FilmLit: Doctor Who - The Unquiet Dead (2005)

The Doctor and Rose Tyler venture back to Victorian Cardiff to team up with Charles Dickens.

Television Review: "The Unquiet Dead" sees the Ninth Doctor (Christopher Eccleston), Rose Tyler, and their good friend Charles Dickens take on spooky, smoky, zombie phantasms on Christmas Eve in 1869. I'm not saying Doctor Who is anything more than fun escapist fare, as with myriad other fandoms (to each their own). I do, however, appreciate the show's little efforts to take it one step better, as with the episodes recruiting famous English writers such as Agatha Christie, William Shakespeare, and here, Dickens. We first see him in "The Unquiet Dead" backstage, depressed at spending his Christmas Eve traveling on a reading tour. Dickens is brilliantly personified by Simon Callow (perhaps best known for Four Weddings and a Funeral). Callow's Dickens will be stuck in my head forever whenever I hear the name. Although at first put off by his brash manner, Dickens quickly warms to the Doctor's unfeigned enthusiasm for and flattery of his work. The plot centers around a funeral parlor which aliens (this is Doctor Who, after all) are using as a portal to enter our world through the "restless dear departed." A seance (Dickens, a known debunker of psychic phenomena, is at first skeptical) is used to contact the aliens. Initially, it seems that all will be resolved well and happily, but soon all goes bonkers (this is Doctor Who, after all). Of course Dickens, genius that he is, plays a key role in addressing the alien menace (and quotes Shakespeare). "The Unquiet Dead" is a more than usually excellent episode -- with a healthy dose of in-jokes and literary references for the initiated. Extra added bonus: the missing ending of The Mystery of Edwin Drood is revealed.  🐢

FilmLit: I Am Not Your Negro (2017)

James Baldwin's words mesh with American history to create a crushing documentary you must watch. You can thank me later.

Film Review: I Am Not Your Negro is necessary. See it. Please. (If you don't trust me: it has a 98% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.) Get it from the internet, check your local library, wherever, and help us all become the people we were meant to be. If you've seen Eyes on the Prize, this is that turned up to 11 and transported to 2017. Ken Burns with a passion and a mission. If you've read Ta-Nehisi Coates, this is him on steroids with visuals (Coates himself being influenced by Baldwin). This is James Baldwin (1924-1987) brought back from the grave so his zombie corpse can speak to a time in which Black Lives Matter is a thing and introduce Medgar, Martin, and Malcolm to a time that has forgotten it needs them; hearing them in their own words is mesmerizing. This is the book he began in 1979 but never completed, now resuscitated and given a new and more powerful voice. All the narration is from Baldwin's words, read immaculately by Samuel L. Jackson (who's never given a better performance -- straight from the heart). We remember what a brilliant writer Baldwin was. He is the center of I Am Not Your Negro through clips of interviews and speeches, interspersed with bits of films (Baldwin was a movie fan) and visuals from throughout American history, photos and footage of the civil rights struggle from the 1950s to 2017. We see how so much of what was feared in that time has come home to roost today. For Baldwin's "Birmingham," the viewer can substitute Charlottesville, or any city in which an unarmed black man was shot dead by the government. Too many similarities still exist from then to now -- recent events have made Baldwin's words not only prophetic, but contemporaneous. We learn that seeing through others' eyes is necessary, but blacks and whites in our national book club are reading two different books, and then discussing as if it's the same book. We can also see that this is not solely a racial problem, but a human problem, an American problem, in which no Americans should be treated as some Americans are treated. One third of America consists of racists and racist enablers. This documentary is not for them, as watching it will only make them purchase another gun, buy a new lock for the front door, and feel a certain smug nostalgia while watching the swastikas and frothing mobs try to prevent small black children from going to school. This film is for decent Americans and traditional liberals, and for those who lament Charlottesville, routinely vote for civic improvement, and can stare unflinchingly at racism without seeing it. I Am Not Your Negro may help us all see the world just a little more clearly. Maybe we'll all move closer to reading the same book.  🐢

FilmLit: Doctor Who - The Shakespeare Code (2007)

The Doctor and Martha Jones travel back to London and the Globe Theatre, circa 1599.

