The Long Goodbye awful as it is, at least has one thing going for it. It does not have Sam Worthington in it. Sam Worthington is cinematic plank wood. He cannot act. He simply cannot act. The determined efforts to make Sam Worthington into a star continue to collide with reality. Yes, he lucked out by being in the Avatar franchise. However, do people really go to an Avatar film to see the CGI version of Sam Worthington?
Saturday, October 25, 2025
Relay: A Review
The Long Goodbye awful as it is, at least has one thing going for it. It does not have Sam Worthington in it. Sam Worthington is cinematic plank wood. He cannot act. He simply cannot act. The determined efforts to make Sam Worthington into a star continue to collide with reality. Yes, he lucked out by being in the Avatar franchise. However, do people really go to an Avatar film to see the CGI version of Sam Worthington?
Friday, October 24, 2025
Ring of Fire: The Television Movie
Ring of Fire is meant to be June Carter Cash's story. I think on the whole it was a strong primer on the Country Music Hall of Fame inductee. A successful biopic does not require for someone to look exactly like their subject. Jewel does not exactly look like June Carter Cash, at least initially. However, as Ring of Fire continued, she began to look more like the older June.
Matt Ross was placed in a pretty difficult situation. He already had a daunting task falling under Joaquin Phoenix's Oscar-nominated turn as Cash in Walk the Line. He was also having to fall under the shadow of Johnny Cash himself. I do not think many people would have thought Ross was Johnny Cash. It was not a terrible job acting-wise. He had some good moments, such as his efforts to go cold turkey on his prescription addiction. He was hampered by not looking or particularly sounding like Johnny Cash. However, I think he got close to how Cash was, so it was not all for naught.
![]() |
| 1929-2003 |
5/10
Thursday, October 23, 2025
With Love, Meghan Episode Six: The Juice is Worth the Squeeze
WITH LOVE, MEGHAN: THE JUICE IS WORTH THE SQUEEZE
Original Airdate: March 4, 2025
Special Guests: Ramon Velazquez, Tracy Robbins, Victoria Jackson and Jennifer Rudolph Walsh
Mentions of Joy: 0
Passive-Aggressive Moments: 2
Gushing Praise for Markle: "It could be the busiest day of the year, and Meg's like worried about every single person's preferences, their dietary needs".
For the second time on With Love, Meghan, there was no mention of joy to be heard. Curiously, both times there has been no "joy" is when her gal pals have come over. The Juice is Worth the Squeeze, our sixth With Love, Meghan episode makes up for this lack of joy and edible flower sprinkles with a lot of elevation and seeing the Duchess of Sussex getting her hands basically slapped down.
It's Taco Tuesday and American mahjongg over at Meghan Sussex's rented home/studio. The Duchess has invited her regular group of mahjongg players/friends to come over and have some chat, some laughs and a nice taco bar. She is also having Chef Ramon come over to help her prepare all the delicious, delightful food.
We learn How to Dehydrate Citrus, as we may not want to use all the citrus right away.
Chef and restauranteur Ramon Velazquez dominates the Duchess when it comes to preparing meals. He is pleasant but has zero patience with any silliness or errors in preparation. As Meghan Markle starts tearing apart a chicken breast with her hands, Chef Ramon quickly but politely corrects her. "I usually grab two forks, so one fork holds it and the other fork kinda pulls it," he tells her as he gives her another one to use in place of her hand. All Meghan can say is "Oh, great", slightly startled at Chef Ramon's actions.
| Wrong Victoria Jackson! |
Once this Mexican shows the Duchess up in her kitchen and demonstrates that he knows what he is doing, we get our trio of mahjongg players. We first have "founder and friend" Tracy Robbins. Shortly after, we see "businesswoman, philanthropist and friend" Victoria Jackson and "entrepreneur and friend" Jennifer Rudolph Walsh. They were different than when other friends dropped by. I do not remember them having to actually make any of the food. I think that they also kept their shoes on. Now, it's on to the backyard, where the New Joy Luck Club can talk about how much fun they have had and how close they are to each other.
"That sense of community, that's what I love about cooking", the Duchess tells Chef Ramon. She may love that sense of community, but she was clearly not loving Chef Ramon. My impression of Chef Ramon Velazquez is that he was there to cook, not chat. He also was not about to have amateurs, no matter who they were, do things incorrectly. When he, again politely but firmly, corrected Meghan and gave her a second fork to pull the chicken breast apart right, Markle looked almost stunned. My sense is that after hearing nothing but praise for her culinary acumen, she was taken aback and off-guard at someone else so much as suggesting to her that she was wrong.
