Tag: #Reviews

  • Short Story Review: “The Beach House” by Joy Williams

    (The short story “The Beach House” by Joy Williams appeared in the January 15, 2024 issue of The New Yorker.)

    (I will SPOIL this story.)

    Illustration by Mia Bergeron

    Of all the storytelling tricks that are out there, the “MacGuffin” is my favorite. If you don’t know, a MacGuffin in a story is any object, device, or person that is essential to the plot and motivation of the characters. Think of the Ark in Raiders of the Lost Ark; it’s the object everyone wants and is also what drives the plot. And the beach house in Joy Williams “The Beach House” is a MacGuffin, but the rest of the story doesn’t play along.

    So, in the story, Amber’s elderly father is near death, and he owns a beach house which he is planning on willing to a charity that save dogs. Amber finds this charity suspicious, but more importantly, if the house is not willed to her after her father’s death, she will be homeless. This is about as textbook as you can get with a plot, and motivation and the whole thing. He wants one thing, she wants another, and the stakes are high as she has a desperate need to get her hands on this beach house.

    But this story never seems to get its dramatic act together. It plods along with little urgency. Amber seems resigned to talk about her plight, but never take action. And the father, though its hinted at that he might be suffering from early dementia, doesn’t seem very interested in his daughters situation of near homelessness. I feel that there are other issues simmering under the surface between these two, but I also think I am giving the story the benefit of the doubt here. When the climax of the piece occurs, the father falls and the daughter wants to take him to the hospital, it in no way affects the plot, the motivations, or the MacGuffin. Nothing is resolved or concluded with this action – the issue of the beach house is still there.

    It’s not a badly written piece, but the aftertaste I am left with is that “The Beach House” might be the first chapter of a novel. Again, all the pieces are here for a good story, and like I also pointed out, there seems to be a subtext between the characters that could be richly explored. But, with the story in this state, Williams introduced a gun and then didn’t fire it.

  • Where Are the Movies About Gen-X in Their 40’s?

    About a week ago, I found on YouTube old episodes of Siskel & Ebert, At the Movies, and Sneak Previews; all the iterations of their show. It did make me miss watching Gene and Roger debating movies. As Patton Oswalt described, those reviews were a godsend for a kid growing up in the suburbs whose access to good cinema was a video store and their suggestions. The other bonus, other than a nostalgia flood, was being reminded of many great movies that I hadn’t seen in years, which I am now reacquainting myself with.

    Then I noticed that, starting around the late 70’s and going into the early 80’s, there were many dramas and romantic comedies which addressed Baby Boomers entering their 40’s, and the issues and complications that followed. Divorce and affairs seemed to be the Boomer’s major concern in these films, which makes sense as that generation was coming out of the Sexual Revolution which dramatically/comedically could run in conflict with the desire for a more normal and conventional family life.

    The last movie I just finished watching, The Four Seasons, Alan Alda’s directorial debut and meditation on three couples entering middle age and empty nests. Though still a good movie, and no surprise here, it is dated, but dated in the sense that it reflects the sensibilities of its time. Sure, the men dominate the film leaving the women little to do (but Carrol Burnet does steal the show in several of her scenes,) and in the end, it feels like a WASP-y fantasy of a life of leisure. I don’t want to discount that Alda does have some very honest notes with these characters; not wanting to miss out on having joy in one’s life, to have relationships that are still filled with spontaneity and passion, and what it takes to be in a relationship that continues to grow. That I could relate to.

    And then it dawned on me…

    I’m a Gen-Xer in my mid-forties; Where’s the Gen-X movie about being in your 40’s?

    Seriously? What happened? Are those movies out there, and I’ve just missed them? Or are people even making movies like that anymore? (I fully admit, that since I became a father, I totally have dropped off the Earth when it comes to movies. I haven’t seen a film in a theatre that wasn’t children themed in almost ten years, so if I am woefully ignorant, go easy on me.) It can’t fully be that film making and producing and financing has changed THAT much that no one can make a personal drama about real life issues, right?

    I find it hard to believe that no one is interested in stories like that. From my perspective, it seems like there is so much material there that could be churned up to make compelling dramatic or rom-com about X-er’s in their 40’s. I don’t think people have changed so much that they don’t want to see themselves through characters dealing with relatively similar issues.

    So, where are these movies?

    UPDATE: There was This Is 40, but it wasn’t very good, so it doesn’t count.

  • I Wrote a Blog Today

    Not very inspired.

