Dolly Parton has had serious health problems recently, so the news is not totally surprising. We just don't like to hear it. She was eighty years old.
My mom listened to a country music radio station while we grew up. So I had exposure to country music while growing up in New York City. I like various country music singers.
I like Dolly Parton. Erik Loomis provides a largely positive obituary here, including honoring her talent and business savvy. He references a 1960s song about a pregnant woman committing suicide after being abandoned.
She was a feminist. One thing he notes is that she did not speak out against her state's anti-trans legislation.
Parton is regularly cited as an LGBTQ ally. She was careful not to bluntly oppose certain laws. But people knew where she stood. In the 1980s, she said this:
“I got a huge gay following and some really macho-looking women,” Parton told Andy Warhol in a conversation for a 1984 Interview cover story. “To me, people are people. … Many of my friends are gay, male and female. I don’t judge people. I don’t care what people do in their bedrooms and people shouldn’t care what I do in mine.”
The anti-LGBTQ movement is based on hate, lack of empathy, and scare tactics. People, however, overall found same sex marriage not a big deal. Parton was accepting, loving, and knew it was not a big scary thing.
When asked, early on, she made jokes about gays now having the same problems as straights. [I heard a form of this on today's Gay USA episode.]
Of course, she didn't really think marriage was bad. She was married for almost sixty years.
[ETA: A Wikipedia page is available.]
Dolly was pro-labor, including all those people required to produce her music. Not just for one film.
She was loving, funny, and honored by people she worked with. As the actress Daryl Hannah noted on Bluesky:
I could tell you stories & you would love ‘em, but they wouldn’t make you love her more than you already do. We will always love her.
I sometimes watch DVDs with someone who has not watched many of the films that many have seen. I recently re-watched Enchanted with her. Last night was B&B. The animated version.
(Years later, we had the live-action version. Kevin Kline played the grandfather.)
Multiple familiar actors do the voices, including the person who later played the gruff police officer Lenny on Law & Order, though some might remember him from Dirty Dancing.
[Jerry Orbach had done some stage work.*]
The film has some good songs. It also has scary parts, including when wolves threaten Belle.
The "heavy" is also a rather cruel character. His flunky reminds somewhat of the flunky in Enchanted.
His being a sexist boor is one thing. Then, he goes next level. Again, I can see some parents being like the mother of "Chip," and thinking their children were too young for some of this.
True enough, the original fairy tales were rather dark. But we generally have a sanitized version. Up to a point. Not quite as dark as this.
I guess the original edit was deemed inappropriate.
The film is about true love conquering all -- both familial (Belle sacrifices herself for her father) and romantic (a beauty falls for a beast). Also, about the dangers of appearances. Dreaming of more.
And, of course, the power of reading.
The true symbol that all is well is when they kiss. For the value of a true love kiss, see either Enchanted or a Hallmark Channel film. A kiss is a standard finale.
==
* Jerry Orbach, to be clear, did a significant amount of stage work. Many people only know him as "Lenny."
His first appearance on the show -- the actor -- was a one-episode guest role portraying someone else. If footnotes are not the place for trivia, what is?
Other Films
To toss it in there, since the film is so popular, they decided to do some spin-offs. Oh, you mean after the events of the film? No silly.
People like the enchanted castle stuff. So, looking at the plot summaries, the stories generally involve stuff that would have taken place during the film.
It might not be completely clear (it wasn't for me), but the "time skip" entry here suggests the film takes place over an extended period. So, there is plenty of time for additional "enchanted" content.
As to the live-action film, there was also one back in the day. Tubi shows me there are multiple live-action versions without all the enchanted details.
I once started watching the live-action version of the animated film that this entry discusses. It didn't really, including the lead, catch my interest.
It also tosses in various extra details, which aren't really necessary and might be counterproductive. Still, I think I will try to watch it again.
ETA: I did try to watch it again. Not interested.
Checking Tubi, I see the original and the sequel are available. I hold to my earlier remarks. The author of a (defunct) blog named after the film continues to post on social media (including Bluesky) and elsewhere. The sequel looks ridiculous (and ridiculously overlong).