Whatever Markle's intentions, her interaction with Velazquez comes across as rather cross to hostile. Perhaps other interactions between herself and With Love, Meghan guests have been misinterpreted. In The Juice is Worth the Squeeze though, her actions, behavior and words towards Velazquez are pretty obvious. She is all but seething with rage at someone showing her up.
Chef Ramon is a thorough professional. He is putting in his effort to make the food correctly. As such, he is not having cheerful conversations as she did with Roy Choi. He clearly loves cooking and takes it seriously. He is by no means unpleasant or condescending towards Markle. He just knows he is a skilled chef and she is not. Velazquez treats Markle as his student and an assistant. He does not treat her as his equal, let alone his superior.
After he stops her from using her bejeweled hand to pull the meat off the chicken breast, we have a couple of very curious exchanges between them. "So, while you're doing that (pulling the aforementioned chicken breasts apart), I'm gonna chop couple of chipotles". After hearing that, Markle replies, "This is how I know you're a seasoned chef: because you're like 'While you do that, I'm just gonna chop a chili'".
I literally, and I do mean literally, cringed at that moment. She attempted to make it a humorous quip. Her body language and vocal tone, however, told me that she was livid but could not openly demonstrate it. That, to my mind, was totally unprofessional on her part. Chef Ramon Velazquez was there to work. He is a professional chef with I presume years of experience. He should not be there as Markle's assistant, let alone lackey. There was something dismissive in her quip. Dismissive, with a tinge of hostility, even anger.
She was doing something wrong. As a professional who was there, in part, to instruct, Chef Ramon did what to Markle seems to be an unspeakable act: treat her as a person, not an exalted figure. I for the life of me do not understand why Markle opted to essentially talk back to Velazquez. Her "I'm just gonna chop a chili" quip was not funny. It seemed very dismissive, very hostile. It came across almost as a way to put him down, diminish him.
Fortunately for Velazquez, he seemed not to take note of her questionably humorous comment. Later during the cooking segment, he places items into a blender. He then puts the lid on the blender firmly but not aggressively, using his fists to top it off twice. "What did that blender ever do to you?", Markle quips in another apparently jokey manner. Velazquez replies nonchalantly, somewhat dismissively, "I don't know".
The thing that makes this segment in The Juice is Worth the Squeeze fascinating to watch is in seeing how Velazquez refuses to play along with her efforts at being charming. He is pleasant and professional with Meghan Sussex. What he is not is jokey, chatty or awestruck by her. Velazquez is not mean or condescending towards her in any way. He is friendly, but he also does not praise her. He is not there to talk about his past or fantasize about opening up food trucks with her. He is there to demonstrate his skills and prepare food. He is also there to instruct Meghan Markle, not take instruction from her. Roy Choi, the only other professional chef so far on With Love, Meghan, complemented her. Ramon Velazques, on the other hand, did not complement her once, at least in my memory of it.
As a side note, my notetaking was so fast that they read, "that's what I love about cocking" rather than "cooking". Make of that what you will.
I think Meghan Markle embarrassed herself in front of Ramon Velazquez. She could have said, "Oh, I'm sorry" or "Thank you" for him showing her how to do something right. Instead, she opted to make comments about how he essentially was giving himself easy things to do while she had to do all the hard work. That comment about "this is how I know you're a seasoned chef" came across as very arrogant and petty. That might not have been the intended aim. That was just the end result.
Surprisingly, it took almost twenty minutes for her three girlfriends to show up. Perhaps that is why Meghan did not put them to work: it would have required more time and each With Love, Meghan episode is only about 30 minutes give or take. I think we do get a bit of a quick information dump about what mahjongg is and we do see them play some. However, they do look like four random strangers gathered together. Far be it for Meghan Markle to tell us what Tracy Robbins is a founder of. Far be it for Meghan Markle to tells us how Victoria Jackson is a philanthropist. Far be it for Meghan Markle to tells us how Jennifer Rudolph Walsh is an entrepreneur.
This is a common thread on With Love, Meghan. She gives us the titles that her guests have. She never asks or invites them to talk about exactly what they do.
The Juice is Worth the Squeeze is boring when we finally have our gal pals break out the mahjongg. It is worth watching only for Ramon Velazquez: the man who dared tell Meghan Markle that she was doing something wrong. And lived to tell the tale.
