It's Dorothy! A Review

IT'S DOROTHY!    

Some literary characters have taken on a life so far removed from their source material. Such is the case with Dorothy Gale, the protagonist of L. Frank Baum's The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. The documentary It's Dorothy! looks at the various incarnations of this literary character. Using archival footage and interviews with the myriads of Dorothys from stage and screen, It's Dorothy! sometimes stretches some connections more than I think logical. However, it has some interesting background to the lives of the actresses and fans of this distinctly American figure.

It's Dorothy! interviews various actresses who have played the little girl from Kansas, mostly on stage or television specials. There is Shanice Shantay from The Wiz Live! NBC special. There is also Nichelle Lewis from the 2024 Broadway revival of The Wiz, pop singer Ashanti who starred in The Muppets' Wizard of Oz special and Danielle Hope, who won the BBC competition show Over the Rainbow in 2011 to play Dorothy in London's West End. The documentary also has an audio interview with Fairuza Balk, who played Dorothy in Return to Oz. She is the only Dorothy who did not appear on screen but was interviewed specifically for the documentary. Stephanie Mills, who originated the role in the original run of The Wiz, Diana Ross who played the role in the film version of The Wiz, and Judy Garland from the 1939 The Wizard of Oz all spoke about the character and/or Oz-related projects via archival footage. 

Each of the actresses who played Dorothy speaks to her experiences both before and after their casting. For Garland, the two figures of actress and character eventually blended into each other. It is surprising to learn, for example, that initially many objected to Garland's casting for being "too old" for the part. As time went by, Garland became the definitive Dorothy to where every other actress who played the role was measured against her. We see that Judy Garland had excessively high expectations as a child performer. The high price of fame, the dichotomy between the outward glamour and intense hard work is nothing new we learn. Ashanti comments that people see the fame and glitter but not the intense invasion of privacy and long work hours.

The more things change, I suppose.

The other people interviewed in It's Dorothy! were heard but not seen. The various interviewees speak on various topics related to both Dorothy and the Oz mythos. We get how director John Waters thought Glinda the Good Witch of the North was, in his words, "a sadist" for not informing Dorothy that she could leave anytime rather than letting her go through the land of Oz. He adds that Dorothy is, again in his words, "a fag hag" or at least a precursor to one. 

The documentary does cover how the character of Dorothy and The Wizard of Oz in particular became associated with gay culture. It also through the various adaptations of The Wiz delve into how the L. Frank Baum series was co-opted into black culture. 

Director/writer Jeffrey McHale covers a great deal of ground in It's Dorothy! To his credit he did a strong job in giving the various actresses who brought the character to life. As stated, all the living Dorothy actresses save Balk appeared on screen (Ross and Mills not interviewed specifically for It's Dorothy!). Hearing their stories about how fans still remember them and their experiences working on their respective Oz projects is an interesting backstage look.

I do, however, think that sometimes It's Dorothy! bit off more than it could chew. Late in the film, some of the interviewees suggested that the appearance of Wheelers in Return to Oz was a sign of disability empowerment. I think that while disabled people may see the Wheelers as some kind of representation, I do not think that was the intent. It was not just the Wheelers but the various figures who had different parts to them, like Jack Pumpkinhead and Tik-Tok. 

The Wizard of Oz/Judy Garland gay connection has been noted for years. It is interesting to learn that such a connection did not start immediately but built up over the years. The "friend of Dorothy" myth is dispelled in It's Dorothy! with the suggestion that such a euphemism developed over time rather than be immediate. 

The film also could not resist a dig at L. Frank Baum. It does point out that while Baum was a liberal in almost all matters, his editorials calling for the extermination of the indigenous Americans is a black spot on his record. I do not think that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz or any of his other Oz books will be pulled from the shelves because he was wildly wrong in that one take. This unfortunate lapse in judgment by Baum is connected to the Wizard himself not being what he was supposed to be. 

Again, this is similar to the Return to Oz take that the various creatures are a subtle sign of disability representation. Some of the connections between the various Oz projects and both its creator and its fans seems to stretch more than I'm willing to believe.  

Still, It's Dorothy! has some wonderful insights from academics, fans and the various actresses who have played the role. We get a nice montage of both Over the Rainbow and The Wiz's Home which are standouts. Both are brilliant songs that have stood the test of time. Seeing various figures like Barbra Streisand to Beyoncé take cracks at them is a wonderful reminder of how good the songs and singers are. It is also good to hear how various Dorothys have been received. Shantay calls her The Wiz Live! experience a "one-and-done" deal with no big bounce to her career. Conversely, Danielle Hope has found a career after winning Over the Rainbow and she was cast in the theatrical version of The Wizard of Oz.

How we see both Dorothy Gale and various interpretations of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz will shift with the culture. It's Dorothy! is a good snapshot of how both were seen then and are seen now. I am not sure that Dorothy Gale really is, as one person called her, "a bad bitch". It's Dorothy! ends with various people being asked to describe Dorothy Gale in one word. My choice would be "Dorothy Gale is...American". 

DECISION: B-

Athlete A: A Review

ATHLETE A

The phrase "go for the gold" takes an ominous and sinister turn in the documentary Athlete A. A shocking tale of moral corruption in pursuit of Olympic glory, Athlete A makes one wonder how adults can turn a blind eye to children in danger.