ETA: I saw Angel (or parts of it). Some 1980s exploitation film charm with breast shots. The lead (in her 20s but playing a teen prostitute) doesn't really do much other than look like a good girl with sorta slutty makeup. Also, Mama Weed (French film) was decent.
I read The Martian after watching part of it on television. The book has too much science porn.
I'm not a scientist. If this were about a subject I knew more about, the level of "into the weeds" in it would still get too much at some point.
Plus, it got repetitive. People obviously enjoyed the book. But just saying as one of them.
Something comes up, he figures a way to deal with it, in intricate scientific detail, rinse/repeat. Please, can we get back to the other people? They even sometimes have to deal with intricate scientific details. They do not go into that much detail. Other stuff also happens.
It's appreciated that we get repeated reminders of the possibility of human error, unplanned occurrences that will screw things up, etc. But this got tiresome.
I liked the book as a whole once I got into a groove of quickly reading all of these details. I have noted that it is harder for me to get into books in recent years.
I completed this book in less than a day. So, you know, not all bad.
The human element is done well overall. Sometimes, I wanted to learn more about the other characters. The rest of the crew, e.g., seem interesting.
I suppose online there is fan fiction covering their adventures. We receive a few snapshots of their personal stories, including a single home-to-ship live communication. Three are married, and the other two have a thing going on with each other.
We know the maroon crew member's parents are alive; he's from Chicago and doesn't seem to have a significant other. Other than that, there is no backstory. One of the discussion questions addresses that. The book is largely about one guy, alone, and you do not get to really understand him too much.
It was flagged in an earlier morning thread that a key science point was problematic. The author edited the book over time as he received feedback on scientific details (my copy has an interview with the author).
He did not fix everything. Dramatic license and other factors do come into play.
He later noted he was aware of the issue. And, anyway, I saw one account that said it "may" be a problem. We don't know for sure.
The book tosses in a somewhat out-of-left-field comment about alternative food supply options. I wondered how long that would last.
Checking online, one commentary noted they left that part out. It is a cannibalism hypo. I can see why.
They also left a few things out of Hail Mary, a recent well-received film also based on the author's novel. My copy provided the first chapter as a preview.
From what I saw, the Matt Damon film was well made. Good cast and so on.
I cannot judge the science of it all.
I also appreciate the sentiment about how it is human instinct to help people, with some exceptions. A key plot point involves the Chinese Space Agency helping, with some sacrifice to their own efforts.
Checking Wikipedia, the film tells you what Matt Damon's character will do when he gets back.
The book ends with his rescue. So, you know, maybe there is a disaster later on, and the whole crew dies!
It's over. Yesterday was Stephen Colbert's last night.
It was also the last show of the CBS late-night show overall. There won't be repeats. They will immediately shift to a non-political comic show.
Multiple celebrities had cameos. There was some gimmick that supposedly six bananas were a retirement gift.
The final guest (who also sang "Hello Goodbye) was Paul McCarthy, who had that famous appearance over sixty years ago in the theater where Colbert had his show. Quite fitting, though he seemed a bit uncomfortable as the solo guest in a long-form way.
I DVR-ed it, and for whatever reason, it did not record the whole thing. It was about twenty minutes longer, and the DVR cut off at the normal end of the show. I saw what I missed online on YouTube.
The show was a tad indulgent, overdoing a metaphor of some wormhole who sucked that everything into it. They probably could have handled it with a normal length, especially since they included a "meanwhile" segment with at least one story that wasn't too topical.
Still, if it amused him, more power to him. I wish him well. I probably will check out Jimmy Kimmel a bit.
They had that short-lived comedy game show-like program after Stephen Colbert with a young woman comedian, who wanted to continue her stand-up full-time instead of continuing. It must have taken a lot of effort. They will now just have comedian stuff.
There are still two talk shows at 11:30 and one at 12:30, both with middle-aged white guys. Why can't they have some variety? John Oliver has a good show, but again, enough guys!
I'm sure you can find a lot of women in various contexts. But, unfortunately, none of these talk shows entrusted a woman for any length of time (Joan Rivers once had a short-lived show). The late-night talk show might be on the way out, but this is still a problem.
(We did have a black host once upon a time.)
I enjoyed Stephen Colbert, though I think he didn't take enough risks. The show was a bit bland. Also, watching was often a matter of liking the guests.
