialogue, and I thought the performances from Douglas and Ina Claire (as Leon’s original love interest, Grand Duchess Swana) were excellent. There are definite flaws, as noted above, but ultimately I finished viewing it with positive feelings.

I give it 3.75 stars.

Out and About: San Clemente

A couple of years ago, I spent a magical few days with a friend in San Clemente, a cute little beach town not all that far from where I live. My husband had never visited. I wanted us to spend some time there together, so I planned a day trip. 

Honestly, it's not the most "happening" town around. I did some googling for ideas on what to do and that's how I ended up discovering Casa Romantica. It's the former home of Ole Hanson, the founder of San Clemente, now a museum/art gallery/cultural center/wedding venue. It's easy to find, right on the edge of downtown San Clemente, and it only costs $5/person to visit!

Entryway.

There was a lot to admire at Casa Romantica. I particularly enjoyed the tile work, all done in concrete. Our very informative guide told us how it was made but I've already forgotten:

I also loved the ceilings & fountains:

But let's not forget the views and the gardens:

This is what Ole Hanson saw when he looked out his office
window. It's a wonder he ever got any work done.

San Clemente pier

Sculpture

After finishing our exploration of Casa Romantica, we headed into downtown San Clemente for some food. We ended up at Nick's, which I now see is a very localized chain. Nick's is beautiful, a great deal fancier than most of places we frequent. The drinks were strong & the food was excellent.

I had a Moscow Mule; Dan had a mimosa.

These deep fried, bacon-topped deviled eggs were one of
the most delicious things I've ever had the pleasure to eat.

My chicken pot pie.

After lunch we strolled around downtown, where I picked up some chocolates at Schmid's:

Then we parked in a neighborhood close to the beach & walked the boardwalk down to the San Clemente pier:

Path to the boardwalk.

The boardwalk parallels the train tracks. Both Amtrak
& the local Metrolink run here.

On the pier, a pigeon checks us out hopefully.

Exquisite water color.

After we walked back to the car, we took a quick trip to the local outlet mall. I didn't take any pictures there because we didn't stay long & because I don't think mall pictures are very interesting. We headed home once we left the mall. It was a beautiful day. I'm still in love with San Clemente!

Top 50 Actresses, #12 - Jean Arthur: "The Devil and Miss Jones" (1941)

Movie Stats:
Released 1941 (USA)
American, in English
Director - Sam Wood
Stars - Jean Arthur, Charles Coburn, Spring Byington, Robert Cummings

Plot Summary:
When the employees of a department store he owns begin agitating for unionization, wealthy John P. Merrick (Coburn) goes undercover in the shoe department in order to pinpoint the organizers. Soon, however, he becomes enmeshed in their lives. Arthur co-stars as shoe department employee Mary Jones; Byington as store employee/Mary’s friend Elizabeth Ellis; and Cummings as former store employee/Mary’s boyfriend Joe O’Brien.

Warnings:
Very minor violence.

Bad Stuff:
Once again, I’m not terribly pleased to see a film that includes the message to women: “it’s okay that he lies to you as long as he’s rich (and/or handsome).”

The “reaction scene,” where Mary, Elizabeth, and Joe discover J.P.’s true identity, is so ridiculously over-the-top that it nearly ruined the whole movie for me. It’s probably meant to be funny but it didn’t have me laughing.

At only an hour and a half, it still feels too long.

Good Stuff:
I was very relieved that it went with a father-daughter type relationship between J.P. & Mary, instead pairing J.P. with the much more age appropriate Elizabeth.

I enjoyed its sweetness. Ultimately, this film is about overcoming one’s own biases.

I really liked the score and the costuming.

About the Performance:
Arthur is an actress that I feel rather lukewarm about. I’ve seen a handful of her performances. She hasn’t wowed in any of them. I felt the same way about this one. She’s not bad, but at the end I didn’t have that, “I love her!” feeling I have about the actors I like best. One thing I will say about her is that she definitely isn’t one-note. In this, she’s sweet and bubbly. In Mr. Smith, she’s cynical and brash. In Shane, she’s tough as nails. So I do admire that she had range.

Other performances of Arthur’s I’ve reviewed: Shane; Mr. Smith Goes to Washington; You Can’t Take It with You.

The Verdict:
To be honest, I thought it was pretty simplistic and naive. It’s total fantasy in that no wealthy man would actually do what J.P. does and even if he did, I don’t think he would have the total change of heart that J.P. has. Also, it definitely romanticizes the “common man” and his plight. However, it was nice to watch something light, fun, and good-hearted. It’s a sweet little film. The performances are all satisfactory. I particularly enjoyed Coburn, Byington & S.Z. Sakall (as J.P.’s butler, George). I liked the gentle fun it pokes at the ultra wealthy & its exploration of class issues, even if that exploration was simplistic.

I give it 3.75 stars.