THE MT VOID
04/21/23 -- Vol. 41, No. 43, Whole Number 2272

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:
Correction to ORLANDO (comments by Charles S. Harris)
Mini Reviews, Part 20 (JERRY AND MARGE GO LARGE,
THE PHANTOM OF THE OPEN, ROSALINE) (film reviews
by Mark R. Leeper and Evelyn C. Leeper)
Pronoun Festival (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
AI Companionship Bots
NEUROMANCER by William Gibson (audio book review
by Joe Karpierz)
THE RISE AND REIGN OF THE MAMMALS by Steve Brusatte
(book review by Greg Frederick)
Bechdel Test (letters of comment by Gary McGath
and Peter Trei)
This Week's Reading (HEDDA GABLER) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)

==================================================================
TOPIC: Correction to ORLANDO (comments by Charles S. Harris)

In response to Evelyn's review of ORLANDO in the 04/21/23 issue of
the MT VOID, Charles S. Harris writes:

In decades of reading the MT VOID, this is the first time I have
spotted a palpable error in your writing.

You wrote: "Our book and film group read ORLANDO by Virginia Woolf
(Mariner, ISBN 978-0-156-70160-0) and watched the film by Sarah
Polley this month. Interestingly, we had just re-watched Polley's
WOMEN TALKING about a week earlier, and Polley's attention to the
look of her films comes through."

Actually, though, ORLANDO was directed by Sally Potter. In the
book and film group's announcement of ORLANDO, Potter was described
as a multitalented director who "co-wrote both the screenplay and
the musical soundtrack, and has performed elsewhere as a dancer
(THE TANGO LESSON, 1996), singer and choreographer."

Sarah Polley has also taken on several such roles, but not as
director of ORLANDO. [-csh]

Evelyn replies:

ARRGGH! My only excuse is that there are a lot of letters in
common between the two names. :-(

And I'm sure I have made more than just this error over the
decades. [-ecl]

==================================================================
TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 20 (film reviews by Mark R. Leeper and
Evelyn C. Leeper)

This is the twentieth batch of mini-reviews, more comedies:

JERRY AND MARGE GO LARGE: JERRY AND MARGE GO LARGE is that rare
film that makes mathematics look like fun with a seemingly
super-powered handling of multiplication. The premise--based on
actual events--is that Jerry understands math, especially
probabilities, better than the people running various state
lotteries, and has detected a way to play the lottery with the odds
in his favor. He also understands the law of large numbers, and
this is what makes the story--and the film--visually as well as
intellectually interesting.

And there is also an unusual attempt to make believable characters;
for example, one easily tells the other that he "has to go." James
Bond never tells a Bond girl he has to go to the toidy.

In many ways, this is a small film, even though it was produced by
a subsidiary of Paramount. One way the film saves money is by not
having any really expensive actors, though a lot of the actors you
see are familiar from television.

The film is reasonably accurate, although the ending is perhaps
more sentimental than real life. A delightful movie for an adult
audience.

Released on Paramount+ streaming 17 June 2022. Rating: low +3 (-4
to +4) or 8/10

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8323668/reference>

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

THE PHANTOM OF THE OPEN: THE PHANTOM OF THE OPEN stars Mark Rylance
(BRIDGE OF SPIES and WOLF HALL) as Maurice Flitcroft, a middle-aged
working-class Briton who has never played golf, but who decides in
1975 (for reasons never explained) to enter the British Open. (The
reasons are never explained because perhaps Flitcroft did not know
them himself.) Sally Hawkins as his wife is much more restrained
than usual.

In some ways it is similar to BELFAST in showing working class
people, though BELFAST concentrates on The Troubles, and THE
PHANTOM OF THE OPEN takes a more comedic look at life.

Once again filmmakers have sports fascination examined in a popular
musical form. Perhaps this is a reference to THE BIG LEBOWSKI,
since both films show scenes from the ball's point of view.

The Brits seem to love these comedies about working-class people
who have an impossible dream and see it through with pluck and
grit--even if they don't always succeed. CALENDAR GIRLS, EDDIE THE
EAGLE, MILITARY WIVES, PRIDE, MADE IN DAGENHAM, THE ENGLISHMAN WHO
WENT UP A HILL AND CAME DOWN A MOUNTAIN, THE WORLD'S FASTEST INDIAN
(okay--he's a Kiwi), ...

(And, yes, Maurice's twin sons really were world champion disco
dancers.)

Released theatrically 3 June 2022. Rating: low +2 (-4 to +4) or
7/10

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12572040/reference>

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

ROSALINE: ROSALINE is similar to CATHERINE CALLED BIRDY in that it
is set several hundred years in the past, but uses modern language
and modern sensibilities. But while CATHERINE CALLED BIRDY is a
new story, ROSALINE is based on a throwaway bit from ROMEO AND
JULIET--she was Romeo's "true love" before he saw Juliet. So
Rosaline is a character from Shakespeare but unlike Rosenkrantz and
Guildenstern (who appeared in Stoppard's play), she does not
actually appear in the original play itself. (In this she
resembles Rebecca in the Daphne du Maurier eponymous novel.)

The problem with ROSALINE is that the language is disconcertingly
anachronistic at times. Characters talk about going on a "date"
(the word was first used in that sense in 1896), and having a
"boyfriend". Also, Rosaline asks for a match (matches were not
invented until 1826) and "wants a career" (also a modern phrase).
(For that matter, Rosaline's nurse (played by Minnie Driver) makes
a joke about having seven years of nursing school, and later about
being a medical professional. But of course "nurse" did not have
that meaning--or even exist as a profession--for centuries.) I
suppose at least some of this is supposed to be funny, but it can
also jerk one out of the milieu as much as if Rosaline had whipped
out a cigarette.

When avoiding anachronisms, screenwriters Scott Neustadter and
Michael H. Weber do add a crisp wit for their audience. The music
is also modern, and it copies a Woody Allen joke about diagetic
music.

Overall, this is amusing enough--not Shakespeare, but what is other
than Shakespeare himself--and of interest to those of us who like
the "side roads" of Shakespearean drama. If you like ROSENCRANTZ
AND GUILDENSTERN ARE DEAD, or the modern re-stagings of RICHARD III
or ROMEO & JULIET, you would probably like this. (Yes, I realize
that the modern re-stagings are also full of anachronisms. But
they are integral to the film, not surprise stumbling blocks.)

Released on Hulu streaming 14 October 2022. Rating: low +2 (-4 to
+4) or 7/10

Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1777606/reference>

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

[-mrl/ecl]

==================================================================
TOPIC: Pronoun Festival (comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)

Now that pronouns are a big thing, I think TCM should have a day of
pronoun films as a theme. They could run SHE; HER; IT; IT!; THEM!;
US; HERSELF; MINE; THEY/THEM; YOURS, MINE & OURS; and ME, MYSELF
AND I. [-ecl]

==================================================================
TOPIC: AI Companionship Bots

And speaking of the film HER:

<https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/03/30/replika-ai-
chatbot-update/>

They fell in love with AI bots. A software update broke their
hearts.

Companionship bots ... are designed to foster humanlike
connections, using artificial intelligence software to make people
feel seen and needed. A host of users report developing intimate
relationships with chatbots--connections verging on human love--and
turning to the bots for emotional support, companionship and even
sexual gratification. As the pandemic isolated Americans, interest
in [chatbots] surged. Amid spiking rates of loneliness that some
public health officials call an epidemic, many say their bonds with
the bots ushered profound changes into their lives, helping them to
overcome alcoholism, depression and anxiety.