Basically, he seems like a nice guy with good values, with a wickedly funny side. We saw that more on his old show, but it showed up here, too.
He will have a small voice role on a Star Trek television show. He's co-writing a Lord of the Rings screenplay with his son. He will find something else to do, maybe after taking time off.
One possibility is a longer form conversation format like Conan O'Brien and others do. He can show his musical theater side. He might do some drama.
I think he will be fine. The overall annoying thing is that the network didn't find a way to end things on a nicer note. Colbert might still be angry because he didn't trust their reasons. But it seems gratuitous.
==
Their Finest tells the story of a British Ministry of Information film team making a morale-boosting film about the Dunkirk evacuation during the Battle of Britain and the London Blitz. It's based on a book.
Gemma Arterton is the lead, and she's great. I rewatched the DVD and enjoyed it. I will eventually see if I like re-reading the book.
I also rewatched Walking on Sunshine, which uses 1980s songs to tell a story. Arterton's sister plays one of the leads. Fun film.
Great songs, well choreographed.
I referenced this film about six years ago. The video I used is blocked. I summarized:
Up Channel has "new" films on Sunday nights at 7/11 that are actually not new but promoted as new. For a few weeks now, the picks have been overall pretty good.
This week, we had a city girl, not much into God, come to help her old mother-in-law (as in ex -- the hubby cheated on her) move after the father-in-law died. She falls for the new minister, whose deceased wife was her sister-in-law.
Thus, the punny title. Various familiar faces, including two people in current shows and two from old shows. It has light touches mixed with a lot of serious content.
Well-acted, with the story pretty well paced too. Sorta topical.
I used to keep track of and watch the Oscars. Now, I am barely familiar with some of the films. Instead, I read Daughter of Daring, which is not only a biography of a stuntwoman/actor, but a history of film and Hollywood (with a woman's focus) overall.
I have also read her Creature from the Black Lagoon book. Both are good. Down-to-earth style, while quite detailed. Fun footnotes.
ETA: One interesting tidbit is how cliffhanger serials and other films attracted women viewers as escapes and an example of women having agency, including for lower class women.
A retro channel shows "Blondie" films (1940s; there was also a couple of television series based on the comic strip, plus a radio show) each Saturday morning. I talked about this over the years.
The 28 films are of mixed quality. For whatever reason, one film is not shown in the rotation (about a "haunted" house). Blondie Plays Cupid is a good one.
The film is effectively a series of vignettes. It starts with the Fourth of July coming up. Blondie is not a fan of Dagwood and Baby Dumpling's fireworks.
She wants to go somewhere quiet. How about her relatives in the country? Some home and office scenes (where a plan to trick Dagwood backfires; the coworker involved is played by someone else in later films) take place.
Then, an amusing scene on the train, with a familiar face (the grumpy railroad executive on Petticoat Junction; the actor was in lots of character roles). Fans of old shows and films will see other familiar faces throughout the series.
The busy film then shifts to the country, where a young Glenn Ford offers them a ride. That's where the title drop comes in -- he has fallen in love with the neighbor's daughter, but the father opposes the match. The justice of the peace gives an amusing performance.
More hijinks and things end (as they always do) happily. The film is well-paced and well-written, with the interrelated scenes fitting together nicely.
One amusing bit of the "I see what they did there" variety involves Baby Dumpling winding up in a haystack after a joyride. Something is poking him. Turns out to be a needle. In a haystack.
There is also a cute final joke. The last bit involves something that would be rather serious (painful burns) if we took it seriously. The Wikipedia page at the moment somewhat misleadingly notes how things wound up. They don't simply enjoy the end of their vacation peacefully in the country.
The films have various expected components, including the postman getting hit by Dagwood (the film has a twist, including him having a chance to get Dagwood back) during an early scene involving the family having breakfast. The smart aleck neighborhood kid usually gets involved somehow.
Dagwood bumbles a lot, which at some point is a bit tedious. There is also some stereotypical Blondie stuff, including a bit too many scenes of her being jealous or upset (often arising from some misunderstanding) for some reason. She is not as sexy looking as in the comic strip.