Maggie Nichols loves the sports of gymnastics. She shows great skill and hard work have made her a potential Olympian. However, during her training, Maggie is sexually molested by Dr. Larry Nassar. Nassar has been with USA Gymnastics for years as its physical therapist. USA Gymnastics oversaw the women's Olympic gymnastics program. Maggie, along with her mother Gina and father John, immediately reported the molestation to USA Gymnastics officials.

The officials turned a deaf ear to the Nichols' complaints. Then USA Gymnastics President Steve Penny did not seem alarmed at the accusations. He also did not report them to the police. By coincidence, the Indianapolis Star was doing investigative work on how sexual abuse accusations were being essentially ignored at USA Gymnastics. Coaches who had files on them were being shifted about rather than reported. Into the growing maelstrom came Rachel Denhollander. She was another of Nassar's victims. She was also willing to go on the record.

The sexual abuse charges were already disturbing enough. That the victims were minors made it more shocking. Children were placed in this situation due to a strange set of circumstances. In the 1976 Montreal Olympics, Romanian gymnast Nadia Comaneci took the world by storm. Comaneci was the first female to earn a perfect 10. She was also 14 years old. She, along with her coach Bela Karoly, inadvertently ushered in the era of younger athletes for gymnastics. 

Karoly and his wife Marta, who had defected from Romania, brought their Romanian style of training to America. It had results with Olympic gold. It also had an adverse effect on the female gymnasts. They were brutal with the girls. Jennifer Sey, a former gymnast herself, looked on in horror when Kerri Strug hobbled to victory in Atlanta. America cheered. Sey saw it as the end result of a "win at all costs" mindset. It eventually became a toxic mix. You had the Karolys' harsh manner on one hand. You then had Larry Nassar's faux friendliness on the other. He would give them secret treats to circumvent strict diets. He provided a sympathetic ear to the Karolys harshness. He was grooming them.

Meanwhile, Steven Penny was too intoxicated by the increase in publicity and marketing potential to focus on the abuse going on. The Indianapolis Star published their bombshell report. They had sources on record. The house of cards collapsed, bringing down both Larry Nassar and Steve Penny.

Athlete A is a distressing and disturbing look at how unqualified people can put the organization ahead of those it supposedly represents. There are, in my estimation, two villains in Athlete A. The first is Larry Nassar. He is the one who committed the crimes. The second is Steve Penny. He is the one who did not move to stop Nassar. One is shocked to learn that Penny seemed at minimum disinterested at what people kept reporting to him. Penny, we learn in Athlete A, started as the Vice President of Marketing at USA Gymnastics and eventually rose to become the organization's President.

That apparently influenced Penny's lack of action. Put aside how Penny had no actual background in gymnastics. It was his marketing background, rather, that blinded him to the growing crisis. Penny's focus was on how to "sell" the athletes. It was not to protect them.

Athlete A (the title coming from the pseudonym used to protect Maggie Nichols' identity) also covers how the overall culture at the Karoly Ranch brought about this sorry situation. A surprising detail is how Bela Karoly was selected by Romanian Communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu to run the Romanian gymnastics program. The overall culture that Karoly brought to America was one where verbally abusing the athletes was commonplace. It worked in the Eastern Bloc. Why not the West?

That abuse, in turn, allowed Nassar to come across as the opposite to the Karolys. He could present himself as their friend. In reality, he was really grooming his victims.

Athlete A makes for sad and distressing viewing. The various gymnasts recounting their experiences is a hard watch. Jennifer Sey's perspective on Kerri Strug is interesting. We were as a nation too caught up in the sense of triumph to notice or give much thought to the physical and emotional toll the athletes paid?

Athlete A is a bit faltering when it attempts to channel All the President's Men with its coverage of the Indianapolis Star meetings. The Star did needed coverage. However, these meetings did not have as gripping a manner as hearing from those who lived through Nassar's actions. 

Overall, that is a minor point. Athlete A will have one questioning how far people were willing to go or do for those sixteen days of glory. It looks like it was simply too high a price. 

DECISION: B+

One Survivor Remembers: A Review (Review #2175)

ONE SURVIVOR REMEMBERS

When one looks up "memorable Oscar acceptance speech", what comes up is the Best Documentary Short Film Oscar winner One Survivor Remembers. Gerda Weissmann Klein, the titular survivor, approached the podium after the film's director, Kary Antholis, gave his acceptance speech. Mrs. Klein gave a simple yet eloquent statement that put a focus on true victory. Winning the Oscar is nice. However, a greater victory is to live and survive an unimaginable horror. It would be tempting to add "unspeakable" to "unimaginable". The horrors that Gerda Weissmann survived, however, must be spoken of. One Survivor Remembers, in its simple and direct telling, tells of how simple, small decisions let one Holocaust survivor live to speak for the millions who could not.

One Survivor Remembers is a blend of archival footage and a single closeup of Gerda Weissman's interview conducted by Sandra W. Bradley. There is narration from Peter Thomas, who fills in historical information. 

