Trailer: https://bit.ly/3z0MvXa
What does it take to give up?
I don't remember a Christmas when I wasn't skiing.
Well, that's not true, there was last year, and that year I got cancer, and all those years in between the seventies and 2005 when I was stuck in L.A., wondering what to do with myself when the world stopped and I didn't want it to.
You grow up in a family. Well, maybe you don't. Maybe you're the child of a single parent. Or sans parents. I'm not familiar with your experience, but the suburbs? I know those by heart.
And in the pre-internet era, if you lived in the suburbs you were disconnected, all you could do was dream. You had to go to the city, New York or L.A., to take your chance on the spinning wheel of entertainment, even more. But the truth is most people don't have the chutzpah, they're just too scared to leave their comfort zone, or maybe they've got no direction except home. Why do people not dream? Maybe it's society, it does its best to squeeze the creativity out of you, makes you conform, so you can be a good little worker on the assembly line of life. But what if that life isn't for you?
The truth is it's easiest to go straight. And if you're from the suburbs your parents wanted you to go straight, they weren't rich, they wanted you to be able to leave the nest and keep flying, they wanted you to get a college education, to be prepared, and then a professional degree, to begin your working life one step ahead of everybody else. And to defy your parents, that takes a will most people don't have, therefore the world is riddled with baby boomers who look back and wonder, what if they took the path less taken, what if they invested in their dreams, what if they hadn't borrowed so much money, what if they weren't tied to their job, THEN WHAT?
On the other side you've got the people watching the world pass them by as they pursue their dream, and usually never achieve it. At first they can live without the money. But then there's the house, the car, the family, and then it's too late, you can never catch up. Either it's your dream or second class citizenry.
And everybody's invested in your dream, but only for a short while. They'll support you, come to your show, and then they won't, they believe you're being juvenile, that you need to grow up, everybody else conformed, why can't you?
I'm not talking about the desperate, who will do anything to make it, many times they do. Then again, the risk is so much smaller, if they fall back to earth they haven't missed much, just drudgery on the assembly line.
And the truth is it is drudgery. So you live to get high, have sex and be entertained by music, movies and television. Without those three there'd be little reason to live, life would be in black and white, and we all need a little color to make it worthwhile.
But there are a zillion people for each slot. And most are full of it...you know, doo-doo. They tell you about their past, who they know, but they never go anywhere. And then there are those who make it their business to complain about the system, saying it's rigged. And then there are those for whom it seems effortless, they make it in their twenties, but what if you're about to be THIRTY!
The bigger the artist, the more unique the path, the more challenges there are to success. Because even the gatekeepers, they want something that rains down coin, they talk about risk, but take very little. As for today's internet world? Like Sly Stone sang, everybody is a star, and it's a side hustle. Occasionally it's your main hustle, but it takes so much effort to keep your head above water that you ultimately give up. Being a star today is different from yesterday, because today it is all about money, whereas before it was about the work, you were measured by your work, not the cash.
So Jonathan Larson put everything on the line to make it, and he failed.
Oh, eventually he succeeded, with "Rent," but he wasn't around to see it, he died of a heart attack, you don't have health insurance when you're poor, to go to the hospital just costs too much, so you don't. This is the reason the rich live longer than the poor, health care.
So you're sharing an apartment. You've got the college bookshelves, with the cinder blocks and wooden planks, and after a couple of years your cohorts peel off. Usually they don't talk about it, they keep it to themselves, and then suddenly they've gone straight, and there's one fewer Indian in the tribe. Can one even use that metaphor anymore? Now there are so many boxes you have to check before you can start to write, start to create, talk about inhibition.
And Larson needs one more song for his musical "Superbia," and the closer it gets to deadline, the harder it is to write. That's one of the reasons people don't risk, because when you get close to the deadline, the test, it's agony.
And then... "Superbia" fails. I'm not giving anything away. It's right there online if you do any reading. And the fact that Lin-Manuel Miranda made the picture, a tribute to his hero.
And "tick, tick...BOOM" is made for theatre nerds. If you're not one, if you're not a fan of Broadway, I don't recommend it, it will be a bit of a slog. But then it ends...
It took so much for Jonathan Larson to make it. And despite common wisdom, his Jewish parents did not support him. They support you during your education, then they cut you off, you've got to make it on your own, but that's so hard to do, there are no starting jobs that pay all the bills, you need time to create. But especially if you're the child of Jewish parents the entertainment business is anathema. Forget that Jews started Hollywood, forget all the successful actors and musicians, that was a different era, they came from nothing.
As for those who come from something... That doesn't help you much on the creative side of the equation. Maybe you can get a desk job, but when it comes to creativity you've either got it or you don't, and no amount of money can buy it. But the point is...DO YOU BELIEVE IN YOURSELF!
Not blind belief. Not the person who tries to convince you it's sunny when it's pouring outside. No, if you believe in yourself you've got a world of doubt. The inner mounting flame keeps you going, but you're not convinced you're going to make it, at most you can convince yourself you'll keep on trying.
And then as the wannabes peel off, those with early success and no follow-up become real estate agents, and you get a grasp of what it takes to make it, you can smell it, sense it. Then you know whether you've got it or not. And I'm gonna let you in on a secret, most people don't have it, that "it."
But everybody recognizes that "it" when they see it, or hear it. They yearn for it, they cut through detritus looking for it. Nothing comes close, it's the difference between masturbation and sex, the former is just a facsimile, the latter is the real deal.