Television Review: "The Shakespeare Code" gives the 10th Doctor (David Tennant) and his companion, Martha Jones (in her second appearance) the opportunity to meet William Shakespeare, in all his genius and fame ("no autographs. No, you can't have yourself sketched with me"). This episode from the BBC's Doctor Who Series Three reveals an alien race, the Carrionites, who appear as witches (broomsticks and all) attempting to use the brilliance, or magic, of Shakespeare's words in his famous play Love's Labour's Won, to resurrect their trapped race and take over the Earth. Magic being just another sort of science. Can the Doctor, Martha, and Will stop them? The whole show is too clever by half and way too much fun, while telling an exciting story at the same time! Back to the Future, Freedonia, groundlings, Harry Potter, Bedlam, Elizabeth I, the sonnets' dark lady, echoes of Shakespeare in Love (1998), all get a mention. Marty McFly is used to explain time travel. Allusions, puns, in-jokes abound. Writers have no more fun than bringing Shakespeare into their work; the chance to to put your own spin on the Bard: priceless! Irresistible. Here, Shakespeare is presented much as I see him myself, pure genius, seeing through and understanding all, the wordsmith, a mind for the ages, even immune to the Doctor's psychic ID. For Doctor Who and Shakespeare fans, "The Shakespeare Code" is all just a little bit of heaven here on Earth. All as funny and thought provoking as usual.  🐢

FilmLit: A Quiet Passion (2017)

A creative approach to the short life of the great American poet, Emily Dickinson.

Film Review: A Quiet Passion is well done, surprisingly so since the life of a poet, especially Emily Dickinson's, is almost impossible to turn into a film. As such, the writer/director has freely imagined many elements of Dickinson's biography. This is Terence Davies' version of, interpretation of, vision of the great poet. Since he willingly deviates from telling the truth of her life, it makes me wonder whose life he was actually telling about. But in a larger sense we get in A Quiet Passion a film that may be true to the spirit, if not the letter, of Dickinson's life. His fabrication is only troubling because so many Americans get their history lessons from the movies. Davies' Dickinson lives for home, music, faith, family, and of course, poetry. She is strong willed, angry, proud, feminist, short tempered, sharp witted, and something of a smart-ass. There is conflict, rage, sorrow, hypocrisy, loneliness, and the immortal poems.

Dickinson the poet turned her gaze within, ever deeper, ever smaller, to the interior of the atom, and there she discovered a whole universe in the circumscribed realm of her life. Contrasted to her contemporary, Walt Whitman, who orating as an Old Testament prophet tried to envision the largest possible picture of America, and found small moments of the personal and private. A significant part of the film's success is Cynthia Nixon's nuanced, strong, and sensitive performance in the lead role (she makes the viewer forget there was ever a Sex and the City). Nixon reads the poems well, no easy task (having the words simultaneously on screen would be even better). One of the director's decisions has to be questioned. Davies largely invents a friend for Dickinson, a female Oscar Wilde whose recited epigrams and banter outshine Dickinson every moment they share the screen. Why? Presumably much of the film was inspired by Dickinson's letters, but no small part is fictionalized. A Quiet Passion is enjoyable, well worth watching, a strong contribution to the too little noted memory of Emily Dickinson.  🐢

FilmLit: Stranger than Fiction (2006)

Film Review: Stranger than Fiction is a fictional and fantastic account of an author meeting her novel's protagonist. Too clever for its own good? Nope. Just clever enough. The film begins with a voice-over, which we soon learn is the author writing her book, and simultaneously narrating the daily life of our hero, Harold Crick (Will Ferrell). Crick is a lonely IRS agent with such a minimal life that he seems to live his life only as if waiting to die. He begins to hear the voice describing all he does. We also see the author herself, Karen Eiffel (Emma Thompson), struggling with a 10-year writer's block, helped by a quietly competent assistant (Queen Latifah) hired by the publisher. In each of Eiffel's books, the protagonist dies. To deal with the voice Crick futilely goes through therapy then ends up talking with a literature professor (Dustin Hoffman), who decides he has to determine whether Crick is in a comedy or tragedy to tell which author's book he's the subject. Simultaneously, Crick finds love. The film is full of gentle, subtle humor with touching moments that make this a rich, though quiet, emotional experience. Stranger than Fiction consists of the typical great-novel questions: life, death, love, time. It'll also change how you feel about getting flowers on a date. This is one of Will Ferrell's best roles, toned down, under control, and projecting just the right mix of bewilderment, pathos, and hesitant determination. Emma Thompson is brilliant portraying the desperation of an author with an endless case of writer's block. The cast also includes Maggie Gyllenhaal, Linda Hunt, Tom Hulce, and that guy from the Sonic commercials. This is a film about authors, books, inspiration. How many movies mention Italo Calvino, third-person omniscient, and dramatic irony? Stranger than Fiction is one of the films I was thinking of when I came up with the idea of FilmLit -- a movie about writing, and the struggles of writing. Literate, intelligent, romantic.  🐢