4/10
Wednesday, October 22, 2025
Jurassic World Rebirth: A Review
I do not think that Rebirth cared about logic. Why were the Delgados in these dangerous waters? There is, to be fair, an effort to say why (Reuben said that millions of ships sail the waters). How exactly do dinosaur blood help research into heart disease? How are machines and vehicles operational seventeen years after Ile Saint-Hubert was abandoned in chaos and terror? The Quetzalcoatlus nests in what Zoe suggest is an ancient temple. Again, Dr. Loomis is not an archaeologist, so he wouldn't know anything about the who, what, when, why, where and how of this.
Tuesday, October 21, 2025
William & Kate: The Television Movie
The romance of William and Catherine, the current Prince and Princess of Wales, can now be seen as a departure from that of William's younger brother, Prince Harry. While not without its ups and down, the courtship of Catherine Middleton by William Mountbatten-Windsor had less drama than that of Meghan Markle and Henry Mountbatten-Windsor (or Henry Sussex, if Meghan is to be believed). While Harry & Meghan have a trilogy of television films covering their courtship, marriage and flight from the Royal Family, poor Wills & Katie have a mere two films on the same subject: their courtship. William & Kate is pleasant enough, not well acted but nothing as horrendous as anything in The Sussex Trilogy.
Young Prince William of Wales (Nico Evers-Swindell) is now off to university. His father, Prince Charles (Ben Cross) is today like any other father, worried that his son will find university life difficult. Charles is not the only one who notices the handsome young second in line to the British throne within their midst. Friends both male and female come to help Wills get his footing. Ian Musgrove (Jonathan Patrick Moore) offers to be his wingman. Posh student Margaret Hemmings-Wellington (Tribly Glover), who has run in royal circles, all but declares that she will be the next Mrs. William Wales.
One student who is not particularly impressed is Catherine Middleton (Camilla Luddington). William is not her type. She also has a boyfriend already, so why would she want any other man? As it turns out, William is assigned to Catherine's study group. She would prefer sending everyone emails rather than have individual telephone numbers. Wills wants to transfer universities, but Charles is adamant that he finishes what he started. It is Catherine who persuades William to merely change majors rather than universities.
Inevitably, William starts developing feelings for Catherine. These feelings are both romantic and erotic, the latter after Catherine makes a splash at a fashion show. "SHE'S HOT!" Willis declares. Eventually, William and Kate move in together, with two other flat-mates. But what started out as friendship has grown stronger between William and Catherine, and they soon begin an affair. William also develops a bond with the middle-class Middletons, who are a solid family unit. What will it take for William and Kate to finally get together in marriage?
When William & Kate started, I saw that Charles Shaughnessy was in the cast. I became very alarmed. Mr. Sheffield had played Prince Charles in Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal. I was terrified that he would play Prince Charles in William & Kate too. I would have to endure some kind of crazed shared universe between the Waleses and the Sussexes. It did not help that Shaughnessy was absolutely abysmal as Prince Charles. To be fair, he was given absolutely lousy material, but he was still bad.
Fortunately, Mr. Sheffield was not Prince Charles. He had what was essentially a cameo as William's flight instructor. The now-King Charles III was played by Ben Cross. I think that he was slightly embarrassed to be there. Cross did his best to get some of Charles' mannerisms, particularly the pulling on the cuffs. He also tried to match Charles' speaking voice. However, I think Cross was cross as Prince Charles. It was a paycheck, and a chance to play royal to American audiences. It was not a convincing performance.
It was infinitely much better than Justin Hanlon as Prince Harry. Poor Hanlon does not look anywhere close to Harry in this or any other alternate universe. Hanlon also did not sound anything like Harry. In perhaps a curious criticism, Justin Hanlon looked far too young to play Prince Harry. He looked like he was an overgrown twelve-year-old versus a twenty-seven-year-old man. In Hanlon's defense, his "Harry going through puberty" performance towers over the simply godawful Lifetime movies of the current Duke of Sussex in the Sussex Trilogy. He at least had a personality.
Less so were our leads. Neither Camilla Luddington nor Nico Evers-Swindell look or sound like Catherine or William. Evers-Swindell is pleasant but nondescript as Wills. He is pretty but there is nothing extraordinary in his performance. I think, however, that he played the part as written by Nancey Silvers and directed by Mark Rosman. Evers-Swindell's William was a bit shy, pleasant, eager but there was nothing special about William.