Used to be the hurdles were right up front. To jump from the minor leagues to the big leagues was quite a leap, but you found out pretty quickly if you were cut out for the creative life. Now, in today's amorphous world, you're not even sure what success is, and you can woodshed for a decade, hear the words of acolytes and sycophants, and then realize you can never be a part of the club. You're in between the winners and the losers, but in truth you're a professional wannabe.
So...
Jonathan Larson made it. There were signals that kept him going, little events that kept him on the path, certain words of encouragement, but he threatened to go straight, all the winners do, like I said, they have self-doubt.
And he sacrificed love and lifestyle. A significant other will only believe in you so long, then they want the trappings. The odds of finding someone who needs it as much as you do, who will sacrifice as much as you do, are close to nil. They're all lovey-dovey, supportive, and then the switch flips, you didn't realize it was coming, and then you're confronted with a black and white choice, give up or give up everything and keep going.
So, if you're Jewish and you live in the city, on Christmas you go for Chinese food and then to the movies, maybe two. Christmas means nothing to Jews.
But now you can't go to the movies, you can't even go skiing, you're taking your life in your hands. I know, I was in Vail, I came home. Colorado is not like California, the belief is there is no Covid, no one was wearing a mask. And it's not like the news will confirm the infection rate, because that might make people leave, or not even come, and they depend on tourists.
And if you have three shots, you're not gonna die. But my two didn't give me any antibodies, and a third would do nothing, because I have no B cells. And I was depending on Regeneron's monoclonal antibodies, good at 82% for eight months, no one went to the hospital, no one died, but then Regeneron said it didn't work so well against Omicron, the study said 15%. Are you willing to take those odds?
Like I said, I'm unique. I don't know anybody else with my immune issues. And no one cares about my immune issues. Ever since Reagan the American mind-set has changed, you worry about yourself, not everybody else, not society. And the truth is life is so hard you've got to. But the irony is those who are the winners care about the losers, the challenged, the least. Philanthropy is at a higher percentage amongst the far less wealthy, they're compassionate, whereas the "job creators" are trying to disinform the public as to the reality.
That's the story today. Which is why our art often suffers, it's about the bottom line. And movie studios and record labels used to fund the challenging, the out there, the risky, that was part of their mission, but no longer. Thank god we've got Netflix, which will fund your passion project with its hands off. But how long will that last?
This is the juggernaut you're confronted with, No one is awaiting your opus, no one cares about your opus. It becomes unclear how talented you are, perseverance is as important as talent, the road is littered with the talented.
And even if you make it, you cannot get back those years gone by. Your body is beat up, you're old. No one wants to go on a month-long bike trip with you, they'd rather just relax at an expensive hotel. They're on the downslope, you're on the upslope, they're retiring, you're still going, is the equation equal, is it worth it?
Hell if I know. Only you know. Deep down inside. Only you can stay the course. Ultimately only you're the one who believes. Are you willing to put it all on the line?
Jonathan Larson did.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Saturday 25 December 2021
Friday 24 December 2021
Being The Ricardos
Movies didn't used to be an event, they used to be a religion.
Maybe if you're young you can understand when I say that movies used to be streaming television, something we all watched and talked about that at its best tested limits and made us think.
But movies aren't like that anymore.
Used to be you had to go to the movies to be part of the culture, part of the discussion, when we talked with those nearby as opposed to those far away via a device. This was the paradigm all the way up through the early aughts, when we all looked around and said the movies sucked and stayed home.
But in the late sixties, even into the nineties, you wanted to go to the movies, for the experience. You wanted to be challenged, you wanted your mind stretched, there was constant innovation, remember that movie "Memento," which unfolded in reverse? That came out in 2000, when all reasonable movies were labeled "art movies" and opened in specialized theatres. And those theatres still exist, but it's impossible to keep up, there's a plethora of product, and if it's worth anything you can stream it soon anyway.
You see we were all completists. You didn't go to one movie a year, probably not even one movie a month! You wanted to view everything worth seeing. And that included failed attempts as well as classics, like "Being the Ricardos."
The reviews are middling. One writer said Aaron Sorkin knew nothing about not only comedy, but women.
But on Tuesday it became available for free streaming (we all have a Prime account or access to one, right?) on Amazon.
But I still didn't want to see it. I mean I remember Lucy. Can't say that I love her, not that I hate her, but she was always there. Not only in first run, but reruns, she was available every day, frequently at multiple times a day. You knew what she'd deliver. And no one said they never wanted a hit of that.
And she didn't look like Nicole Kidman. Then again, even Nicole Kidman doesn't look like Nicole Kidman anymore. Have you seen "Dead Calm," her Australian breakthrough? It's better than almost all of today's studio films, I recommend it. But you might not recognize Kidman. She's got flaming red hair and freckles, she's not a Hollywood babe, but a too cute for you girl from high school. You knew people like this. An adjustment or two shy of perfection, who might give you the time of day but would never date you. But then Nicole Kidman had so much plastic surgery she no longer even looks like herself, here, check it out: https://bit.ly/3HbC0mx
And I liked Nicole Kidman, even in the movie where she connected with Tom Cruise, "Days of Thunder." But ultimately she left Cruise and became a better actress, but less believable. To the point where she's today's Meryl Streep, a great actress but you see her acting, it's always her, not the person she's playing. So my expectations were low, I was ready to wince, but Nicole Kidman is fantastic in "Being the Ricardos," she carries the whole movie, at times you even think she's Lucille Ball, especially in the black and white footage from the television show.
