dirac

Thanks very much for telling us your thoughts about the movie, Jayne. The Pearl Harbor analogy remains quite inappropriate to me, but opinions will differ. Please report back here if you go, atm711.

Hello, atm711. I wouldn't call "The Iron Lady" must-see but I can testify that it's much less painful to sit through than "J. Edgar."

If the anecdote is out there, Colleen, it's probably in a book - a memoir or a bio. Absolutely true about the devastation of Alzheimer's.

I was curious about that too, and I wasn't sure how we were meant to take the scene. I think it was intended to show Thatcher courageously telling off those bossy Americans, but it just comes off as strange.

She probably is, Colleen - an Alzheimer's diagnosis speaks for itself, really. Thatcher's daughter has spoken out on her mother's illness and she did say that Thatcher often didn't remember her husband was dead. No doubt the scenes of Thatcher in decline are mostly imagined, but it doesn't mean the filmmakers are trying to show her in a poor light thereby - on the contrary. (When the senile Thatcher sees television footage of a terrorist attack, she imagines she is still PM and her immediate response is that condolences must be sent.)

The movie doesn’t really work, although one acknowledges the damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t aspects of the enterprise. The flashbacks might have been constructed with more clarity and the historical timeline is flouted regularly. Thatcher is celebrated as a Woman Who Made a Difference but the enduring ramifications of the Difference go carefully unexplored. She is also presented as a feminist role model, if not a particularly inspirational one from some viewpoints. ("Girls! You too can humiliate cabinet members, throw millions into unemployment, and send old age pensioners to hospital with hypothermia! ")The Falklands War is the only historic incident treated in any real detail. The sequences that show Thatcher being groomed for the leadership are effective. I particularly liked the scene where Thatcher lectures her doctor for substituting the squishy "feel" for "think." Streep is terrific, even by her standards – a moving performance. The supporting cast is also excellent, although Jim Broadbent is not well served by the way in which the shade of Denis keeps popping up at odd times. I enjoyed Harry Lloyd and Alexandra Roach as the young couple, Richard E. Grant is a slinky Michael Heseltine, and Anthony Head, demoted from Prime Minister to put-upon deputy, is fine as Geoffrey Howe.

I see, thanks. I guess it does depend on perspective. The Hurt Locker didn't show anything new to this viewer, for example. But it was certainly an "appropriate" winner in the sense I think you intend.

Thanks, Anthony_NYC. Nice to hear from you in this forum again.

Ray, in what sense is The Descendants not Best Picture material? Not trying to put you on the spot, just curious.

I think you may be right about DiCaprio, although I thought J. Edgar was a holiday turkey par excellence. Clooney's performance in The Descendants tended to highlight his limitations -- and I was expecting to like him in it.

I agree in full, MakarovaFan. Oldman's nomination is a very pleasing surprise. He has to be considered a dark horse and generally speaking my support does my favored nominees no good, but I'm rooting for him. "Tinker, Tailor...." could have been fruitfully substituted for several of the Best Picture nominees on that list, as well. I'm not surprised that "The Tree of Life" got a nod under the new system (now slightly revised). Don't worry, it won't win.

Here they are. Photo gallery.

You know, you just jogged my memory - "Into Great Silence" was shown on EWTN not too long ago and I saw a brief portion of it before switching over to an event involving a local sports franchise. Damn, or perhaps I should say, darn...... It sounds as if he's taken a page from Frederick Wiseman's book. BTW, Kerry1968, welcome to the forum.

Thank you for telling us your impressions, leonid. A quote from the review: Has anyone else seen/heard it?

An obituary by Judith Cruickshank in The Guardian. RIP.

Who's recently retired, alas. Welcome to the Other Arts forum, SimonA!

Thanks, Kerry1968. I have not seen it. Was there anything in particular that you liked about it?

Thanks for reporting here, miliosr. I was a trifled disappointed, myself, but Dujardin and Bejo are certainly charming.

Please do tell us your impressions when you see the show, California!

New developments. (Thanks to innopac for sending in this link.) DanceTabs is just going to be a magazine – no forum, no TodaysLinks (and its huge attendant database) – just Reviews, Galleries, Interviews and News items. The contributors will largely be names you know already and to which I look to add - I continue to want it to take a world view. It will use technology similar to the Balletco redesign but will be hosted in specialist space I don’t have to worry so much about. The gallery area will be hosted differently. Time is short – the launch will be in early February and while I would like to do different designs I may just use the recent Balletco ones with a few light modifications.

It does sound good, doesn't it? From the review: The highlights of Lynne’s career (her name was changed from Jill Pyrke as it was deemed too easy to mis-spell in notices) include winning the RAD Solo Seal with Nimrod from Elgar’s Enigma Variations, coveted roles, praise (and punishing corrections) from ‘Madam’ Ninette de Valois and Frederick Ashton among others, touring to Europe during the war to entertain the battle-weary troops, taking class with Margot Fonteyn, who was helpful and charming and on the brink of greatness; the highlights are many and the stories surrounding them very well told.

I think the values ship sailed a few years ago when a certain much-married GOP politician was not immediately disqualified from serious Presidential consideration after very public adultery, not to mention endorsing alternative lifestyles by moving in with a couple of gay guys for awhile, not to mention the photographs in circulation featuring him decked out for charity as the alluring "Rudia." Only in New York!

I don't think we've reached a place where citing adultery in a divorce case is retrograde, and I can't imagine what reason could be more justified and germane. It's also a legal tactic, as well as an emotional or societal one. In this case, the plaintiff presumably has greater assets than the defendant, and she wants to protect those assets. It is therefore in the plaintiff's financial interest to ask for an at-fault divorce. If they had a prenup, it may have contained an infidelity clause as well. Reports suggested the divorce was proceeding "amicably," as they say, until this last wrinkle developed and Bushnell elected to proceed this way. If there was a pre-nup with such a clause that would certainly provide a financial motive.

Ray, my own suspicion is that the name Bouvier had a lot to do with getting this movie made. I do see what you mean by invoking Arbus but I don't find her photographs troubling in the same way and some of her shots have a warmth and humanityfor which they don't always get credit. Taking a picture is different in kind and degree from allowing/encouraging unfortunate people ramble on in front of the camera. Hard to say, isn't it? As you note, they clearly don't mind the camera and they probably enjoyed having someone take an interest, any interest. The question is whether you exploit that need, but I guess it's asking too much of human nature to ask a filmmaker to pass up such an opportunity.

Thanks for the link. Several articles like this have appeared recently - Carolina Ballet is one of the companies contemplating or implementing such moves, including offering "tweeting sections" during live performances. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, etc. The organizations looking at this view it as outreach to a new audience whose attention they might not be able to attract by traditional methods. I can see how it might not work out as intended, but there's no harm in trying, although the theater certainly didn't handle this well - even if they didn't have to keep Grote informed for contractual reasons, the experiment is being conducted on his work. Grote doesn't seem wholly closed to the idea, he seems to be mainly unhappy with the addition of this potentially unpredictable element at a delicate time and also unhappy that he wasn't consulted, which makes perfect sense. He also makes the sound point that "moderated" tweeting is pretty much a contradiction in terms. "Transparency" is one of those fashionable pieces of cant, it's everywhere, alas. Other thoughts?