I think William & Kate attempted some moments to humanize him. Of particular note is when he attempts to win her back by singing karaoke to her. It does make him look slightly goofy. However, it is not a dealbreaker. At times, though, he was bad. His efforts to argue with Catherine looked almost funny. It did not help that Evers-Swindell is quite hirsute. For a moment, what I thought were burn marks on his neck turned out to be excessive chest hair.
For better or worse, Camilla Luddington matched Nico Evers-Swindell in the "pleasant but nondescript" department as Catherine. She did not make Catherine into either strong woman or the much-abused "Waitie Katie". To be fair, Luddington did have a few good moments such as when the paparazzi are besieging her. She also worked better when she was with her Middleton family. Luddington looked more relaxed and informal, as if she was with people. Her struggle to come across as human were not due to being in close proximity with royalty. She was a bit awkward with her supposed friends too.
In what I think is either stunt casting or a wild coincidence, Serena Scott Thomas plays Catherine's mother Carole Middleton. Thomas had played Diana, Princess of Wales in the television movie Diana: Her True Story in 1993. It is a very interesting twist that Serena Scott Thomas played the mother of the future King and future Queen of the United Kingdom. She was actually quite good in the role, as was Christopher Cousins as Mike Middleton, Catherine's father. They were helped, I think, in that they did not try to be royal or dignified. Instead, Thomas and Cousins played the Middletons as pleasant, ordinary people who just happen to have the potential future monarch staying with them for breakfast.
I do wonder if the music was at times too cutesy for its own good. Never was fornication so cute with the pretty music playing as William and Kate kept slipping in and out of each other's bedrooms.
As I look on William & Kate, I find it overall inoffensive and harmless. It is not good. The final scene where William gives Catherine the engagement ring is filmed in a very amusing green screen that we are supposed to believe is Africa. Most of the acting is not good, though I would not say it was terrible. It was decent enough. William & Kate does not give us any insight into these people. It does say much. However, it is short and doesn't embarrass itself. That is not something to dismiss.
5/10
Monday, October 20, 2025
Truth & Treason: A Review
On September 28, 2025, a Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) worship center was attacked and later burned to the ground. Four congregants died as a result of the attack at Grand Blanc Township, Michigan. In the aftermath of the attack, a most curious trend developed online. Rather than express shock, or horror, or condemnation at the attack, many were condemning the LDS (also known as Mormon) victims and survivors. Of particular note were many in evangelical circles, who decided this was the perfect time to point out that Mormons were not Christians. I mention all this because Truth & Treason centers around a young LDS member during the Nazi era. Even though Truth & Treason is based on a true story, I suspect that many of those same evangelicals will call it "Mormon propaganda". Truth & Treason is a deeply moving film that tells its story with respect.
Hamburg, Germany, 1941. Helmut Hubener (Ewan Horrocks) is a Hitler Youth member, but he spends his time around his LDS friends than the bullies in the HY. His life is pretty much his friends and his LDS church. However, while his focus is primarily about finding work in the local government, Helmut observes some troubling signs. He is displeased with how his local bishop gives the Heil Hitler salute before the service. He is especially angered by how the bishop has installed a "Jews Forbidden to Enter: sign at the church. This clearly excludes LDS member Salomon Schwarz (Nye Occomore), who is a quarter-Jewish.
Things come to a head when Salomon is taken by the authorities. Helmut, now working at City Hall despite being only 16, is upset to enraged. Helmut also has access to forbidden knowledge at work and home. Part of the archives involve holding the banned literature, such as All Quiet on the Western Front and the works of Shakespeare. Thanks to his brother who came home briefly from the front, Helmut also has a short-wave radio that lets him pick up BBC broadcasts. Filled with a youthful zeal and righteous anger, Helmut starts typing out anti-Nazi messages and surreptitiously posting them about town. He gets his fellow LDS members Rudolph "Rudi" Hobbe (Daf Thomas) and Karl-Heinz Schnibbe (Ferdinand McKay) to help him post them.
The messages soon attract the attention of Nazi official Erwin Mussener (Rupert Evans). He begins a methodical search for who this traitor is, initially thinking that the educated language makes him a college professor. Helmut for his part soon attracts the attention of Elli Kluge (Sylvie Varcoe), who also works at City Hall. They begin a romance, with Elli having only the vaguest of suspicions about Helmut's nighttime actions.
Mussener's thorough, logical investigation eventually yields results. He is shocked to find that the traitor is a 17-year-old boy. Arrested and put under torture, Helmut eventually breaks and names his two compatriots. Put on trial for treason, Helmut speaks truth to power one last time. While Rudi and Karl-Heinz receive prison, Helmut Hubener is sentenced to death by guillotine.