"Being the Ricardos" is hokey from the beginning, from the nearly superfluous wraparounds, behind the scenes people looking back from decades hence. Actually, that's my major complaint with the film, the endless exposition. In a ten hour streaming series all the facts would come out, but here Sorkin keeps having actors tell their story when in real life they wouldn't. It's not only unnatural, at times it's uncomfortable.
But the only reason I agreed to watch "Being the Ricardos" was because of Sorkin. But this is not "The Social Network," never mind "Sports Night," Sorkin misses, but he's shooting high, like almost no one else, so his failures are worth seeing, ergo my point above, the religion of movies, you have to see them all to get a feeling for the medium, to be educated, to be able to talk intelligently about them, and believe me we did. Judith Crist had movie weekends. We even had Siskel & Ebert. Now we've got Comic-Con.
So the cast is actually better than the movie. Javier Bardem is good, close to Desi Arnaz, but not quite there, you don't suspend disbelief like you occasionally do with Kidman. But J.K. Simmons starts off chewing the scenery and then becomes phenomenal, when he gets into it with Lucy/Kidman.
And it's always great to see Nina Arianda, who carried the last few seasons of "Goliath." And Alia Shawkat, who was brilliant in "Transparent" and never got rid of her freckles.
The problem is the story. We've seen enough House Un-American Activities films. The Commie-naming doesn't deliver the tension Sorkin wants it to, we aren't invested in Lucy's career, if for no other reason that we know it lasted for decades thereafter.
As for the relationship between Lucy and Ricky...it's done pretty well, but I wish that had been the sole focus, that's the movie right there, we all want to know more, at least those interested in this movie, because back in the day so much of the truth never came out.
So the story is there, but there's too much detritus around it. Well, not detritus, it just seems like multiple movies are happening at once.
There's the film about the making of a TV sitcom, a behind the scenes look.
There's the film about Lucy's genius/difficulty.
There's the film about the power of the sponsors and the network, their fear of even getting close to a third rail that we passed decades ago. This is what killed network TV, fear. The networks thought they were showing us ourselves on screen, but we had to go to movies for that, and ultimately HBO.
And then there are throwaway references to women's rights. Yes, Sorkin is trying to include everything from the era, and it hurts the ultimate film.
And the film jumps back and forth in time. You think you're following it, but at times you're not quite sure.
As for the cinematography... The truth is the past looked just like the present, but in Hollywood they change the tone, make it richer, not quite sepia, this is supposed to add gravitas. And it's pretty well done, but in truth I'd like to see the story from the exact viewpoint of the era.
So having gotten that out of the way, there's Lucy's arc. Second tier actress who gets involved with Desi and triumphs. The ditzy redhead who in real life was anything but. This is a movie unto itself, I actually wish they'd gone deeper. Was Lucy a control freak, the queen of OCD, or a genius needing to get it exactly right, was she the reason the show was so successful or did the elements alone, the four main characters, push it over the top?
And Fred, played by the aforementioned J.K. Simmons. Was he an irascible drunk or an experienced seer... Here he's both, and it's not quite believable.
And what was it like for Ethel to be second banana, this is touched upon, but it's just one more element in the stew that becomes overwhelming and too much to consume.
So, Sorkin doesn't really have a feel for Lucy and Desi. What I mean is he's made a movie, and it's watchable and good, but it's not quite the movie we want to see. We want much more than one week. We want the show and its stars more in context, just not references to "Lucy" being number one. And the backstory of the creation of Desilu. And we want the heavies to be more three-dimensional, less cardboard. Although the head of the network, the guy who green lights the show, he seems somewhat real.
You see there's a lot in this film.
And yes, there's tons of dialogue, but except for the endless exposition, it doesn't seem unnatural.
It's a Sorkin picture, but Sorkin does gravitas, not comedy. And although there is gravitas in Lucille Ball's story, her main calling card is comedy, and there's not enough from her in this film, and there's not enough of it overall in this film.
But at least Sorkin is trying. Or shall we say at least Amazon (and Netflix!) are laying down cash, allowing auteurs to test the limits, do what they do. And the great thing is in these projects story trumps image, like it always has in television. Today people revere these blockbuster film directors who make a movie look good, whiz-bang, it's just that the characters and the story have no soul.
Finally, when they reference the Lucy/Desi divorce at the end, which is almost superfluous, done with such heaviness you almost laugh, you are shocked when you see it happened back in 1960... That was SIXTY YEARS AGO!
Let me put this in perspective... This would be like asking baby boomers to be interested in the stories of the 1910s, and we were most definitely not. We were interested in the thirties, the forties, Bette Davis and W.C. Fields, but if you've seen a flick from the early part of the twentieth century you probably saw it in film class, not at the public theatre.
So...
We've got images, moving, of the past. But does that mean they remain, have traction? Is Lucy forever?
I don't know. She's a staple of boomer life, but do young kids even care? Kind of like the Marx Brothers. In high school and college we saw all their movies, knew all the characters, did the routines. I've never heard a Millennial or a Gen-Z'er talk about the Marx Brothers. Who are still great, but the edge is in the dialogue, nearly hidden, whereas today almost everything is in your face.
So how accurate is "Being the Ricardos"?
Well, we know Desi and Lucy got divorced, but the rest, who knows?
