"DEADPOOL" (2016) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "DEADPOOL", the eighth entry in the "X-MEN" film series. Directed by Tim Miller, the movie stars Ryan Reynolds as Wade Wilson aka Deadpool: 



"DEADPOOL" (2016) Photo Gallery

"WAR AND PEACE" (2016) Review

"WAR AND PEACE" (2016) Review

I have a confession to make. I have never seen a movie or television adaptation of Leo Tolstoy's 1869 novel, "War and Peace". Never. Well . . . I once made an attempt to watch the 1956 movie adaptation directed by King Vidor. Unfortunately, I could never go the distance. In fact, I have never read the novel. 

However, many years passed. When I heard about the BBC's latest adaptation of Tolstoy's novel, my curiosity got the best of me and I decided to give "WAR AND PEACE" a chance. The six-part miniseries is simply about the experiences of five Russian families during the Napoleonic Wars in the early 19th century. Those families include the Bezukhovs, the Bolkonskys, the Rostovs, the Kuragins, and theDrubetskoys. The miniseries seemed to be divided into three segments during a period between 1805 and 1812-13. The first segment featured the introduction of the main characters and Russia's preparation of a war against Napoleon's France. This culminates into the Battle of Austerlitz in which two major characters - Prince Andrei Nikolayevich Bolkonsky and Count Nikolai Ilyich Rostov - participate. 

The second segment featured the characters' personal experiences at home. During this period, the miniseries explored Count Pyotr "Pierre" Kirillovich Bezukhov's failed marriage with the beautiful, but vapid and unfaithful Princess Yelena "Hélène" Vasilyevna Kuragina; the Rostov family's financial woes and how it affected Nikolai Rostov; the emotional strains within the Bolkonsky family; Prince Boris Drubetskoy's efforts to advance his military career; and especially Countess Natalya "Natasha" Ilyinichna Rostova's love life, which included both Andrei Bolkonsky and Prince Anatole Vasilyevich Kuragin. This segment also included news of Treaties of Tilsit of 1807, which ended hostilities between Imperial France and Imperial Russia and Prussia. The miniseries' final segment focused on France's invasion of Russia in 1812 and the characters' efforts to survive it.

I could compare director Tom Harper and screenwriter Andrew Davies' adaptation with Tolstoy's novel, but it would be a useless effort. As I had earlier pointed out, I have never read the novel. But I do have at least two complaints about the productions. One of them revolved around the relationship between Natasha Rostova and Andrei Bolkonsky. I realize that the publicity machine on both sides of the Atlantic had undergone a great effort to build up the relationship between the pair. Frankly, I found the publicity campaign rather wasted. The Natasha/Andrei romance struck me as a disappointing and wasted effort. The majority of their story arc - which began with their meeting at a ball near the end of Episode Three, continued with Natasha's brief romance with the slimy Anatole Kuragin, and ended with Natasha's romances with both men crashing around her by the end of Episode Four; had moved . . . so damn fast that it left my head spinning. I cannot help but wonder if the entire arc could have been portrayed with more detail if the series had stretched a bit longer.

I also had a problem with Edward K. Gibbon's costume designs. I found most of them very colorful, especially for the aristocratic characters. But I also found most of them rather troublesome. Well . . . to be honest, I found them either mediocre or historically questionable. One of them left me gritting my teeth:



But my jaw had literally dropped at the sight of a few costumes worn by actresses Tuppence Middleton and Gillian Anderson - including those shown in the images below:

  

WHAT IN THE HELL??? Their costumes looked more appropriate for present-day evening wear than the early 19th century. What was Mr. Gibbons thinking?

Despite the rushed Natasha Rostova/Andrei Bolkonsky romance and despite the rather questionable costumes, I managed to enjoy "WAR AND PEACE" very much. I am a sucker for family sagas, especially when they are seeped in a historical background. And "WAR AND PEACE" nearly pushed every one of my buttons when it comes to a well made saga. It had everything - romance, family struggles, historical events and personages. When I realized that Tolstoy had originally focused his tale on five families, I did not think Andrew Davies would be able to translate the author's novel in a tight story without losing its epic quality.

There were certain sequences that really blew my mind, thanks to Davies' writing and especially, Tom Harper's direction. I thought Harper did an outstanding job of re-creating battles like Austerlitz and Borodino, along with the French Army's retreat from Moscow. Harper also did a great job in directing large parties and ball scenes. My two favorites are the party held at St. Petersburg socialite Anna Pavlovna Scherer's salon in Episode 1 and the ball where Natasha and Andrei met in Episode 3.

But it was not just the battle and crowd scenes that impressed me. "WAR AND PEACE" is - after all - a melodrama, even if many literary critics are inclined not to admit it. I never thought I would find myself getting caught up in the lives of the saga's main characters. But I did. I must admit that I admire how Tolstoy . . . and Davies managed to allow the three main characters - Pierre, Natasha and Andrei - to interact with the five families, regardless of blood connection or marriage. I especially enjoyed the explorations into the lives of Pierre, the Rostovs and the Bolkonskys. At first glance, some might regard the miniseries' ending that featured a picnic with the families of the three leads as a bit on the saccharine. It did have a "happily ever after" tinge about it. But I read in a newspaper article that complained about Tolstoy's "realistic" ending - one that featured a less-than-happy view of the protagonists' lives and a critique from Tolstoy on all forms of mainstream history. Thanks to Davies' screenplay, audiences were spared of this.