    I have been trying to think of a subject to write about, and I just couldn’t come up with something that would inspire me. Often, I can come up with an idea while walking the kid to school, but not this morning. We were running late, and had to rush, so we didn’t really get a chance to have one of those cute father/daughter conversations.

    I thought that while doing laundry something would strike me, but not really. I just folded laundry and watched First Take.

    I planned for dinner, which will be a sheet-pan meal from the NYTimes Cooking Page. I’m going to add a side of rice, and make a butter lemon sauce to round out the whole thing.

    The only thing of note, when it comes to the blog, is that some people came by today and read my short story review of “Detective Dog” by Gish Jen. In fact, more people read it today than when I originally posted it. I wonder if it was Gish Jen?

    I think this post is falling into the category of “keeping up the quota.” I made the rule that I need to post one blog a day, Monday through Friday. So, no matter what, I have to put something up. Clearly, this isn’t one that will make the book.

    Oh, did I mention that one day all of these blog will be published in a book. Well, not all of them. Just a select few, like a greatest hits. But then, several years later, a book will be published that will contain all of the blogs, and that will be more like a collector’s edition, unabridged version. Now, thinking about it, yes, I guess this blog will eventually be published, so I guess, this one does make the book.

    If you made it this far I the blog, then I congratulate you. That shows a level of dedication to a very half-baked concept that I am making up on the fly, to justify my existence, and to also give myself a feeling of accomplishment.

    I’ll do better tomorrow.

  • Late to the Party: Review of “Perry Mason” (2020)

    This is my continuing series of reviews of tv, movies, or music that has been out for a while, that I am just getting around to… As always, there are SPOLIERS!

    I am a sucker for noir films and TV shows. From Sam Spade, to Chinatown, to The Long Goodbye, to LA Confidential, I love noir’s visual style, the dark stories, and also how these noir stories show the dark criminal world that is just under the surface of the cities we inhabit. I will even throw The Third Man in as well.

    When I saw the previews of Perry Mason on HBO in the spring, I was hooked and ready to go. I never watched the original Raymond Burr 1957 television series of the same name, so I had no attachment to anything that had happened in the past, but I was aware that Perry Manson was “the best” defense lawyer around as he could get criminals to admit their crimes on the stand. When I saw that the cast was lead by Matthew Rhys, and also that Tim Van Patten was directing many of the episodes, I felt that I was in very safe hands.

    And for the most part I was.

    We meet Perry in 1932, who at this point is a detective for the lawyer Elias Birchard “E.B.” Jonathan. Jonathan takes the case of defending a mother who is accused of killing her child in a kidnapping plot. It was a very dark subject matter to have the show revolve around, but I do admit that it did create a feeling of uncomfortableness in me for all the characters that are involved in the murder. What also became apparent very early on is that this was going to be the origin story of Perry Mason becoming a lawyer, and his drive to defend people who seemed to be undefendable.

    What I was given was a show that hit all the right noir notes that this type of genre demands, as well adding a very relevant depth to the inherent racism in the LA Police Department, and the indignities black police officers faced. Most of the characters did have backstories of pain that they were still dealing with, or secrets they couldn’t share, or of living lives not out in the open. It created a solid foundation of why all of these very different people would be drawn together to fight for justice.

    The series had a nice slow simmer to it, hitting its marks, and then at the crux of the show, episode 5, after E.B. Jonathan’s suicide, the show starts an awkward sprint to the end. It comes across as jarring and very out of left field. Somehow, with a little coaching, Perry is able to pass the California Bar exam, which I do happen to know that you do not need to go to law school for, and POOF! He’s a lawyer now!

    After a few stumbles at the start of the trial, Perry has no issues to working his way through the courtroom. And when Perry wants to put the corrupt cop who is behind the murder on the stand, he is told that no one confesses under cross examination, but then the show doesn’t put the cop on the stand. A choice that left me very confused. I thought that was Perry Mason’s whole thing. At least let him try and fail, right, as that would be realistic. In the end Perry pays off a juror to deadlock the jury, only to learn that two other jurors also felt the mother was innocent, which I guess was meant to make us feel that Perry did a better job than he thought. It left me with the feeling that Perry isn’t going to become a good lawyer one day, but that he’s just not a good lawyer at all.

    Sadly, it felt like all the pieces are there to make a really good show that is moody, honest, and can be relevant as we examine what justice denied in the past looked like. Perry Mason was renewed for a second season, so I hope that the next time around, with all the characters in place, that they will be able to stick the landing.