Which means we would have been better off with a documentary, or something closer to a biopic. But this attempt...it misses the mark, but it still delivers a lot, like a movie of yore, you're not at a distance, you're engrossed. You're pulled in. It's nearly intellectual without advertising itself as such. You'll think about it after it's done. Which is something you don't get with the superhero comic book movies of today.
Then again, comic books were never considered great literature. They were always for kids. Sure, there were some developmentally retarded men who still read of them, but for the rest of us they were a phase, like "Winky Dink." Funny world we live in, the issues are serious and that which is universal is so dumb. Why do we have to always play to the lowest common denominator? Can the soul of America be lifted, its intelligence, its curiosity? That's what films used to do, and that's what "Being the Ricardos" does too, which makes it worth seeing. There.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Maybe if you're young you can understand when I say that movies used to be streaming television, something we all watched and talked about that at its best tested limits and made us think.
But movies aren't like that anymore.
Used to be you had to go to the movies to be part of the culture, part of the discussion, when we talked with those nearby as opposed to those far away via a device. This was the paradigm all the way up through the early aughts, when we all looked around and said the movies sucked and stayed home.
But in the late sixties, even into the nineties, you wanted to go to the movies, for the experience. You wanted to be challenged, you wanted your mind stretched, there was constant innovation, remember that movie "Memento," which unfolded in reverse? That came out in 2000, when all reasonable movies were labeled "art movies" and opened in specialized theatres. And those theatres still exist, but it's impossible to keep up, there's a plethora of product, and if it's worth anything you can stream it soon anyway.
You see we were all completists. You didn't go to one movie a year, probably not even one movie a month! You wanted to view everything worth seeing. And that included failed attempts as well as classics, like "Being the Ricardos."
The reviews are middling. One writer said Aaron Sorkin knew nothing about not only comedy, but women.
But on Tuesday it became available for free streaming (we all have a Prime account or access to one, right?) on Amazon.
But I still didn't want to see it. I mean I remember Lucy. Can't say that I love her, not that I hate her, but she was always there. Not only in first run, but reruns, she was available every day, frequently at multiple times a day. You knew what she'd deliver. And no one said they never wanted a hit of that.
And she didn't look like Nicole Kidman. Then again, even Nicole Kidman doesn't look like Nicole Kidman anymore. Have you seen "Dead Calm," her Australian breakthrough? It's better than almost all of today's studio films, I recommend it. But you might not recognize Kidman. She's got flaming red hair and freckles, she's not a Hollywood babe, but a too cute for you girl from high school. You knew people like this. An adjustment or two shy of perfection, who might give you the time of day but would never date you. But then Nicole Kidman had so much plastic surgery she no longer even looks like herself, here, check it out: https://bit.ly/3HbC0mx
And I liked Nicole Kidman, even in the movie where she connected with Tom Cruise, "Days of Thunder." But ultimately she left Cruise and became a better actress, but less believable. To the point where she's today's Meryl Streep, a great actress but you see her acting, it's always her, not the person she's playing. So my expectations were low, I was ready to wince, but Nicole Kidman is fantastic in "Being the Ricardos," she carries the whole movie, at times you even think she's Lucille Ball, especially in the black and white footage from the television show.
"Being the Ricardos" is hokey from the beginning, from the nearly superfluous wraparounds, behind the scenes people looking back from decades hence. Actually, that's my major complaint with the film, the endless exposition. In a ten hour streaming series all the facts would come out, but here Sorkin keeps having actors tell their story when in real life they wouldn't. It's not only unnatural, at times it's uncomfortable.
But the only reason I agreed to watch "Being the Ricardos" was because of Sorkin. But this is not "The Social Network," never mind "Sports Night," Sorkin misses, but he's shooting high, like almost no one else, so his failures are worth seeing, ergo my point above, the religion of movies, you have to see them all to get a feeling for the medium, to be educated, to be able to talk intelligently about them, and believe me we did. Judith Crist had movie weekends. We even had Siskel & Ebert. Now we've got Comic-Con.
So the cast is actually better than the movie. Javier Bardem is good, close to Desi Arnaz, but not quite there, you don't suspend disbelief like you occasionally do with Kidman. But J.K. Simmons starts off chewing the scenery and then becomes phenomenal, when he gets into it with Lucy/Kidman.
And it's always great to see Nina Arianda, who carried the last few seasons of "Goliath." And Alia Shawkat, who was brilliant in "Transparent" and never got rid of her freckles.
The problem is the story. We've seen enough House Un-American Activities films. The Commie-naming doesn't deliver the tension Sorkin wants it to, we aren't invested in Lucy's career, if for no other reason that we know it lasted for decades thereafter.
As for the relationship between Lucy and Ricky...it's done pretty well, but I wish that had been the sole focus, that's the movie right there, we all want to know more, at least those interested in this movie, because back in the day so much of the truth never came out.
So the story is there, but there's too much detritus around it. Well, not detritus, it just seems like multiple movies are happening at once.
There's the film about the making of a TV sitcom, a behind the scenes look.
There's the film about Lucy's genius/difficulty.
There's the film about the power of the sponsors and the network, their fear of even getting close to a third rail that we passed decades ago. This is what killed network TV, fear. The networks thought they were showing us ourselves on screen, but we had to go to movies for that, and ultimately HBO.
And then there are throwaway references to women's rights. Yes, Sorkin is trying to include everything from the era, and it hurts the ultimate film.
And the film jumps back and forth in time. You think you're following it, but at times you're not quite sure.