FilmLit: Papa - Hemingway in Cuba (2016)

Film Review: Papa - Hemingway in Cuba is a slice of Hemingway's life, a short period in the late Fifties when he became friends with an idol-worshiping reporter from Miami. Perhaps the best element of the film is that it was filmed on location, in Hemingway's actual haunts in Cuba, including his own luxurious house (carefully preserved by the Cuban government). Apart from that we see what the reporter saw: marital problems between two people with big egos, one just a bit larger than the other; Hemingway's sympathies for the communist rebels, reminiscent of his involvement in the Spanish Civil War; the toll that abuse and age had taken on the writer -- now a writer who could no longer write. In one heartbreaking scene, we see Hemingway broken as he painfully etches a zero for his daily writing word count, this by a man who had once proudly crowed about how many words, good words, he could write in a day. We also see how his paranoia was not all that paranoid, and the pressures that were pushing him to his end in Idaho. Although not a great film (destroyed on Rotten Tomatoes), Papa - Hemingway in Cuba is a good solid effort by all concerned, guilty only of trying to do too much in too little time, trying to make too many points about the author too quickly. The movie can't show Hemingway's greatness as a writer, especially as Hemingway's reputation may now be at the lowest point it's ever been (perhaps due for rehabilitation from his image as the great white macho man). The more the viewer knows about Hemingway, however, the more enjoyment there is to be found. Papa - Hemingway in Cuba is a rare and interesting glance into a life, well worth the time of anyone interested in the Nobel Prize-winning author.  🐢

FilmLit: To Walk Invisible - The Bronte Sisters (2016)

Film Review: To Walk Invisible has a perfect cast, flawless acting, impeccable sets. A two-part, two-hour show, it's as finely crafted as we've come to expect from BBC productions. Although covering about three years in the lives of Charlotte, Emily, Anne, their brother and father, even more of their story is brought in by reference and flashback. In fact, the writer seems to have tried to include as much of their biography as possible in the confines of these two hours. To Walk Invisible is well-constructed, showing the obstacles the sisters faced in their time ("to walk invisible" refers to the necessity as authors of hiding their gender) without melodrama, creating solid individual personalities for the sisters and the other characters, and giving the whole an authenticity and verisimilitude that never wavers. I will never think of Charlotte Bronte again without seeing Finn Atkins' portrayal, and Anne Bronte was what I would have imagined, if I had imagined. Chloe Pirrie is brilliant as Emily, although she is presented as far more robust than I would've expected. There are some differences from the standard Bronte biography (Emily and Anne, the two youngest, were known to be inseparable; Mr. Bronte was considered more eccentric than shown), but none that rang false and it's evident that the writer did her research. There are moments of laughter and keen wit, and moments that brought tears. Fine writing. There are only two small complaints, neither of which seriously marred the film. First, the flashbacks to childhood were bizarre, a cross between Hogwarts and a fever dream. The second is that too much of the film is given over to the brother's story. More time devoted to Charlotte, Emily, and Anne, and a little less to the pitiful, dipsomaniac Branwell would have made a better film. Additionally, the suggestion is made that their brother crumbled under the pressures put on him, when other sources say that it was Branwell himself who proclaimed his genius loudly and often. But this is nitpicking. To Walk Invisible is a wonderful, entertaining, and excellent film!  🐢

FilmLit: Becoming Jane (2007)