Gerda Weissmann was 15 years old in August 1939. She, her father, mother and brother Arthur lived in Bielsko, Poland and made up the Jewish community there. Then, the Nazis invaded. The Weissmanns were initially more fortunate than some of their neighbors. While they were forced to live in their basement, they at least were in their home. That, however, would not last. There was a forced roundup of Jewish citizens. "There was a feeling of betrayal," Weissmann reflects. "Suddenly you were home and you were not at home anymore". The Nazis and their collaborators first took now-19-year-old Arthur, whom she never saw again. June 28, 1942, Gerda Weissmann calls the worst day of her life. 

It was the last time that she saw her parents. 

The men and women were separated, then separated between young and old. Gerda had been taken from her mother. Desperate to get to her, Gerda jumped out of the truck she had put in and rushed to where her mother's truck was. A Jew working alongside the Nazis grabbed her and forced her back. "You are too young to die," he hollered.

Fate kept turning in turns cruel and kind. The female commandant at the first camp Gerda and her new friends were in looked fierce and barked out her orders. Gerda, however, states that this Frau Kugler was "decent, wonderful, warm, caring human being" who saved her life. Gerda kept living. She honored her promise to her father to not commit suicide even at her most desperate and despairing. As the war was coming to a brutal end, she and the rest of the women were forced onto a death march. "Is it to liberation or to doom", she recalled. 

The death march was the last brutality of the dying Third Reich. Gerda, however, found that fate kept her alive. She avoided being massacred when she opted at the last minute to not make an escape attempt. Her father's insistence that she take her ski boots when they were rounded up saved her from the frostbite that was destroying the others. Finally arriving at Volary, Czechoslovakia, she was one of 50 women liberated by the incoming American army. 

She weighed 68 pounds. She had white hair. She was a day away from her 21st birthday. 

The first American soldier that she saw spoke both English and German. He was Lieutenant Kurt Klein, who by coincidence had been born in Germany but who was sent to America when the Nazis rose to power. His parents had been unable to flee. Lieutenant Klein was shocked by what he saw. He was equally shocked that Gerda quoted the poem The Divine by Goethe as she showed him her fellow survivors. "Noble be man, merciful and good", she recited, still holding out hope for humanity. Gerda and Kurt eventually married and had three children and eight grandchildren.

The details that Gerda Weissmann Klein shares in One Survivor Remembers are said simply but will shock the viewer to their core. She talks about how she saw the other women on the death march snap their frozen toes like twigs. Other details will leave a heartbreaking impression. On the 28th of June 1942, Gerda recalls that her mother prepared the cocoa that she had saved all those years. She remembers that it did not taste as sweet that morning as it would have. She also tells us that in those ski boots, she hid photos of her father, mother and brother Arthur. They will be remembered because of a simple, quick action.

One is left to ponder how many others were erased from history. 

The importance of One Survivor Remembers cannot be overemphasized. She was a witness to a monstrous act of evil. We see early on the footage of the corpses found in Volary. We learn via Peter Thomas' narration that out of 2,000 women on that death march, only 50 survived. We do not know if the other 49 ever shared their stories. We do one person that did. Gerda Weissmann, in sharing her story of survival, became the voice of those 1,500 women who were found dead at Volary. She became the voice of those killed in the camps. She became the voice of those taken away, never to be seen or heard from again.

Gerda Weissman Klein bore witness. She speaks clearly, sadly and simply. One Survivor Remembers does shake one after viewing. Still, one leaves with a tinge of hope. Weissmann lived to tell her tale. In doing so, we must carry on to not forget how close man can come to doing evil. We also know that we can choose to do good.   

One Survivor Remembers mixes Mrs. Klein's interview with archival footage and photographs. The only contemporary footage that I remember is when we see the cemetery where those found at Volary were buried. Seeing the moments to her friends who did not make it is hard but needed viewing. This is especially true when we recall that one friend of hers who died the day of their liberation.  

I have at least two regrets in my life. The first is the day that my mother died. I regret and will regret to my dying day that my final words to her were "Call me when you're ready" instead of "I love you". I was waiting for her to finish what was expected to be a simple medical exam that triggered a medical emergency leading to her death. 

The second was when I attended a soccer match with a coworker and his female companion. During the match, I was overhearing but not participating in their conversation; he asked her who her favorite Muppet character was. When she replied "Gonzo", his surprisingly cheerful reply was, "Oh, so you're a Zionist". I regret not telling him to shove his antisemitism up his ass. 

Other circumstances have terminated our association, and he no longer speaks to me at work going on three months as of this writing. Yet, in retrospect, I see it as no loss. Regretful, hurtful, but no loss. 1 Corinthians 15:33 says it best: "Do not be misled. Bad company corrupts good character" (New International Version). I work to have good character. He and his cohorts are bad company. Yet, I digress.

One Survivor Remembers is a documentary that while short will leave a permanent impact on the viewer. We each have dignity by virtue of birth. We each can choose good or evil. We also have the blessings of life. Freedom is a gift. At a time of rising antisemitism, One Survivor Remembers is now more vital than when it was released. We are not so far away from what came before. Sadly, we can end up returning to seeing such horrors come again.