Blondie started as a flapper-type character, while Dagwood was a rich man's son who gave up his money out of love. The films skip that backstory.
The strips, at least when I read them much later, also had them being close friends with their neighbors. This film has Blondie talking to the wife on the phone. Most of the films, however, skip them, and one late film has the neighbors annoyed at Dagwood.
The family grows over the decade or so of the films. "Baby Dumpling" becomes Alexander. And, they have a daughter named Cookie. The boss is "J.C" Dithers, though he is replaced later in the series except for the last film. That is, Julius Caesar Dithers.
Today is the Ides of March. It's all connected.
SCOTUS is on its mid-winter break.
It released its March argument schedule, which includes April 1 (birthright citizenship). See also, some of the anti-BC briefs.
==
Today's Groundhog's Day and this is Black History Month. I briefly talk about that here with further links with more info.
==
I watched Ted Lasso (first five episodes) on DVD around five years after most people. It does have charms, especially such a positive lead, which we need in these times.
The two primary women (owner and girlfriend of a player) characters are well played. There are so many shows these days on so many platforms of which I see nearly none.
Someone responded to a post about an anniversary of the 18th Amendment with a "what a bunch of morons" sentiment. That's a somewhat cheap shot.
I was watching Brief Encounter (the original, not the horrible 1970s t.v. remake) again.
[BTW, I also watched the first season of Night Court. The DVD provided a commentary track for the first episode from the show's creator, who also separately talked about the show along with Harry Anderson. It also has its charms on the nice people front.]
The film is wonderful on multiple levels, including its cinematography and use of sound.
One thing that is so enjoyable is that the characters are such pleasant people. Their normalness is a large part of the point.
They are just two normal married people who strikingly fall in love with other people. They know that it is crazy and that there is no future in it. That doesn't change the reality.
That is the basic tragedy.
The film is mostly shown through the eyes of the woman. She is the sort of woman who is upset at herself when being annoyed at someone who is an annoying pest. Yes, they are being annoying, but it's sort of mean to have mean thoughts about that.
It's nice to remember that people deep down often are like the leads in the film. That includes the woman's husband, a nice guy who she loves, and who would be the one person she would talk about her experiences, except that it would hurt him so much.
(Meanwhile, in Minnesota. My comments.)
Anyway, it's snowing.
Yes, it's winter, but NYC usually doesn't get this much snow. Also, it is colder than usual -- we don't usually have pre-20-degree weather. Of course, it is all variable, with forty-degree weather recently.
Sunday is a good day for it, since during the week it would cause a lot more people problems.
Easy Living is an amusing and overall well-paced screwball comedy starring Jean Arthur with a young Ray Milland (love doesn't mean saying you are "sorry") as her love interest.
I enjoy her in various films, though If You Can Only Cook was too mannered. Her career spanned from the silent era to limited roles on television.
She had to step aside after a few performances when she co-starred in the Supreme Court-themed play First Monday in October. I still don't know how she was not too old for the role. She was in her 70s. The role was for a much younger person (a young Jane Alexander stepped in to play the role).
[The Wikipedia entry says she stepped out because of a viral infection. I read in the past that stage fright was also a major concern; she suffered it over the years and overall was a very private person.]
Easy Living is also a dramatic film regarding an aging football star learning that he has a heart condition. Victor Mature (his real name) stars. Lucille Ball has a supporting role. She was quite good in a variety of dramatic roles.
A familiar face portrays a doctor who confirms the condition. "Jeff Donnell" (a woman; "Jeff" is a childhood nickname), who plays the pregnant wife of a friend on the team, looks familiar, but I don't see anything in her resume that looks familiar.
Overall, I liked this film too.
ETA: T11 Incomplete (title concerning the injury of her client) is not quite as good as that review says.
Still, I liked it. Karen Sillas, as the older home health aide who is struggling with personal demons and other problems, is excellent. The other actors are a mixed bag, but overall give good performances as a bunch of flawed people. It weighs a bunch of themes well.
The DVD box suggests a lesbian angle, which does exist, but there are multiple interlocking stories here. For instance, her son becomes more important as the film goes along. And, as with all good films, the supporting cast provides good touches. I wouldn't mind learning more about the daughter-in-law.
There is not much "easy living" here.