I am not a man given to emotional displays. No, I did not cry at the end of Truth & Treason. However, I noticed that others in the audience did. I also noticed that I felt a lump in my throat when we got to the closing credits. Helmut was a courageous young man, shaped by his convictions and his youthful belief that one person can make a difference. This is a credit to Ewan Horrocks' performance as Helmut Hubener.
Horrocks makes Helmut into a man who went from not being involved in things to one filled with fire and passion to do what he thought right, damn the consequences. Horrock does not make Hubener into an innocent or clueless. He shows Helmut's fears, but how Helmut let his beliefs overcome those fears.
He also shows Helmut's lighter side. This is a young man who is a Felix Mendelsohn freak, totally passionate about the Jewish composer. He notes to Elli on their date that Mendelsohn wrote music specifically for a soprano, but that his music is forbidden now. The Helmut/Elli romance is both endearing on its own merits and a brief respite from the high drama.
Truth & Treason is a showcase for Ewan Horrocks. He gets what all actors love: a dramatic court scene. Here, Helmut's blend of youthful passion and firm conviction let Horrocks speak passionately about the wrongness of the Nazi regime without it coming across as theatrical or grandiose. Earlier in the film, Matt Whitaker and director Ethan Vincent's screenplay had given us an amusing scene of Helmut making up a pro-Nazi speech to win over his interview board which he pretended to have written out when he was actually making it up as he went along. At the trial scene, we see another paper, and instead of reading out the contrition in hopes of leniency, Helmut speaks from his heart.
"The Reich is not afraid of your little leaflets", the judge comments in a mix of fear and dismissiveness. Without missing a beat or batting an eye, Helmut forcefully replies, "Then why are you here?".
Truth & Treason is well acted overall. McKay, Thomas and Occomore did well as Karl-Heinz, Rudi and Salomon respectively. Occomore and director Vincent did especially well in Salomon's last scene. As unseen Gestapo are pounding at his door demanding to get in, Salomon takes a chair and a book and sits, waiting for them. There is a mix of fear and quiet defiance in Occomore's face. Once the again unseen Gestapo force their way in, the screen fades to black, then returns to see Salomon's room in disarray. Truth & Treason understands a lesson mostly forgotten in Hollywood films: the less that something is shown, the more impactful it is.
Another powerful moment is when Mussenner is ripping Helmut's nails off. We see just the beginning of the torture, then have to rely on Horrocks and Evans' performances to show the horror of what Helmut is enduring. It is a powerful scene, but one where we do not see the brutality. Instead, it is off-screen. That in turn is what I think makes it more frightening.
Rupert Evans does not play a crazed, evil Nazi. His Edwin Mussenner is more a dogged detective, determined to find the culprit. We also get a scene where there is a suggestion that he too doubts, but unlike Helmut won't speak out. He recounts to his wife how when he started at university, he found out from a friend that his first girlfriend was sleeping with his professor and mentor. With apparent regret, he tells his wife that he punched his friend for telling him. His wife, I believe, asks him if he regrets punching the man who told him the truth.
Truth & Treason is subtle enough about the implications of what is being said without saying it out loud. The same can be said when Helmut accidentally drops some government papers, including the distinctive red sheets Helmut has been typing his anti-Nazi leaflets on. Elli runs after him, giving him one that he did not pick up. "Better know which way you're going," she tells him. Again, this statement has a clear double meaning. The characters may or may not know what is being said. The audience, I think, does.
Anyone going into Truth & Treason thinking that this is Mormon propaganda will probably leave disappointed. You do see scenes of Hubener and his friends attending Mormon service. A couple of police officers harassing Salomon and the judge comment on how they are Mormons. The latter even asks what that is, if memory serves correct. We do see Helmut praying near the end and of them singing from their hymnals. However, Mormonism is mostly in the background. No one ever says that they were motivated by Joseph Smith or Brigham Young to take a stand against the Nazi regime.
I do not know if Truth & Treason being released this year was due to 2025 being Helmut Hubener's centenary or if that is a mere coincidence. More surprising is that the film was released on October 17, 2025. That is ten days from the anniversary of Hubener's execution, which took place on October 27, 1942, as we are told in the closing credits. They feature the actors and their real-life counterparts, along with text on their ultimate fates. It is standard, but a reminder that these were real people.
Truth & Treason is perhaps a bit long, though I did not notice it until late into the film. I also think the title is a bit clunky. Those, I think, is probably some of the film's few faults.