Here is the complete text of Gerda Weissmann Klein's Oscar statement*:

Kary, Sheila, Sandy, Michael, my beloved husband and my family. I have been in a place for six incredible years where winning meant a crust of bread and to live another day. Since the blessed day of my liberation, I have asked the question, "Why am I here? I am no better". In my mind's eye, I see those years and days and those who never lived to see the magic of a boring evening at home. On their behalf, I wish to thank you for honoring their memory; and you cannot do it in any better way than when you return to your homes tonight to realize that each of you who know the joy of freedom are winners. Thank you on their behalf with all my heart.

*Based on the credits, I take that those mentioned in Mrs. Klein's speech are the following individuals. Kary is Kary Antholis, One Survivor Remembers' director. Sheila is Sheila Nevins, the senior producer. Sandy is Sandy Bradley (listed as Sandra W. Bradley), the interviewer. Michael is Michael Fuchs from HBO, which produced and presented the documentary short.

DECISION: A+

Ethel (2012): A Review (Review #2170)

ETHEL (2012)

It is said that behind every great man, there is a great woman. I consider Robert F. Kennedy a great man. As such, would I consider Ethel Skakel Kennedy a great woman? Ethel, the documentary about the Widow Kennedy, shows a loving and devoted spouse to one of the most beloved political figures of the mid twentieth century. It does not, however, show us who she is apart from her beloved.

Ethel is directed by Mrs. Kennedy's youngest daughter, Rory, who was born after her father's assassination in 1968. Mrs. Kennedy, then 83, is pretty dismissive about the entire project. "All this introspection, I HATE IT!", Ethel Kennedy says somewhat in jest. One senses that Mrs. Kennedy considers a documentary about her a silly endeavor. Fortunately, all of Robert and Ethel's surviving children are also interviewed to fill in gaps that Mrs. Kennedy would rather not go into.

Mrs. Kennedy is very forthcoming about her own early years as a Skakel. Her family and the Kennedy family share many similarities. Both are large Irish Catholic families. Both had a fierce competitive streak. However, there were marked differences. The Kennedys were posher and more intellectually bent. They for example, as Ethel points out, discussed current events at dinner, which started at 7:15 on the dot. The Skakels, for their part, could start dinner at 5 pm or 10 pm and were more rambunctious. Her family was also self-made, with her father working to build up his fortune. The Kennedys, conversely, were essentially to the manor born. 

Ethel had no shame in being a respectable albeit rebellious figure. She got along fabulously with her school roommate, Jean Kennedy. They also delighted in innocent scrapes. For example, they had received enough demerits to be prohibited from attending an event by the school. Ethel reports that she and Jean found the book, burned it, and attended the event anyway.

It was through Jean that she met Jean's younger brother, Robert. In her own words, Robert was considered the runt of the litter. He was smaller than his siblings, especially his older brother John whom Bobby idolized. However, he had a fierce determination to succeed. Ethel reports that he played football at Harvard because he showed up an hour earlier and left an hour later than everyone else. He even managed to letter in football despite playing with a broken leg. "He really wanted that letter," Ethel reflects.

Ethel was smitten on first sight, stating "Wow!" when asked what her first impression of Bobby was. She managed to win him over after her sister, whom he was dating, found another man. Once hitched, she was thoroughly devoted to him. Ethel was with him as he worked in government and helped Jack reach the Presidency. She brought the kids to committee meetings. She felt it was vitally important for them to see what he did. She also felt that the children needed to see how the other half lived; however, she was frozen out by Bobby when President Kennedy was assassinated. "It was like Daddy had lost both his arms", Ethel says. Ethel could not reach her husband until he set a goal to climb the recently renamed Mt. Kennedy in Canada. He did not enjoy a single minute of the expedition. However, in the most reflective moment in Ethel, she saw that it helped him finally emerge from his overwhelming grief.

Now, he starts out his own campaign, first for Senate for New York, then for the Presidency. Robert was not a natural campaigner, awkward and hesitant. Robert, however, knew that Ethel was what got him through. After his assassination though, Ethel emerged to forge something of her own life.

Ethel shows that her children clearly love Mommy and Daddy. It shows that Mommy loved Daddy (the now adult children always refer to Robert and Ethel as Mommy and Daddy). Ethel herself refers to her husband as "Daddy". The various Kennedy siblings ranging from the oldest, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend to now Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. and Kerry, the youngest sister outside director Rory all share their various memories of both Daddy and Mommy. In that regard, Ethel is a pleasant love letter to their mother.

Ethel also has a wealth of archival footage. Of particular note is the wedding of Robert and Ethel, which shows a surprisingly lighthearted, even goofy side to the bride and bridegroom. The viewer gets anecdotes both amusing and mundane. For example, Robert Kennedy Jr. remembers that Mommy could not cook at all. Daddy, he observes, did not marry Mommy for her cooking. Something that does take even Ethel by surprise is the statistic that she was pregnant for 99 months of her life. That is unsurprising given that Robert & Ethel had eleven children. Ethel makes quick note that two of those children were dead when the documentary was made: David in 1984 of an overdose and Michael in 1987 in a skiing accident. 

However, Ethel has a curious flaw. It is Ethel Kennedy herself. Ethel makes clear that this is not a woman who gives the past much thought. She is not one for reflecting or thinking on her impact in history. Some of that hesitancy is understandable. When they get to the assassination, one senses Rory attempting to draw more reflection out of her mother. "Then we lost Daddy", she says. Looking clearly uncomfortable, the Widow Kennedy merely states "Let's talk about something else", in a terse tone.