"WAR AND PEACE" featured a good number of first-rate performances from a supporting cast that included Stephen Rea, Gillian Anderson, Tuppence Middleton, Callum Turner, Mathieu Kassovitz, Jessie Buckley, Adrian Edmondson, Aisling Loftus, Rebecca Front and Aneurin Barnard. However, I was especially impressed by certain supporting performances. One came from Greta Scacchi, who portrayed the Rostov family's practical and sometimes ruthless matriarch Countess Natalya Rostova. I also enjoyed Brian Cox's portrayal of the world weary General Mikhail Kutuzov, who has to contend with not only Napolean's army, but also the amateurish interference of the Czar. Tom Burke did a great job in portraying the wolfish and ambitious army officer, Fedor Dolokhov, who eventually becomes a better man following Napoleon's invasion. Jack Lowden's portrayal of the young Count Nikolai Rostov really impressed me, especially when his character found himself torn between following his heart and marrying a wealthy woman to restore his family's fortunes. And Jim Broadbent gave a very colorful performance as Prince Nikolai Bolkonsky, the mercurial and controlling patriarch of the Bolkonsky family.

And what about the production's three leads? Lily James gave a very charming performance as Countess Natasha Rostova. Well . . . I take that back. Describing James' performance as simply "charming" seemed to hint that I found it rather shallow. Yes, James handled Natasha's "light" moments with her usual competence. More importantly, she did an excellent job in conveying Natasha's personal struggles - especially during the series' second half. There were times when I did not know what to make of the Prince Andrei Bolkonsky. He struck me as a very unusual protagonist. Although I found him rather honorable and filled with valor, Andrei did not always struck me as likable - especially in his relationship with adoring, yet ignored wife Lise. And Norton superbly captured the many nuances of Andrei's character. If Andrei Bolkonsky struck me as an unusual protagonist, Count Pierre Bezukhov struck me as one of a kind. Well . . . one of a kind for a literary piece written in the 19th century. Sometimes, I get the feeling that someone like Pierre could easily translate into a late 20th century or early 21st century geek. Or perhaps not. I think Pierre is too kind and open-minded to be considered a geek. But he is very unusual for a leading man. And thanks to Paul Dano's superb portrayal, Pierre has become one of my favorite fictional characters. He did a stupendous job in conveying Pierre's character from this insecure and rather naive man to a man who learned to find wisdom and inner peace through his struggles. Dano was so good that I had assumed that his performance would garner him a major acting nomination. It did not and I am still flabbergasted by this travesty.

My taste in period dramas usually focused on stories set in the United States or Great Britain . . . with the occasional foray into France. I was very reluctant to tackle this latest adaptation of Leo Tolstoy's most famous novel. But I was in the mood for something new and decided to watch the six-part miniseries. I am happy to say that despite some flaws, I ended up enjoying "WAR AND PEACE" very much, thanks to Andrew Davies' screenplay, Tom Harper's direction and an excellent cast led by Paul Dano, James Norton and Lily James.

"UNDERGROUND": Things That Make Me Go . . . Hmmm?

The following was first written after Season One of "UNDERGROUND" aired on the WGN network:



"UNDERGROUND": THINGS THAT MAKE ME GO . . . HMMM?

Ever since its premiere back in March 2016, I have been a major fan of "UNDERGROUND", the WGN cable series about a group of Georgia slaves who attempt the journey to freedom in antebellum America. But I am also a big history buff. And since "UNDERGROUND" has a strong historical background, it was inevitable that I would notice how much the series adhered to history. Although the series' historical background held up rather well, there were some aspects of the series that I found questionable, as listed below. 

Women's Hairstyles - I had no problems with the hairstyles worn by the African-American female characters. However, I cannot say the same white female characters - especially the two sisters-in-law, Northern socialite Elizabeth Hawkes and Southern plantation mistress Suzanna Macon. The latter's hairstyle seemed to be some vague take on mid-19th century hairstyles for women. However, the hairstyle worn by the Elizabeth Hawkes character seemed to be straight out of the late 19th century or the first decade of the 20th century. 





Patty Canon - A group of professional slave catchers/traders were featured in the episodes between (1.06) "Troubled Waters" and (1.09) "Black & Blue". These men were led by a notorious illegal slave trader named Patty Cannon. The lady herself finally appeared in the flesh in the tenth and final episode of Season One, (1.10) "White Whale". However, the presence of Miss Cannon in a story set in 1857 proved to be anachronistic, for she lived between the 1760s and 1829. Hmmm.