As for the cinematography... The truth is the past looked just like the present, but in Hollywood they change the tone, make it richer, not quite sepia, this is supposed to add gravitas. And it's pretty well done, but in truth I'd like to see the story from the exact viewpoint of the era.
So having gotten that out of the way, there's Lucy's arc. Second tier actress who gets involved with Desi and triumphs. The ditzy redhead who in real life was anything but. This is a movie unto itself, I actually wish they'd gone deeper. Was Lucy a control freak, the queen of OCD, or a genius needing to get it exactly right, was she the reason the show was so successful or did the elements alone, the four main characters, push it over the top?
And Fred, played by the aforementioned J.K. Simmons. Was he an irascible drunk or an experienced seer... Here he's both, and it's not quite believable.
And what was it like for Ethel to be second banana, this is touched upon, but it's just one more element in the stew that becomes overwhelming and too much to consume.
So, Sorkin doesn't really have a feel for Lucy and Desi. What I mean is he's made a movie, and it's watchable and good, but it's not quite the movie we want to see. We want much more than one week. We want the show and its stars more in context, just not references to "Lucy" being number one. And the backstory of the creation of Desilu. And we want the heavies to be more three-dimensional, less cardboard. Although the head of the network, the guy who green lights the show, he seems somewhat real.
You see there's a lot in this film.
And yes, there's tons of dialogue, but except for the endless exposition, it doesn't seem unnatural.
It's a Sorkin picture, but Sorkin does gravitas, not comedy. And although there is gravitas in Lucille Ball's story, her main calling card is comedy, and there's not enough from her in this film, and there's not enough of it overall in this film.
But at least Sorkin is trying. Or shall we say at least Amazon (and Netflix!) are laying down cash, allowing auteurs to test the limits, do what they do. And the great thing is in these projects story trumps image, like it always has in television. Today people revere these blockbuster film directors who make a movie look good, whiz-bang, it's just that the characters and the story have no soul.
Finally, when they reference the Lucy/Desi divorce at the end, which is almost superfluous, done with such heaviness you almost laugh, you are shocked when you see it happened back in 1960... That was SIXTY YEARS AGO!
Let me put this in perspective... This would be like asking baby boomers to be interested in the stories of the 1910s, and we were most definitely not. We were interested in the thirties, the forties, Bette Davis and W.C. Fields, but if you've seen a flick from the early part of the twentieth century you probably saw it in film class, not at the public theatre.
So...
We've got images, moving, of the past. But does that mean they remain, have traction? Is Lucy forever?
I don't know. She's a staple of boomer life, but do young kids even care? Kind of like the Marx Brothers. In high school and college we saw all their movies, knew all the characters, did the routines. I've never heard a Millennial or a Gen-Z'er talk about the Marx Brothers. Who are still great, but the edge is in the dialogue, nearly hidden, whereas today almost everything is in your face.
So how accurate is "Being the Ricardos"?
Well, we know Desi and Lucy got divorced, but the rest, who knows?
Which means we would have been better off with a documentary, or something closer to a biopic. But this attempt...it misses the mark, but it still delivers a lot, like a movie of yore, you're not at a distance, you're engrossed. You're pulled in. It's nearly intellectual without advertising itself as such. You'll think about it after it's done. Which is something you don't get with the superhero comic book movies of today.
Then again, comic books were never considered great literature. They were always for kids. Sure, there were some developmentally retarded men who still read of them, but for the rest of us they were a phase, like "Winky Dink." Funny world we live in, the issues are serious and that which is universal is so dumb. Why do we have to always play to the lowest common denominator? Can the soul of America be lifted, its intelligence, its curiosity? That's what films used to do, and that's what "Being the Ricardos" does too, which makes it worth seeing. There.
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
The Kennedy Center Honors
There were no youngsters there.
That's what I've realized, we've become our parents. The boomer favorites are ignored by kids and when we salivate and go to shows they roll their eyes. Then again, this is CBS, the supposed Tiffany Network, the land of oldsters, and in truth no one e-mailed me about the show, demonstrating it's a closed universe.
I was caught off guard that Joni Mitchell was first. The deeper you are in the show, the more gravitas you exude. It was almost a minimalization. Norah Jones is talented, she played the piano and sang well, it's just that her voice lacks character, at least enough to make her rendition of Joni's material transcendent. And let's forget Ellie Goulding.
Brandi Carlile delivered, but we've seen this trick multiple times. Even better, there should be a film of Brandi's rendition of "Blue," that would be good for posterity. As for Brittany Howard... It was a show-stopping performance. It was both incredible and so slow as to remove the essence of "Both Sides Now." The lilting melody of the hit Judy Collins version (and Judy was in attendance, recognizable with her white hair, yet when they panned the audience it was tough to make most people out, everybody was wearing a mask), and even the slower Joni original match the lyrics in impact, but when the song is so slow it's all about the lyrics, it becomes a dirge, depressing, BUT BOY COULD BRITTANY HOWARD DELIVER! Which had me sitting there contemplating that none of these singers is capable of writing songs in the league of Ms. Mitchell's, if only they could.
As for the tribute to Lorne Michaels... That was the highlight of the night. It was so weird seeing young Lorne juxtaposed against old Lorne. The young Lorne was not so self-assured, he was not the Grand Poobah, he had something to prove, and now he's part of the glitterati, not realizing that outside the New York media world the show has very little impact, I mean just look at the ratings (and there is very little in the way of viral videos).