Film Review: Becoming Jane is the perfect example of how too many people can form their unalterable view of history from the poetic license, exaggeration, and fiction of films. This is a fictionalized telling of a true romance in the life of Jane Austen. Viewed as a trifle, an average romcom, this is a fine film, with more than adequate acting, attractive players, sets, costumes, and the like, but the story itself, the content of the story, is lacking. The film does not have the witty and tongue-in-cheek allusions to the life of Austen as Shakespeare in Love did with the Bard. The more the viewer knew about Shakespeare, the more the viewer could enjoy that film. Nor is it an accurate and illuminating commentary on the life of this great writer; although not overdone, I'm unsure there's any evidence that Tom Lefroy guided or influenced Austen's writing. The film takes liberties and makes real distortions in the facts of Austen's life. Nor does Becoming Jane cleverly incorporate Austen's novels into this telling, either comedically making her life into an Austen novel, or, conversely and more seriously, finding the autobiographical in her novels and using them to illustrate this biopic. In fact, except for a few instances, this film needn't have been about Jane Austen, and could've been about any young woman who wanted to be a writer and had an episode of romantic entanglement; it could've been simply a Georgian romcom. Although enjoyable and worth watching, Becoming Jane doesn't add anything to the story of the beloved writer, and so is a huge missed opportunity to make a lasting work that would be treasured by generations of Austen fans. A lovely and amusing entertainment, but little more. 🐢

FilmLit: Shakespeare in Love (1998)

Film Review: Shakespeare in Love, Academy Award winner, is the perfect definition of what literature in film should be. Set in London of 1593, the star-bedazzled cast presents Will Shakespeare as he desperately seeks love, his muse, and to complete his latest work, Romeo and Ethel the Pirate's Daughter. The script is full of in-jokes: the more you know of Shakespeare and his time, the more you'll get the movie. Lines from his great plays are strewn throughout the dialog. We meet (an uncredited) Kit Marlowe, a young and vicious John Webster, a Lord Wessex (Thomas Hardy, anyone?). We see the immortal playwright, a skull on his shelf, practicing his signature, writing sonnets, visiting his shrink. Since we know so little of him, the comedic imagining of Shakespeare rings true with only a little suspension of disbelief. He is humanized in Shakespeare in Love, given a credible life and personality that compels the viewer to keep watching, even while knowing how it all must come out. The audience roots him on. Shakespeare writes his great romantic tragedy scene by scene, even as the play is being rehearsed, the rehearsal of the growing play mirroring the budding romance between Shakespeare and Viola, his love and muse. There is ample humor, adequate swashbuckling, and just enough bawdiness to fit the times. The film's sets, score, and costumes are immaculate, the whole generously textured with perfect detail. The actors, both leads and supporting, are uniformly brilliant, and Judi Dench even more so as Queen Elizabeth. In the end this romantic comedy and tragedy reveals the power and beauty to be found in Shakespeare, and convincingly argues why we continue to read and watch his work after so many centuries. Shakespeare in Love is a vital film for anyone who appreciates, or wants to appreciate, the genius of William Shakespeare. How did they make this virtually perfect movie? I don't know. It's a mystery.  🐢

FilmLit: Sylvia (2003)

A film covering the last seven years of the life of American poet, Sylvia Plath (1932-63).

Film Review: Sylvia gives a good solid try, but ends up being too much bio and not enough pic. The film begins with Sylvia Plath meeting her future husband and the future poet laureate, Ted Hughes, and carefully checks off key points in Plath's life: driven, Fulbright Scholar, past suicide attempts, Cambridge, his book, America, a child, jealousy, moving to the country, her book, his cheating, another child, The Bell Jar, and we know how it ends. Which is one of the two problems here: although there is an underlying tension, the audience knows how the story will end, so how does the film get past that and become immediate, rather than simply a set up for what we know is coming? Gwyneth Paltrow works hard, and gives a visually convincing portrayal of Plath. But despite a game effort, the film finally doesn't really connect us to the poetry (the second problem with the film; perhaps insurmountable) or give us a sense of what made Plath a great poet. Much of the time Paltrow is left to silently sit, stand, or stare, lost in emotion. Meshing film and poetry is no easy task, and I just don't see many viewers wanting to run out and read Plath's amazing poetry after seeing Sylvia. Daniel Craig is also visually solid, but isn't given a lot to do except to be harsh, cold, and abusive while continually cheating, despite his knowledge of Plath's insecurity and fragility. We know from his biographers that he was a serial cheater and was carrying on at least two affairs at the time of Plath's death. A key moment is when Plath says, "Now he's gone. I'm free. I can finally write," but the beginning of the Ariel poems, the sudden unfiltered release of emotion, is also too much for her. Although Plath is presented as proto-feminist, both domestic goddess, saddled alone with two children, and ambitious writer, that is not what made her one of the most underrated poets of our time (known more for her life than her shattering poetry). Plath reached the stage most poets never do: perfectly combining emotion, words, and herself. Although I've focused here on the difficulties the filmmakers faced, the end result is still worth watching for the strong performances despite any frustrations with the finished product.