Location, Location and . . . Location - One aspect of the series that annoyed me was that viewers were more or less left in the dark was the locations of the fleeing fugitives in two episodes - "Troubled Waters" and (1.07) "Cradle". Their journey in Season One was spread throughout four states - Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky and Ohio. I really wish that showrunners Misha Green and Joe Pokaski had kept track of the fugitives' locations - especially in those particular episode. Also in "Troubled Waters", they traveled north (I think) aboard a keelboat that previously served as a floating whorehouse. I am aware that a few rivers in the United States flow northward. But I could have sworn that the two nearest ones in the series' setting would be the New River in southeastern North Carolina and the Monongahela River that flows from West Virginia to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Neither river is that close to the fugitives' route.





James as a Field Slave - In the second episode, (1.02) "War Chest", viewers learned that the Masons' housekeeper, Ernestine, is willing to have sex with planter Tom Macon in order to secure the safety of her children, which includes preventing their seven year-old son James from becoming a field slave. Ernestine's efforts come to nothing for the episode "Cradle" opened with Ernestine and her older son, Sam, preparing young James for the harshness of the cotton fields. While the scene was heartbreaking, I also found it slightly unrealistic. Slave children on large-scale plantations would not be sent to the fields (cotton, sugar, tobacco, etc.) until they were at least nine or ten years old. The sight of James in the cotton field would have been more realistic if he had been a few years older.





Harriet Tubman - The series' Season One finale ended with successful fugitive Rosalee meeting the famed Underground Railroad conductor Harriet Tubman at the Philadelphia home of abolitionist William Still. This is not a blooper, considering that Miss Tubman's base of operation stretched between Maryland (her home state) and the New York-Canada border. However, since news of actress Aisha Hinds being cast to portray the famous abolitionist in the series' second season, I cannot help but wonder if the setting will shift toward the East Coast. 





Sam's Role on the Macon Plantation - The series' premiere, (1.01) "The Macon 7" first introduced Sam - Rosalee's older half-brother and Ernestine's oldest child - as the Macon plantation's carpenter. Audiences saw Sam serve in this role until the fifth episode, (1.05) "Run & Gun", when he and the other remaining slaves on the plantation worked out in the cotton field to put out the fire caused by one of the main fugitives, Cato. Sam worked in the cotton field until his escape attempt at the end of "Cradle" and his death in (1.08) "Grave". Yet, I have no idea why owner Tom Macon kept him in the cotton fields. Considering that the latter never suspected him for helping the Macon 7 escape, why would he have Sam working in the field, instead of the carpenter's wood shop?





Boo's Fate - The Season One finale saw the youngest of the Macon 7, Boo, playing in the garden of William Still's Philadelphia home. Before that, the young girl lost her mother Pearly Mae first to slave catcher August Pullman and later to Ernestine's act of murder on the Macon plantation. She then lost her father to members from Patty Cannon's gang on the banks of the Ohio River. After spending time at the home of Elizabeth and John Hawkes, she was reunited with Rosalee and Noah, before joining the former at Still's home. But Noah got captured and Rosalee decided to return south to find him. So what will happen to Boo, now that she is literally orphaned? She certainly cannot remain in the United States. Her time with the Hawkes proved that.





End of the Journey - Northern States or Canada - Ever since the series began, many characters - especially the Macon 7 - discussed about taking the arduous 600 miles or so journey from Georgia to the Ohio River and freedom. Yet, no one even brought up the idea of continuing the journey to Canada. After all, Season One is set in 1857, seven years following the passage of the Compromise of 1850 and the Fugitive Slave Act. The fugitive law was mentioned by Elizabeth Hawkes' former beau, Kyle Risdin, who used it to force her husband John Hawkes to assist in the search and capture of a fugitive slave. So why did the Hawkes, Still, and the Underground Railroad conductors in Kentucky (I believe) failed to inform members of the Macon 7 that reaching the North would not be enough . . . that they would have to travel all the way to Canada in order to be safe?





Ernestine's Position on the Macon Plantation - Sam was not the only member of Rosalee's family that left me confused about the chores assigned on the Macon plantation. I also found myself confused about the chores of Rosalee's mother, Ernestine. "The Macon 7" made it clear that Ernestine was the Macon family's housekeeper. In fact, the series featured scenes of her acting as supervisor of the house slaves. And yet . . . other episodes featured Ernestine supervising the work inside the plantation's kitchen. I found this odd. Surely the plantation had its own cook preparing and supervising the meals? Plantations and the households of wealthy families would have a cook. Why did this series have Ernestine, a housekeeper, supervising the kitchen? As housekeeper, Ernestine would not be serving drinks or food to the Macon family and their guests. She would order a maid for this function. Yet, the series has shown Ernestine not only ordering maids to serve food, but also herself performing the same chore. Huh? But the biggest mind bender occurred in the fourth episode, (1.04) "Firefly", which featured Ernestine butchering a hog. I really found this difficult to accept. The housekeeper of a wealthy family acting as a butcher? C'mon! Really? 


Despite the above quibbles, I really enjoyed "UNDERGROUND" and look forward to watching Season Two. I only hope that this second season will feature less anachronisms.

"THE GAMBLER FROM NATCHEZ" (1954) Photo Gallery

Below are images from the 1954 costume adventure film, "THE GAMBLER FROM NATCHEZ". Directed by Henry Levin, the movie starred Dale Robertson and Debra Paget: 


"THE GAMBLER FROM NATCHEZ" (1954) Photo Gallery