Senator Kennedy's assassination is a major part of Ethel Kennedy's life story. However, she will not delve into any aspect of it. Ethel Kennedy appears to already be reluctant to talk about herself. She seems perfectly happy to talk about her husband and her children. She can reflect on some of her in-laws. She can talk about the joys of campaigning for Jack in his various races. Ethel Kennedy, however, never mentions her sister-in-law, Jacqueline Kennedy. 

A lot of the reflections and memories in Ethel are more from director Rory Kennedy's siblings than her surviving parent. That is not a bad thing. It is just that in some ways, Ethel is guarded about the documentary subject. It is almost as if Ethel is less documentary and more family home movie. Mrs. Kennedy had been a widow for forty-four years when Ethel was released. Yet, for a film that runs one hour and thirty-seven minutes, it devotes about the last ten to those forty-four years. She created the Robert F. Kennedy Center shortly after the assassination. She had to raise those eleven children without the love of her life (the oldest was seventeen, the youngest was born six months after Kennedy's death). She had a long second act, yet Ethel devotes almost no time to that second act.

In a very curious and strange way, Ethel makes it look like she is a coda to RFK's life. She was a partner, an advisor, a champion to Robert F. Kennedy. Somehow, Ethel does not make the case that she was anything other than a spouse and not a woman of her own separate from her husband and his legacy. 

One senses that she was more than that. Part of me understands that Ethel Kennedy did not see herself in lofty terms. She, at the end of the film, all but bristles at the idea that she could take any credit for her children to be involved in public service. I also suspect that Ethel Kennedy did not want to reflect on herself post-assassination even if she thought looking at the past was worth the time. However, for someone who wants to know what made Ethel Kennedy tick or wanted to know what her life was after June 4, 1968, Ethel gives them very little.

I saw a bit of my own mother in Ethel Kennedy. Both put family first. Both were not big into reflecting on the past. Both were more about the today than the yesterday. Ethel is a respectable portrait of a matriarch. Ethel Kennedy lived twelve years after Ethel premiered, dying in 2024. Ethel is a good primer into one of the unsung heroines of this political dynasty. It gives us a look into her long life with Robert F. Kennedy. Ethel might not be the intimate portrait of this political spouse that I think many might have expected or wanted. Then again, I figure that is exactly how Ethel Kennedy would want it. 

DECISION: B-

Melania: A Review

MELANIA

In these highly charged times perhaps it would be impossible to judge the documentary Melania without bringing in one's own feelings on the subject. Melania is a slickly produced film that gives one little insight into the enigmatic First Lady. It is also not without some positives that make for an interesting albeit curious viewing.

Melania Trump tells her story of the twenty days the New Year's Day 2025 and Inauguration Day when her husband would be sworn in as the 47th President of the United States. There is a lot to do as she goes from the Trump estate of Mar-a-Lago to their penthouse at Trump Tower in Manhattan.

Her staff presents her with the official invitations to the pre-Inaugural candlelight dinner. Her longtime designer Hervé Pierre works on her Inaugural coat and gown. He is excited that his creation will be at the Smithsonian. I suppose that he was too excited to notice that Mrs. Trump's Inaugural coat made her look like the love child of Carmen Sandiego and the Hamburglar. 

In between all that though comes events that will force a personal reflection. Former President Jimmy Carter had died shortly before the Inauguration. His funeral was set for January 9, 2025. This would require that the Trumps attend the funeral as a former President and First Lady at the time. January 9, 2025, was also by coincidence the first anniversary of the death of Mrs. Trump's mother. All those conflicting feelings, coupled with the preparations for the ceremonial aspects of the Inaugural, swirled around Mrs. Trump.

Grief comes, but it also goes. With the official state funeral done, Melania can return to her many focuses. There is the Inauguration. There is her Be Best and Fostering the Future Initiatives. There is her son, Barron, who wants to stay out of the limelight. At last, the former First Lady becomes First Lady again, and she can dance until her feet are tired.

One should not even bother pretending that Melania would give anyone genuine insight into this most mysterious of First Ladies. Melania Trump enters and exits wearing high stiletto heels. The viewer learns very little about her. While Mrs. Trump narrates the documentary, she never has a formal sit-down interview. In many ways, Melania does not reveal the First Lady as it shields her. She begins and ends Melania as a mystery.

We do learn a few things about Mrs. Trump. We learn that she not only loves Michael Jackson music but met him once, describing him as nice. She reveals that her favorite song out of many in his catalog is Billie Jean. She even sings a bit for us, though she quickly dismisses the idea that she is doing a version of Carpool Karaoke. 

I think some of the musical choices in Brett Ratner's documentary are more revelatory. Melania starts with sweeping images of Mar-a-Lago set to the Rolling Stones' Gimme Shelter. Frankly, I found that a very odd choice. It does not help that we hear The Crystals' Then He Kissed Me playing when the-now President and First Lady are returning from one of the three inaugural balls that they attended. I do not know if either or both Ratner and Trump were deliberately echoing Goodfellas or not. There is a strange blending of the elegant pre-Inaugural candlelight dinner with Chase from Midnight Express. 

What exactly were Trump and Ratner attempting to do here? My own sense is that both of them are signaling a certain defiance against all who oppose them. 