It is eighty years since the end of the Second World War. It is eighty-three years since a seventeen-year-old Mormon boy was beheaded for defying Hitler not with guns but with words. Even now, these hereto-unknown stories are now getting their due. Truth & Treason is a strong dramatic film. It is a deeply moving portrait of a true profile in courage, a young man executed for speaking up and speaking out against tyranny. Would that God grant each of us such courage and moral clarity.
| 1925-1942 |
DECISION: B+
Sunday, October 19, 2025
With Love, Meghan Episode Five: Surprise and Delight
WITH LOVE, MEGHAN: SURPRISE AND DELIGHT
Original Airdate: March 4, 2025
Special Guests: Abigail Spencer and Kelly Zajfen
Mentions of Joy: 0
Passive-Aggressive Moment: 3
Gushing Praise for Markle: "I felt like you were Head of Morale on the show".
There was no joy to be found among friends in Surprise and Delight, our fifth With Love, Meghan episode. This is the first time that "joy" is not mentioned by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. However, the lack of joy is more than made up for with more edible flower sprinkles and even some shade thrown at the Duchess' BFFs by the Duchess herself.
The Duchess Hostess with the Mostest is going to have a girls' brunch with her nearest and dearest gal pals. They are the advocate Kelly Zajfen and the actress Abigail Spencer. She wants everything to be perfect (and presumably joyful, even if "joy" never crossed her lips). As such, she needs to have a beautiful flower arrangement set up for them. She also needs to get the fish ready for their lunch, which they will join Mrs. Sussex in preparing.
Oh, what joy!
Mrs. Sussex goes to a nearby flower shop where she buys many bouquets from Juan. She arranges the flowers but avoids any vases. Once Kelly and Abigail arrive, it is now time to learn how to cook a fish and How to Style Crudités. Meghan and her ladies-in-waiting then can go to the backyard, where they reminisce about their friendship, friendship, just the perfect blendship.
I have no way of knowing if Kelly Zajfen and Abigail Spencer really did find all the fish gutting to be the highlight of their day. Technically, they did not actually gut any fish. They just peeled off the bone and face. I do question whether this triple threat is as close as they say that they are.
The reason for my question is that at the brunch, Meghan Markle, Queen of Domestic Doyennes, had one of the most cringeworthy moments in With Love, Meghan. As Kelly and Abigail were gushing about their bond, Meghan's audio-animatronic figure seemed to malfunction.
"You know, I have that on a t-shirt: The Best Ships are Friend Ships", the Duchess of Sussex informs the world. That revelation probably would have gone unnoticed. I figure that quip would have made people at most roll their eyes.
Yet, for reasons that no one will ever uncover, Mrs. Sussex added to that moment. She did what I consider something thoroughly irrational and cringey. After telling us "The best ships are friend ships", she does some kind of seaside shanty jerky movement and calls out, "AHOY!".
I do not think that The Office's Michael Scott, in his most clueless and directionless manner, would have done some kind of Popeye the Sailor Man impersonation to cap off this silly little quip. Again, this little "AHOY!" and jig bit reenforce what I am beginning to think about Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.
Every time she attempts to come across as appealing, helpful, cheerful and friendly, she somehow ends up looking psychotic and dangerous. "If it makes you feel happy, then it's perfect," Mrs. Sussex opines. All I could picture is a John Wayne Gacy or Ed Gein talking about what made them feel happy.
I figure that edible flower sprinkles make Meghan Markle happy. They have returned in Surprise and Delight. However, there is a new twist to the Duchess' favorite condiment. She has frozen them in ice cubes. Now the Silver Girls can suck on edible flower sprinkles while drinking their mint juleps.
They did not actually have mint juleps. I think it was tea. However, the lot of them might just as well have been drinking mint juleps and talked about how they were all getting the vapors.
I am perfectly serious: what IS it with her and edible flower sprinkles? What is her obsession with something that I had never even imagined? Here she is, a former Her Royal Highness, going on about the joy of frozen edible flower sprinkles.
Surprise and Delight has praise and shade in equal measure. As Meghan goes to the flower market, she comments to presumably the viewer, "Kelly's a great cook. Abby has...other strengths". I guess that amongst friends, such joshing is fine. I figure that was meant as a humorous tease from one friend to another. Still, her delivery of this barb and the laughter it provokes from her made me raise an eyebrow. Later on, Abigail wonders which one of the bowls is hers. "We know (the bowl) has your name on it," Meghan calls out.