They focused on the best part of the show, the news, but Jimmy Fallon looked like an empty suit compared to Chevy Chase, and there was little mention of the original cast, no Belushi moment to remind us of what really made the show's bones. And Paul Simon... It was just plain scary. His vocal quiet...you figured they'd recut it and get it right. You watched Paul and you realized he was wise to retire from the road, these oldsters are really on their last legs. "America" is one of Paul's best songs, but what they should have had was Paul come out in a chicken suit singing "Still Crazy After All These Years."
Bette Midler's tribute had an irreverence, a sense of humor absent from the rest of the show. She was enjoying herself in the box. As for the performances...blah. But Mellissa Manchester did give a good speech.
The opera guy? Quick, do you know who he is? I rest my case.
And then we come to Berry Gordy, the man is 92 and looks like he's still in his sixties. He had the most impact of any of the honorees. Motown was the crossover music, so good on record and in performance it was undeniable, changing the world in the sixties as part of the youthquake. But Stevie Wonder... Maybe it's TV sound, or maybe it was the TV I was watching it on, but his performance just wasn't special enough, it wasn't over the top, he didn't kill like Aretha Franklin, and you wished she'd come back, just to show us what we're missing, when stars were just that.
But you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone.
And the truth is the boomers are dying off. As is so much of their culture, that they thought was forever. It's become an insular world. The boomers dress like kids, but they think their age. They want to be comforted, they don't want any riff-raff, they'd rather lounge in front of the flat screen than go to a movie theatre, never mind a show.
Then again, the legends keep putting up numbers. Going to see McCartney, the Stones and the Eagles has become a ritual. Because their music reminds us of when we were our best selves, when what we had to say was important, when we were against the man before we became the man, when we wanted the new instead of the old and familiar, when we wanted change instead of stasis.
Watching a TV show with commercials is interminable. Maybe if it was more exclusive, with a fee. No, if it launched on a weekend on a streaming service. Disney+ made "Get Back" an event, the Kennedy Center Honors was just a repetition of what once was, hewing to formula, and that's a recipe for death. Want to last, still have impact? Switch up the formula. Change. Your old fans might rebel, but you'll make new ones and possibly still stay relevant.
I mean Lorne... Can't you start the show with the news? Or the musical performer? Mess with our expectations? And have multiple guest stars an episode, not only old cast members and hosts, but people who just happen to be in NYC, most people can read cue cards and so many of the hosts are wooden actors anyway.
And this show... Could they have somebody in the audience who is not connected? Or do one show for the oldsters and then tape again with a young audience? And could we see just a little more edge? And have the bios tell us something we don't know? I mean the kind of person watching this show knows by heart the highlights presented, they've been beaten to death. But that's network TV, which tries to appeal to everybody and ends up appealing to nobody. Disney+ allows Peter Jackson eight hours to do a deep dive on one album... Maybe the Kennedy Center Honors could be eight hours long, one honoree per night, do something different, keep us on our toes.
This endless victory lap for Joni Mitchell is getting a bit tedious. As for Herbie Hancock and that lame album, only the Grammys could award such an exercise, have you ever tried to listen to that record, you just lift the needle and put on the originals.
But those originals...
As for Lorne Michaels... SNL was a seventies thing. SNL still oozed the irreverence of the sixties when the boomers were contemplating selling out, it was the end of their heyday.
Bette Midler? She was so busy becoming an everywoman that we're not quite sure who she is anymore. She was a singer, a performer, and then an actress in movies. It's like the comedians who want sitcoms...that's where the money is, but that's not where your talent resides. Bette was great in movies, truly, "Down and Out in Beverly Hills" and "Ruthless People," but she was never transcendent like she was on record, on the stage, because movies and music are different things, and when done right music always triumphs, because it sets your mind free to go on its own hejira, whereas films keep you focused on the narrative.
Opera?
I just read somewhere there's a renaissance amongst young people. But the truth is, all the elements of our parents' culture, the so-called "Greatest Generation," are we going to perpetuate them? They cost a lot of money and audience support is not sufficient, they run on fat cat money, burnishing the image of corporate criminals, like the Sacklers. It'll be interesting to see.
And Motown?
Motown is forever, just like the Beatles. It's the songs, plain and simple. Berry Gordy insisted his records, his acts, have everything, so that they could not be denied...songs, looks, performance, the best arrangers, players and writers. We heard symphonies from not only the Supremes, but endless others, whether they be Marvin, Stevie or Smokey or...
But when they focused on the audience...
Everybody was old. Most especially our president, Joe Biden. This guy was never hip, he was a member of the generation just not OF THE GENERATION! He's got no soul. Like Hillary. Unlike Bill. Come on, the saxophone playing recipient of fellatio? In hindsight, having experienced Trump, Bill's activities look pretty good.
But that was our generation. Testing limits. Embracing change. Not puritanical and steeped in its own ways.
Actually, most of the greatest artists will never get Kennedy Center Honors. Even though they're now aged, they're not lovable. You see if everybody loves you, you've stopped evolving and become a relic, whereas if you're still pushing the envelope you're making people uptight, a point of conversation as opposed to nostalgia.
The Kennedy Center Honors were like a cruise ship show. Making you feel good and instantly forgettable.
It's hard to make moments, to capture lightning in a bottle, but when we've seen it all, or think we have, you have to shock us, do it differently. MTV used to specialize in this, but the internet killed its paradigm, and MTV missed the internet, like seemingly every established institution.