Melania features sometimes amusing moments. There is Hervé Pierre, forever fluttering about with his couturier frocks. The film sometimes attempts to show a more home movie feel with presumably footage shot by Mrs. Trump's father Viktor Knavs. A more unintentionally amusing moment is when the once and future First Lady examines some of the dishes for the candlelight dinner. We see a golden egg almost floating on a dish. One wonders if Mrs. Trump had raided Willy Wonka's factory. 

More unintentionally amusing moments come from President Trump. We see and hear him sporadically. He's still rather boastful and slightly conspiratorial. He brags about how his electoral college vote was the biggest (it isn't). He also believes that the College Football National Championship was deliberately scheduled to overshadow his inauguration. To be fair, other unintentionally amusing moments came from other political figures. We were not shown former President George W. Bush's eccentric reaction to things; we did see then-President Joe Biden look a mix amused and confused by the goings-on. We also saw then-Vice President Kamala Harris clearly unamused by the same goings-on. 

The few times Barron Trump popped up were also interesting. We saw him shake hands with former President Biden and even egg on the crowd at the Capital One Arena where the Inaugural Parade was shifted due to the weather. Barron Trump never spoke. Those moments: the dinners, the celebrations, the elaborate choreography of ceremony, were interesting. 

A little-noted moment in Melania should be in my view. Before the inauguration, Mrs. Trump had a private meeting with Aviva Siegel. She was one of the hundreds of Israelis that Hamas abducted during the horrors of October 7. At the time, her husband Keith was still being held prisoner. As Mrs. Siegel described her experiences and hopes for the safe return of her husband it is hard not to be moved by her story. We see Mrs. Trump hug her and tell her that her husband will bring Keith Siegel back*. As she leaves in the elevator, it looks as if Mrs. Trump's brittle veneer cracks slightly. Melania Trump seems close to tears as the elevator door closes. 

My sense is that Mrs. Trump never wants to be seen as vulnerable. She would rather be seen discussing her initiatives with French First Lady Brigitte Macron or Jordan's Queen Rania. The only time that Mrs. Trump acknowledges the camera is right before she is escorted into the Capitol Rotunda for the formal Inauguration. Turning slightly mischievously to face us, she says, "Here we go again". She wants to present herself as a confident woman. "I will move forward with purpose, and of course, with style," she closes as Sunny plays while her official White House picture is taken. However, I think that even her harshest critics will find the Siegel section impactful.

"Nobody like here. She's difficult but nobody like her," now-President Trump tells Ratner as Melania closes. He adds that he is joking. One thing is certain: Melania Trump is set on controlling her image and narrative. She is in the history books, for good or ill. Melania does not reveal much if anything that Mrs. Trump does or does not want revealed. She begins and ends Melania as a Slovenian Sphinx. 

*We are told in an on-screen postscript that Keith Siegel was released alive.

DECISION: C+

Riefenstahl: A Review (Review #2100)

RIEFENSTAHL

"What did the President know, and when did he know it?" This question from Senator Howard Baker during the Watergate hearings could be altered for German filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl. What did Leni Riefenstahl know, and when did she know it? Riefenstahl, the last living witness to Nazi cinema, spent nearly sixty years denying or deflecting her role in the Third Reich. The documentary Riefenstahl now looks at this most controversial of filmmakers. 

Culled from her personal archives, Riefenstahl paints a dark, ominous portrait of the director of Triumph of the Will and Olympia. While even her fiercest detractors grudgingly acknowledged her visual artistry, she is still damned for her association with the Nazi regime. However, how close was it? The contradictions, deflections and defensiveness that Leni Riefenstahl had throughout her life make it hard to fully defend or fully condemn her.

Riefenstahl does not cover the entirety of her 101 years. Instead, it lets others do most of the talking. That is not to say that Leni herself does not get a chance to speak. The documentary features more than just footage from various talk shows and interviews that she gave. Riefenstahl kept meticulous records of telephone calls from all sorts of people. We get to hear her speak with supporters, enraged that she was in their eyes set up on a German television show. We also get to hear her rapport with Albert Speer, whom she kept in contact with after his release from prison for crimes against humanity.

The Riefenstahl/Speer telephone excerpts are brief. However, I think they give more insight into Riefenstahl's involvement and worldview than perhaps Riefenstahl director Andres Veiel intended. Both Speer and Riefenstahl insisted to their dying day that they were apolitical figures caught up in the Nazi machinery. Both had celebrated postwar lives. Both attempted to whitewash or at minimum downplay their roles in the Third Reich. Both of them, with the evidence we have now, probably knew much more than they let on. 

However, can Leni Riefenstahl really be blamed for the execution of Jews in Konskie, Poland? In one of Riefenstahl's most damning charges, the events in one Polish town make her a de facto murderess. When the Nazis first invaded Poland, Leni Riefenstahl went as a war correspondent. The story as related in Riefenstahl states that she objected to some men being made to dig a ditch (presumably their own graves). If memory serves right, she told the troops that "the Jews have to be removed from there", as they were a distraction to her camera. This direction was translated as "Get rid of the Jews". That in turn led to the German soldiers shooting the men right then and there. In narrator Andrew Bird's conclusion, "If this statement is true, Riefenstahl's set direction played a role in the death of the Jews in Konskie".