FilmLit: The End of the Tour (2015)

David Foster Wallace and a reporter for Rolling Stone go on a road trip at the end of the Infinite Jest book tour during five days of interviews in 1996.

Film Review: Somehow I missed The End of the Tour when it was released, but I'm glad I found it on DVD. Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network, Zombieland) is the reporter and Jason Segel (best known for the TV series How I Met Your Mother) is DFW. Most of the movie centers on the two and they both turn in excellent performances. Segel captures a consistent, credible, and convincing persona that made me believe he was the author. Eisenberg gives a torn and energetic portrayal of the heavily conflicted reporter. The movie is based on actual interviews by writer David Lipsky that were intended for a Rolling Stone article that never came off. After Wallace's death, Lipsky wrote a memoir of the road trip (Although of Course You End Up Becoming Yourself), which formed the basis for The End of the Tour. While watching the movie it seemed that much of the dialog must have come from the interview tapes (IMDb says no, one review says yes), but a disclaimer at the end of the film stated that some events were fictitious, so I may also have to read the memoir to get a fuller picture.

Lipsky comes off poorly in The End of the Tour, which creates the conflict in the film. He's seemingly using Wallace to get the story he wants, invading his life and privacy, flirting with Wallace's former girlfriend. Although he respects him as a writer, he's jealous of Wallace's success, the success he'd like to have as a writer, and jealous of Wallace even when the author simply chats with Lipksy's girlfriend on the phone, 1,000 miles away. He's eager to paint Wallace as a fraud, when the author actually appears nakedly vulnerable and honest. Reporters are scum.

Wallace is so alone, so isolated, so encapsulated, that even while he feels exposed and invaded, he enjoys his discussions with the reporter, opens up to him, shares his home, talks about hidden parts of his life and writing. The viewer watches Wallace, insecure tho brilliant, hungry for human contact but unable to achieve it because of his painful self-consciousness combined with his desire to be (or to be seen as) a good person doing the right thing. It's uncomfortable seeing Wallace watch and envy Lipsky's casual ability to interact, flirt, make small talk. The best part of the film for me was when the author reveals what makes him a writer, why he writes the way he does, reveals the products of his constant overthinking.

If you have any interest in David Foster Wallace or Infinite Jest, The End of the Tour is well worth watching. Even without that interest, Eisenberg and Segel still create a passionate character study of an ambitious writer who's now a reporter, and a troubled, confused author who may have just created the most important novel of our time. It has a 91% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and I enjoyed this greatly, both as a film, and for its portrayal of the writer.

FilmLit is Coming Soon!

Announcing a new feature that I'm just getting off the ground. I'm going to be adding reviews of certain movies to the blog, trying to keep things interesting, and I'm calling it FilmLit. Now, I'm not a movie reviewer and certainly not an expert on cinema, so perhaps calling these "reviews" may be exaggerating things a bit. I'm just a fan and I want to share some of my favorite movies about the world of writers, books, and literature. My goal is just to let you know about films I've seen and enjoyed that relate to books, authors, and the like. I'm not planning to talk much about movies that are simply book adaptations, such as The Martian, unless there's something else unusual or interesting about it. For instance, Love and Friendship, the recent movie adaptation of Jane Austen's Lady Susan, has enough story, trivia, and behind the scenes info about the transition from book to film to fit into the FilmLit bag. Actually, The Martian probably does as well. We'll see. So that's the plan; I just wanted to let you know about this sudden change in the space-time continuum. The posts may be a bit spoilery, but I'll try to keep it to a minimum, and they'll certainly have no more spoilers than your usual movie review. FilmLit posts will be intermittent, depending on when I find something I want to share, but I have some ideas already that you should be seeing soon. This should be fun.