Now I'll put links to the two best performances below, but really the whole show was a miss. You could survive quite nicely never having seen it. Then again, isn't the internet all about looking forward? Did you see that TikTok was the world's most visited site last year? Eclipsing even Google? And Instagram wasn't even in the top ten, imagine that, you're propping up your image where none of the trendsetters reside, you're just like this show.
You were hip once...
But you're not anymore.
Brandi Carlile performs "River":
Brittany Howard performs "Both Sides Now":
P.S. Too much Googling to not find the complete performances. CBS has the complete show, but if you've got ad-blocking software on your browser, like me, like seemingly everybody, sponsors are blocked and you cannot watch. Why can't these ancient enterprises just put their stuff up on YouTube like everybody else? If you think we're gonna patronize your platform...you've got another think coming!
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
That's what I've realized, we've become our parents. The boomer favorites are ignored by kids and when we salivate and go to shows they roll their eyes. Then again, this is CBS, the supposed Tiffany Network, the land of oldsters, and in truth no one e-mailed me about the show, demonstrating it's a closed universe.
I was caught off guard that Joni Mitchell was first. The deeper you are in the show, the more gravitas you exude. It was almost a minimalization. Norah Jones is talented, she played the piano and sang well, it's just that her voice lacks character, at least enough to make her rendition of Joni's material transcendent. And let's forget Ellie Goulding.
Brandi Carlile delivered, but we've seen this trick multiple times. Even better, there should be a film of Brandi's rendition of "Blue," that would be good for posterity. As for Brittany Howard... It was a show-stopping performance. It was both incredible and so slow as to remove the essence of "Both Sides Now." The lilting melody of the hit Judy Collins version (and Judy was in attendance, recognizable with her white hair, yet when they panned the audience it was tough to make most people out, everybody was wearing a mask), and even the slower Joni original match the lyrics in impact, but when the song is so slow it's all about the lyrics, it becomes a dirge, depressing, BUT BOY COULD BRITTANY HOWARD DELIVER! Which had me sitting there contemplating that none of these singers is capable of writing songs in the league of Ms. Mitchell's, if only they could.
As for the tribute to Lorne Michaels... That was the highlight of the night. It was so weird seeing young Lorne juxtaposed against old Lorne. The young Lorne was not so self-assured, he was not the Grand Poobah, he had something to prove, and now he's part of the glitterati, not realizing that outside the New York media world the show has very little impact, I mean just look at the ratings (and there is very little in the way of viral videos).
They focused on the best part of the show, the news, but Jimmy Fallon looked like an empty suit compared to Chevy Chase, and there was little mention of the original cast, no Belushi moment to remind us of what really made the show's bones. And Paul Simon... It was just plain scary. His vocal quiet...you figured they'd recut it and get it right. You watched Paul and you realized he was wise to retire from the road, these oldsters are really on their last legs. "America" is one of Paul's best songs, but what they should have had was Paul come out in a chicken suit singing "Still Crazy After All These Years."
Bette Midler's tribute had an irreverence, a sense of humor absent from the rest of the show. She was enjoying herself in the box. As for the performances...blah. But Mellissa Manchester did give a good speech.
The opera guy? Quick, do you know who he is? I rest my case.
And then we come to Berry Gordy, the man is 92 and looks like he's still in his sixties. He had the most impact of any of the honorees. Motown was the crossover music, so good on record and in performance it was undeniable, changing the world in the sixties as part of the youthquake. But Stevie Wonder... Maybe it's TV sound, or maybe it was the TV I was watching it on, but his performance just wasn't special enough, it wasn't over the top, he didn't kill like Aretha Franklin, and you wished she'd come back, just to show us what we're missing, when stars were just that.
But you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone.
And the truth is the boomers are dying off. As is so much of their culture, that they thought was forever. It's become an insular world. The boomers dress like kids, but they think their age. They want to be comforted, they don't want any riff-raff, they'd rather lounge in front of the flat screen than go to a movie theatre, never mind a show.
Then again, the legends keep putting up numbers. Going to see McCartney, the Stones and the Eagles has become a ritual. Because their music reminds us of when we were our best selves, when what we had to say was important, when we were against the man before we became the man, when we wanted the new instead of the old and familiar, when we wanted change instead of stasis.
Watching a TV show with commercials is interminable. Maybe if it was more exclusive, with a fee. No, if it launched on a weekend on a streaming service. Disney+ made "Get Back" an event, the Kennedy Center Honors was just a repetition of what once was, hewing to formula, and that's a recipe for death. Want to last, still have impact? Switch up the formula. Change. Your old fans might rebel, but you'll make new ones and possibly still stay relevant.
I mean Lorne... Can't you start the show with the news? Or the musical performer? Mess with our expectations? And have multiple guest stars an episode, not only old cast members and hosts, but people who just happen to be in NYC, most people can read cue cards and so many of the hosts are wooden actors anyway.
And this show... Could they have somebody in the audience who is not connected? Or do one show for the oldsters and then tape again with a young audience? And could we see just a little more edge? And have the bios tell us something we don't know? I mean the kind of person watching this show knows by heart the highlights presented, they've been beaten to death. But that's network TV, which tries to appeal to everybody and ends up appealing to nobody. Disney+ allows Peter Jackson eight hours to do a deep dive on one album... Maybe the Kennedy Center Honors could be eight hours long, one honoree per night, do something different, keep us on our toes.