This, I think, is shaping things to fit an idea. It is similar to the Derek Bentley case. In that situation, nineteen-year-old Bentley and an accomplice were caught robbing a warehouse. The police officer demanded his accomplice's weapon. In the confusion and chaos, Bentley told his accomplice, "Let him have it!". However, did Bentley mean "Hand the gun over" to the officer, or did he mean "shoot him"? That phrase, "let him have it" could mean either. Context matters.

The same applies to Riefenstahl's "the Jews have to be removed from there" statement. If we accept what Riefenstahl appears to propose, we are meant to believe that Leni Riefenstahl basically ordered the men killed and/or knew that such a thing would happen. This, to me at least, is a very dicey thing to prove. There is no direct evidence that Leni Riefenstahl knew that the men would be killed at her mere request. Riefenstahl might have genuinely thought that they would be moved out of camera shot but not be literally shot. Moreover, given how virulently antisemitic and anti-Slavic many Nazi military officers and troops were, I doubt that they would need one woman's directions to kill anyone. To place such a heavy burden on Riefenstahl seems a bit of a stretch.

There are other elements about Riefenstahl's World War II activities that are much more damning. The most damning is her use of Sinti and Roma prisoners as extras for her film Tiefland (Lowlands). She claimed that after the war, the Sinti and Roma extras (most of them children) were alive and well and that she had met them all. The truth was that many were murdered in the Holocaust. Surprisingly, this was given less attention than what happened in Konskie. 

She is apparently also blamed for the fate of one of her Olympia cameramen. Wilhelm "Willy" Zielke, a director in his own right, filmed the Olympia opening prologue. After he completed his part, Zielke was forcibly sterilized and went mad. Somehow, this is also all Leni Riefenstahl's fault. I cannot remember why Zielke's awful fate was somehow Riefenstahl's doing. I remember being astounded that such a thing could be put wholly and squarely at her feet.

It is not as if Leni Riefenstahl does not make a case against herself with awful moments and comments. Using unaired footage from The Wonderful, Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl, she tells the interviewer about her tense relationship with Joseph Goebbels. She uses the phrase, "All the affairs he had with me...", which the interviewer himself had to point out to her that it sounded odd. She, if memory serves right, chuckles and says that she misspoke. This again could be an accidental choice of words, as "affairs" could mean something other than sexual. It does come across as funny, as does when she fervently denies a close relationship with the bad doctor.

Later in Riefenstahl, we hear her own words say something downright ghastly. Facing yet another defamation lawsuit over the Tiefland filming, she tells someone over the recorded telephone, "I wouldn't say Gypsies have to lie, but you have to decide who's more likely to commit perjury: me or the Gypsies".  The joy she expresses while watching footage of Triumph of the Will is to me still more alarming than any suggestion that Leni Riefenstahl had a hand in the Final Solution. It does, to me, suggest that she is truthful in one element: her total blindness (willing or not) to how her work is connected to total human evil. 

Riefenstahl has excellent editing that I imagine would have made her proud. This is especially true in the various montages of her aging via her vast photographic collection. The use of various past television and documentary appearances, along with footage of her films, is well-crafted to give us this look at one of the most controversial and contradictory cinematic figures. She is shown as permanently defensive, bristling at the notion that Triumph of the Will or Olympia were "Pied Piper films", luring the German volk into a pact with the Devil. 

However, I think one of the most revealing parts in Riefenstahl may be an unexpected one. It is when she is on a German talk show with Elfriede Kretschmer, another German who was also of her generation. Unlike Riefenstahl, however, Kretschmer dismisses Riefenstahl's suggestions that she could have been unaware of what the Third Reich was up to. She also condemns Riefenstahl for having made her films. Riefenstahl defends herself by essentially saying that people like Kretschmer have the benefit of hindsight. Leni later gives an impassioned defense of herself and her generation, that they have not fully healed from what happened. The audience applauds Riefenstahl's monologue, with Riefenstahl later playing recordings of supportive callers.

I think, in the end, this is why Leni Riefenstahl still holds such power over people to love or hate her. She, I think, has become the embodiment of and to that generation of Germans who feel perpetually blamed and condemned for the horrors of the Third Reich. Leni Riefenstahl is so much: a cinematic craftsman, a manipulative liar, someone who probably supported National Socialism but who also may have been made a scapegoat for everything that the Nazis did. Riefenstahl makes the case that she bears responsibility for her actions during the Nazi era and went to her grave not accepting it. Exactly how much responsibility, how much blame she can and should bear, however, is a harder question.

"I am not responsible for what happened", we hear Leni Riefenstahl say near the end of Riefenstahl. She did not send people to the gas chambers. She, however, hesitated on calling her association with Hitler a mistake. Riefenstahl is a strong introduction to this figure, a woman of evil to some, an artistic innovator to others. Perhaps the truth is that in the final analysis, Leni Riefenstahl can be both. 

DECISION: B+

Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation. A Review

TRUMAN AND TENNESSEE: AN INTIMATE CONVERSATION

Had the term existed in their time, Truman Capote and Tennessee Williams would have probably referred to each other as a frenemy. These two openly gay Southern writers respected and detested the other. They both loved and hated in equal measure. Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation, puts these two titans of American literature as friends, rivals, and what one was to the other.

