THE MT VOID
04/14/23 -- Vol. 41, No. 42, Whole Number 2271

Co-Editor: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Co-Editor: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
Sending Address: evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
All material is the opinion of the author and is copyrighted by the
author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to eleeper@optonline.net
The latest issue is at <http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm>.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at
<http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm>.

Topics:
Mini Reviews, Part 19 (THE MENU, GLASS ONION--A KNIVES OUT
MYSTERY, TRIANGLE OF SADNESS) (film reviews
by Mark R. Leeper and Evelyn C. Leeper)
Accidental Film Fests (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
Bechdel Test (comments by Boyd Nation)
[THE] HOLY BLOOD {,;AND THE} HOLY GRAIL (letters of comment
by Peter Trei, Gary McGath, and John Dalman)
This Week's Reading (ORLANDO) (book and film comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)

==================================================================
TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 19 (film reviews by Mark R. Leeper and
Evelyn C. Leeper)

This is the nineteenth batch of mini-reviews, all focusing on the
"one-percent" (in honor of Tax Day):

THE MENU: We have never attended a tasting menu, so we have to rely
on the reports of others. Some claim THE MENU is fairly accurate
in its basics, while others emphasize the satire in its excesses.
In that it may be like the wine-tasting in SIDEWAYS, but taken to
extremes. (In SIDEWAYS, it's the "hint of asparagus" in a wine
that is amusing; in THE MENU a wine has "a faint scent of longing
and regret".)

There is also a first course that looks like the island with rocks,
plant sprigs, and one scallop. There is a bread course without
bread. These may actually be accurate to some tasting menus. But
as the meal progresses, it is clear that much of what we see is
not. (I'm pretty such that the tortillas are strictly social
commentary.)

Sometimes everything seems to connect. Ralph Fiennes is in this;
his nephew is in THE WOMAN KING, which we saw the day after we saw
THE MENU. There is a private island in THE MENU; there is also one
in THE GLASS ONION, which we saw two days earlier. (In THE MENU,
Fiennes has a grudge against all his guests. In THE GLASS ONION,
all the guests have a grudge against Edward Norton.) And there is
even a connection to THE BANSHEES OF INISHERIN, but telling you
what it is would be a spoiler.

Released theatrically 18 November 2022. Rating: high +2 (-4 to +4)
or 8/10

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9764362/reference>

What others are saying:
<https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_menu>

GLASS ONION--A KNIVES OUT MYSTERY: GLASS ONION is a sequel to the
2019 film KNIVES OUT. We saw the first film three years ago, and
thought it mildly entertaining, and that covers this as well.

This starts with a series of puzzles, but after the first couple,
they are shown as mere snippets. One has to do with the Fibonacci
sequence, and they didn't show you enough of the Fibonacci sequence
puzzle; the Fibonacci sequence deserves some respect.

There are a lot of in-jokes and references. Daniel Craig as Benoit
Blanc says, "I need danger, a hunt, a challenge"--a fairly obvious
reference to Craig's James Bond persona. The film also has the
James Bond exotic travel vibe.

The "disruptors" are (one hopes) an exaggeration of the "one
percent". Set during the pandemic, the disruptors show all the
attitudes of the privileged to masking: one has a mesh mask, a
couple wear their masks incorrectly, and a couple have no masks at
all. Only Benoit Blanc seems concerned about his mask.

The plot itself is very convoluted, and nothing is what it seems,
either to the characters in the movie, or to us. This is a film
you need to watch more than once to catch all the twists, turns,
and hints.

Released theatrically 23 November 2022 and on Netflix streaming 23
December 2022. Rating: +2 (-4 to +4) or 7/10

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11564570/reference>

What others are saying:
<https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/glass_onion_a_knives_out_mystery>

TRIANGLE OF SADNESS: TRIANGLE OF SADNESS definitely emphasizes the
three-part structure of a film, with the sections labeled "Part 1:
Carl & Yaya", "Part 2: The Yacht", and "Part 3: The Island". There
are some nice uses of bright colors, and a good use of space, with
long sweeps through a tight backseat of a car, and using the fact
that the same room can have very different dimensions in the way it
would not in the real world. (At one point, the ceiling lights in
the dining room look like thought balloons, but that is probably
accidental.) The passengers on the yacht are the stereotypical
spoiled rich: a weapons manufacturer and his wife (cleverly named
Winston and Clementine), a bare-chested passenger who complains
about a bare-chested member of the crew, a passenger who wants all
the crew members to have fun for her entertainment, and so on.
Somewhere near the halfway point, the film makes a sudden left turn
into a world of political insanity. The Captain and a capitalist
from Russia debate Marxism and communism, while the crew plays the
"Internationale" in the galley. During a storm during the
Captain's Dinner, the dining area goes totally bizarre. Then
pirates attack the boat, and a small number of the passengers and
crew end up on a desert island. The whole thing seems to be
inspired by a combination of LA DOLCE VITA, various Luis Bunuel
films, and THE ADMIRABLE CRICHTON.