This endless victory lap for Joni Mitchell is getting a bit tedious. As for Herbie Hancock and that lame album, only the Grammys could award such an exercise, have you ever tried to listen to that record, you just lift the needle and put on the originals.
But those originals...
As for Lorne Michaels... SNL was a seventies thing. SNL still oozed the irreverence of the sixties when the boomers were contemplating selling out, it was the end of their heyday.
Bette Midler? She was so busy becoming an everywoman that we're not quite sure who she is anymore. She was a singer, a performer, and then an actress in movies. It's like the comedians who want sitcoms...that's where the money is, but that's not where your talent resides. Bette was great in movies, truly, "Down and Out in Beverly Hills" and "Ruthless People," but she was never transcendent like she was on record, on the stage, because movies and music are different things, and when done right music always triumphs, because it sets your mind free to go on its own hejira, whereas films keep you focused on the narrative.
Opera?
I just read somewhere there's a renaissance amongst young people. But the truth is, all the elements of our parents' culture, the so-called "Greatest Generation," are we going to perpetuate them? They cost a lot of money and audience support is not sufficient, they run on fat cat money, burnishing the image of corporate criminals, like the Sacklers. It'll be interesting to see.
And Motown?
Motown is forever, just like the Beatles. It's the songs, plain and simple. Berry Gordy insisted his records, his acts, have everything, so that they could not be denied...songs, looks, performance, the best arrangers, players and writers. We heard symphonies from not only the Supremes, but endless others, whether they be Marvin, Stevie or Smokey or...
But when they focused on the audience...
Everybody was old. Most especially our president, Joe Biden. This guy was never hip, he was a member of the generation just not OF THE GENERATION! He's got no soul. Like Hillary. Unlike Bill. Come on, the saxophone playing recipient of fellatio? In hindsight, having experienced Trump, Bill's activities look pretty good.
But that was our generation. Testing limits. Embracing change. Not puritanical and steeped in its own ways.
Actually, most of the greatest artists will never get Kennedy Center Honors. Even though they're now aged, they're not lovable. You see if everybody loves you, you've stopped evolving and become a relic, whereas if you're still pushing the envelope you're making people uptight, a point of conversation as opposed to nostalgia.
The Kennedy Center Honors were like a cruise ship show. Making you feel good and instantly forgettable.
It's hard to make moments, to capture lightning in a bottle, but when we've seen it all, or think we have, you have to shock us, do it differently. MTV used to specialize in this, but the internet killed its paradigm, and MTV missed the internet, like seemingly every established institution.
Now I'll put links to the two best performances below, but really the whole show was a miss. You could survive quite nicely never having seen it. Then again, isn't the internet all about looking forward? Did you see that TikTok was the world's most visited site last year? Eclipsing even Google? And Instagram wasn't even in the top ten, imagine that, you're propping up your image where none of the trendsetters reside, you're just like this show.
You were hip once...
But you're not anymore.
Brandi Carlile performs "River":
Brittany Howard performs "Both Sides Now":
P.S. Too much Googling to not find the complete performances. CBS has the complete show, but if you've got ad-blocking software on your browser, like me, like seemingly everybody, sponsors are blocked and you cannot watch. Why can't these ancient enterprises just put their stuff up on YouTube like everybody else? If you think we're gonna patronize your platform...you've got another think coming!
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Thursday 23 December 2021
Pat Boone-This Week's Podcast
Pat Boone says the Black artists whose songs he covered thanked him for doing so, it meant money in their bank accounts and career opportunities. Pat grew up in Nashville and found his way as a singer, and after ups and downs he got his big break and... Pat went to college, he had a family, he acted in movies...he did it all. You'll enjoy hearing him talk about it!
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-the-bob-lefsetz-podcast-30806836/
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pat-boone/id1316200737?i=1000545910775
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1wK737hvtbvAhkGbunbuGW?si=PbC-d83HQwKPR_tfeLxPVA
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9ff4fb19-54d4-41ae-ae7a-8a6f8d3dafa8/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast
https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-the-bob-lefsetz-podcast-30806836/
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pat-boone/id1316200737?i=1000545910775
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1wK737hvtbvAhkGbunbuGW?si=PbC-d83HQwKPR_tfeLxPVA
https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9ff4fb19-54d4-41ae-ae7a-8a6f8d3dafa8/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast
https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Monday 20 December 2021
Dark-This Week On SiriusXM
Tomorrow, December 21st, is the shortest day of the year. Therefore, the topic will be songs that have the word "dark" in the title, because that's what it will be most of the day, DARK!
Tune in tomorrow, December 21st, to Volume 106, 7 PM East, 4 PM West.
Phone #: 844-6-VOLUME, 844-686-5863
Twitter: @lefsetz or @siriusxmvolume/#lefsetzlive
Hear the episode live on SiriusXM VOLUME: siriusxm.us/HearLefsetzLive
If you miss the episode, you can hear it on demand on the SiriusXM app: siriusxm.us/LefsetzLive
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Tune in tomorrow, December 21st, to Volume 106, 7 PM East, 4 PM West.
Phone #: 844-6-VOLUME, 844-686-5863
Twitter: @lefsetz or @siriusxmvolume/#lefsetzlive
Hear the episode live on SiriusXM VOLUME: siriusxm.us/HearLefsetzLive
If you miss the episode, you can hear it on demand on the SiriusXM app: siriusxm.us/LefsetzLive
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1
If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25
-- powered by phpList, www.phplist.com --
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)