Again, I think this comment was meant to be friendly joshing. It somehow ended up sounding more irritated than endearing.
To be fair, Abigail Spencer probably knows that between the two of them, Meghan is the Culinary Empress. "None of us, none of us are chefs", Meghan protests too much. "No, you really are," Abby responds. I believe that Abby later said when looking upon either the fish or the edible flower sprinkle ice cubes, "You did this? It's incredible".
Kelly might be a great cook, but she did not get this amount of ebullient praise from Abby. Now to think of it, Meghan wasn't gushing with praise for either of her besties. Most curious.
I will say that Suprise and Delight is the least guarded that the Duchess has been. She mentioned her daughter, the now-Princess Lilibet. "Lili would love that," Mrs. Sussex says when looking at pink flowers. To be fair, this is the second time that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has mentioned her daughter by name on With Love, Meghan. She name-drops the now-Prince Archie and his fishing exploits. There is also a vague reference to her spouse when she comments that "H is a great cook", at least when it comes to his scrambled eggs.
Make your own "scrambled eggs" quip here.
Given how she early on didn't even want to say "Harry", "Archie" or "Lilibet", the usage of first names by Meghan is almost loosening up for her.
As a side note, Meghan tells Abby and Kelly that she insisted that the family cook the fish that Prince Archie had caught. Something about that made me wince. I wouldn't find forced cooking a surprise and delight.
Surprise and Delight, to be fair, does have an interesting section on flower arrangements. She seems competent in putting a flower display together. She learned this, from my understanding, at the baby shower her friends threw her for the now-Prince Archie. If so, I cannot imagine a less joyful activity than learning flower arranging at a baby shower.
Some things, however, are as permanent as those edible flower sprinkles. We see both Abigail and Kelly walking around the rented kitchen barefoot. For myself, I simply cannot fathom why Meghan or With Love, Meghan requires those in the kitchen to walk around barefoot. I think of my late mother, who would have approved of them dressing well to be on television yet puzzled over the lack of footwear.
I perhaps should not have been surprised and delighted that Meghan could not bother mentioning much of what Kelly or Abigail were up to. Billed as "advocate and friend", we get no mention of what Kelly Zajfin actually advocates for. A little online digging finds that she has a nonprofit for pregnant and parenting teens in foster care: Alliance for Moms. I find it interesting that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is more concerned about her crudités than asking Kelly anything about what sounds like a very positive endeavor.
Mrs. Sussex does enjoy hearing from Abigail though about how Meghan was her flower consultant for Abby's own flower company. Mrs. Sussex recalls fondly attending Kelly's wedding. Whatever Kelly Zajfin feels over her not attending Mrs. Sussex's wedding (the who, what, when, where, why and how) we do not learn. Perhaps Kelly could ask Abigail, who did go to Harry & Meghan's wedding.
"It's the little things that matter,", the Duchess of Sussex tells us in Surprise and Delight. Little things, like edible flower sprinkle ice cubes (tip: don't use tap water as they could make the ice cubes cloudy). Little things, like having yacht rock or French dinner music play while arranging flowers sans vase. Little things, like knowing that the Best Ships are Friend Ships.
AHOY!
3/10
Saturday, October 18, 2025
Erin Brockovich: A Review (Review #2055)
![]() |
| Born 1960 |
Friday, October 17, 2025
Roofman: A Review
There is nothing more endearing than a cuddly criminal. Roofman, the story of a pleasant criminal, is played for mostly laughs while throwing in a few heart-tugging moments. Roofman is a crowd-pleaser. It did not please me that much, but I respect its efforts to try and do so.
Jeffrey Manchester (Channing Tatum) robs McDonald's franchises by literally going through the roof before they are open. His modus operandi is simple: greet the employees, put them in the storage locker and take the money. He does call the police to inform them of the robbery so that they can rescue the employees and not let them freeze to death. These robberies are to fund a better life for his daughter.
They also involve a weapon. He is finally caught after fleeing his daughter's birthday party. Ending up with a charge of kidnapping due to having locked up the McDonald's staff, he is sentenced to 45 years in prison. Some years later, Manchester engineers a daring escape and finds himself in Charlotte, North Carolina. Manchester wants to get out of the country. His fellow former 82nd Airbourne Division veteran Steve (LaKeith Stanfield) can hook him up with a fake passport and identity but he's out of the country himself right now.