Released theatrically 7 October 2022. Rating: low +1 (-4 to +4) or
5/10

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7322224/reference>

What others are saying:
<https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/triangle_of_sadness>

[-mrl/ecl]

==================================================================
TOPIC: Accidental Film Fests (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

Over the last week we watched four Tom Cruise movies, not as some
intentional Tom Cruise Festival, but pretty much coincidentally.
Two were good, and two ... were not.

The good ones were MAGNOLIA and COLLATERAL. In MAGNOLIA, Cruise
plays a sleaze-bag promoter of a course for what are now called
"incels" ("involuntarily celibate"). And he does it so well, you
end up really hating him.

In COLLATERAL, he is a hired killer who kidnaps taxi driver Jamie
Foxx and plans to kill him when his jobs are done. Again, he
manages to convey the cold menace of his role.

Then there is INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE. I realize that there is
no real vampire personality, but whatever Cruise is doing, it is
not at all convincing of anyone or anything.

And last--and possibly least, at least to me--is TOP GUN--MAVERICK.
I know this an incredibly popular film, and series, and character,
but really, it does nothing for me. Everything about the film and
the character is a mass of cliches.

So there you have it. Tom Cruise is usually cast as a positive
leading man, but he does villains so well that maybe he should take
more of those roles.

And then we watched (in three days) three films about an ordinary
person becoming involved in a high society crowd. First was RADIO
DAYS, in which the ordinary people do not truly interact with high
society, but listen to "Breakfast with Roger and Irene" on the
radio, in which show Roger and Irene talk about how they had dinner
with Cole and lots of other people they first-named. Next was
MIDNIGHT IN PARIS, in which Owen Wilson finds himself repeatedly
going through some sort of time portal to the 1920s where he
hobnobs with Hemingway, Eliot, Stein, Picasso, Modigliani, Bunuel,
and many others. (And from there he goes through another portal to
La Belle Epoque and Toulouse-Lautrec et al.) And finally is
MIDNIGHT IN THE GARDEN OF GOOD AND EVIL, where John Cusack is sent
to report on a super-elite Christmas party. All were excellent;
Mark suggests that MIDNIGHT IN PARIS may be Woody Allen's best
film. (If that doesn't get letters of comment, nothing will.)
[-ecl]

==================================================================
TOPIC: Bechdel Test (comments by Boyd Nation)

In File 770 recently, Boyd Nation posted the following observation
about applying the Bechdel Test to science fiction:

"[When] you get to the point where you’re not meeting the Bechdel
Test because your primary characters are a tea monk and a robot,
you’ve probably gone past it and are circling around from the other
side." [-bn]

==================================================================
TOPIC: [THE] HOLY BLOOD {,;AND THE} HOLY GRAIL (letters of comment
by Peter Trei, Gary McGath, and John Dalman)

On 4/16/23 10:26 AM, eleeper@optonline.net wrote:
> In File 770 recently, Boyd Nation posted the following observation
> about applying the Bechdel Test to science fiction:
>
> "[When] you get to the point where you’re not meeting the Bechdel
> Test because your primary characters are a tea monk and a robot,
> you’ve probably gone past it and are circling around from the other
> side." [-bn]

I don't think much of the Bechdel Test except as a loose heuristic. On
the other hand, I watched George Pal's _War of the Worlds_ this past
week, which has just one woman character, whose main purpose seems to be
to panic periodically. I said at one point, "You're the only female
character in this movie. Set a better example!"

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On Sunday, April 16, 2023 at 11:36:20 AM UTC-4, Gary McGath wrote:
> On 4/16/23 10:26 AM, ele...@optonline.net wrote:
> > In File 770 recently, Boyd Nation posted the following observation
> > about applying the Bechdel Test to science fiction:
> >
> > "[When] you get to the point where you’re not meeting the Bechdel
> > Test because your primary characters are a tea monk and a robot,
> > you’ve probably gone past it and are circling around from the other
> > side." [-bn]
> I don't think much of the Bechdel Test except as a loose heuristic. On
> the other hand, I watched George Pal's _War of the Worlds_ this past
> week, which has just one woman character, whose main purpose seems to be
> to panic periodically. I said at one point, "You're the only female
> character in this movie. Set a better example!"

I note the Mad Max: Fury Road both passes the test, and has female characters
who are more competent than the ostensible male protagonist.

pt