Manchester has managed to avoid the police, but he has to find a hideout until Steve returns. Fortunately for him, there is a Toys R Us that he manages to hide in undetected. He soon starts making the place his home. He taps into the store security system to hide his presence. He eats and bathes at whatever is available. He also hooks up his own surveillance system and ends up looking into the lives of the employees.
Among those employees is Leigh (Kirsten Dunst), a churchgoing divorcee with two daughters. Seeing how her jerk of a manager Mitch (Peter Dinklage) won't accommodate her schedule or provide toys for a church drive, Manchester will do both himself. Circumstances cause Manchester to be invited into Leigh's church, headed by Pastor Ron (Ben Mendelsohn) and his wife Eileen (Uzo Aduba). Now calling himself John Zorn, he and Leigh eventually begin a romance. "John" integrates himself into both the church and Leigh's bed. He also starts becoming part of Leigh's family.
All good things, though, have to end, when Mitch walks in on a nude Jeffrey (him still unfinished with his bathing). As Christmas comes closer, Jeffrey/John finds himself in a curious set of circumstances. Will he find the $50,000 to buy his fake passport and identity papers? Will he abandon Leigh? Will he get caught?
After finishing Roofman (which for full disclosure I saw at a secret screening) I was reminded of another true-life story of a criminal who busts out of prison, hoodwinks others and eventually is caught. I do not think that people remember I Love You, Phillip Morris today. I also doubt that director Derek Cianfrance (who cowrote the screenplay with Kirt Gunn) was attempting to draw inspiration from that movie. However, my mind kept going to how both I Love You, Phillip Morris and Roofman play on similar themes.
Both films are based on true stories that are outlandish but built on fact. Both have a score that emphasizes the comedy. Both involve criminals who are motivated, in part, to provide a more luxurious life for those they love. Both have protagonists that we are meant to empathize with a habitual criminal. Here is where I have a minor issue with Roofman.
The film focuses on how well-mannered he is when stealing. It seems pretty blasé about how Manchester is a habitual criminal. Put aside the deception he perpetrates on Leigh, her children and the congregation. He stole from 45+ businesses. He hocked various games to pay for an unwitting Leigh, down to buying her older daughter Lindsey (Lily Collias) a car. He both threatened the Toys R Us staff and punched the man picking up the store's deposit, who he would have left on the floor bleeding profusely. He damaged property. He blew up a dentist office to try and cover his tracks.
Somehow, I cannot find it in my heart to see Jeffrey Manchester/John Zorn to be a good guy. He may have been a very nice criminal. He was still a criminal. Some may have chuckled at his bungling when breaking into a spa instead of the pawn shop that he was aiming for. I kept wondering what the spa owners or poor dentist did to deserve such treatment from this nice guy.
I had hoped that Roofman would have been when I could finally say that I did not have to see Channing Tatum naked. For a while, it looked like the most that I would see would be his torso. Alas, I had to see his backside once again. I will give Channing Tatum this much: he did try. I will not be convinced that he can actually act. He did, however, do his best to make Jeffrey/John into this almost endearing goofball, sweet and loving. The fact is that he couldn't fully shift into making Jeffrey into a complex person with a dark side versus just this nice guy who robbed people.I think Durst was better as Leigh, but not by much. At times, especially with Dinklage, Durst felt almost robotic, playing at a put-upon employee but not convincing me that she was a put-upon employee.
I can give grudging credit that Roofman had a somewhat more positive portrayal of Christians than most films. I do not know if pastors encourage their congregants to jump into bed with people whom they are not married to. It does feel a bit of a lost opportunity that Leigh's faith was not more explored, nor was Jeffery/John's reaction to it. This church apparently consisted of nothing but singing and eating. Yet I digress.
I was disappointed that Dinklage's Mitch was nothing more than a cliched jerk boss. I would have thought better if he had been allowed to be a bit more nuance rather than just be someone that belittles everyone around him. It was nice to see Ben Mendelsohn play something other than a villain as the pastor, though he and Uzo Aduba seemed to be playing more caricatures than people. Same goes for LaKeith Stanfield. Other elements, such as Emory Cohen's bullied Toys R Us employee Otis, were underused.
I think that is a reason why I was not as enthused about Roofman as others. I did not see people. I saw caricatures. Still, I figure that Roofman the movie had its heart in the right place. I cannot fully embrace a film that wants me to like a criminal no matter how outwardly charming and pleasant he appears. Nonetheless, Roofman did please the audience, so while crime does not pay, it does appear enjoyable.

.jpg)



















.jpg)
.jpg)