The documentary uses archival footage and off-screen interviews. We also have their personal writings read by Jim Parsons as Truman Capote and Zachary Quinto as Tennessee Williams. Tennessee Williams and Truman Capote were more alike than merely their shared heritage. Both of them, for example, had drunk parents: Williams his father, Capote his mother. Both of them found inspiration in the writings that they discovered early in their lives: Moby Dick for Capote, the works of Chekov for Williams.

Their lives continued to have parallels as they built up their literary careers. Despite being Southern to their core, their great success came once they hit New York City. Capote loved the Big Apple and loathed Gore Vidal. Williams was the opposite: have great respect and admiration for Vidal but finding New York less to his liking. The two wordsmiths soon hit the big time with their works, celebrated and feted by high society and critics. 

Those critics, however, would eventually, perhaps inevitably, turn against them. Capote and Williams were left slightly dumbfounded on how they went out of fashion. Things got worse when both lost their long-term partners and started flitting from one pretty young thing to another. They also fell into their separate addictions to booze and pills. 

Truman and Tennessee had a curious relationship, part admiration, part irritation. Through their letters and words, we find that they could be very bitchy about the other. Williams had no issue referring to his frenemy as "Miss Capote". Tennessee, according to Truman, "is not intelligent". To be fair, Tennessee unlike Truman was wise enough to not try and break into his frenemy's home and get caught. Eventually, the adoration both public and private faded from view for these two figures. Truman Capote outlived Tennessee Williams by merely a year and a half, Capote dead at 59, Williams at 71.

I wonder, in retrospect, if Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation went a bit overboard in painting a portrait of parallel lives. Director Lisa Immordino Vreeland certainly wants to show how they both were almost twins. Everything from their family histories to their eventual fall into addiction is shown as being similar and happening at similar times. I do not think that Capote and Williams were mirroring the other person. These two were different and distinct people. As such, I wonder if Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation is less about what one thought of the other. It is more like it is trying to make a case that somehow, Capote and Williams are almost the same because they lived the same series of situations. 

A major flaw is the voiceover work. Jim Parsons sounded like a thinner-voiced Jim Parsons. He sounded nothing like Truman Capote. Especially in the beginning, Parsons felt too forced in trying to come across as Capote. I can see how Truman & Tennessee was not attempting to do mimicry. However, I think Parsons struggled to sound like Capote. As such, I never heard Capote's distinct voice both artistically and vocally. Quinto was better as Tennessee Williams, his Southern drawl closer to Williams' voice.

It was easier to hear Williams' words than Capote's words because Quinto sounded better than Parsons. That is not to say that Zachary Quinto sounded exactly like Tennessee Williams. He just sounded better than Parsons. 

Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation at times is a bit too fixated on making their lives parallel ones. This is especially true when we see both of them interviewed by David Frost on separate occasions. I do not think that it would be surprising that both of these writers would be interviewed on the same program. Again, whether Truman & Tennessee wanted to push the idea that they were going through the same situations I cannot say for certain. It just looked that way.

I hope that people do not think that I disliked the documentary. On the contrary, for I thought that Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation is a well-crafted documentary that will give viewers good insight into these figures. I just do not think that because both were gay Southern writers that they are parallels. Each was his own man. Each was creative. Their friendship, at times their cattiness towards the other, is an interesting subject. Truman & Tennessee: An Intimate Conversation does much to bring their own stories to the viewer. It is a conversation worth listening in on.

DECISION: B+

Paris is Burning: A Review (Review #2000)

PARIS IS BURNING

Long before Madonna told us to "strike a pose and Vogue", there was an underground world doing just that. It was a world filled with glamour and outrageousness. Director Jennie Livingston takes into the demimonde of fierce queens who throw shade to their rivals in Paris Is Burning, capturing the decadence and tragedy of this formerly hidden subculture. 

It is New York City, 1987. We learn that to be black, gay and male is a hard burden in the world. However, there is a place, a very special place, where those are not impediments to taking the spotlight. That world is the New York ball circuit. These balls are where black and Hispanic drag queens can strut their stuff for trophies and recognition. The various personalities have something of a sponsorship with various "Houses", a formed family that can be considered something like a gay street gang. The houses provide training and guidance for these warriors of glamour.

One of the queens of the New York ball scene is Pepper LaBeija, who is the "Mother" of House of LaBeija. There are other Houses, like House of Xtravaganza. The various competitions at the balls are a wide-ranging set. There are those who aspire to be like the characters on the television soap opera Dynasty. However, there are other categories, some quite surprising to those on the outside. A group of ball participants compete in a Military category, where one competitor tells us, "Simple wins". The realness (to be able to pass for whatever you are dressing as) is a major factor in winning various competitions.

It is not just about the most beautiful or glamorous. It is also about being the most authentic looking. This world of balls has their own nomenclature. "Throwing shade" is knocking out your competitor with subtle insults. Being able to "read" someone is trash talking someone but with specific quips. If you want to have a dance off, you have to do some voguing (the name coming from Vogue magazine). 

Two years later, we learn a few things. This world has now attracted such figures as Fran Lebowitz, Geoffrey Holder and Gwen Vernon, who love the voguing. However, some old school ballers like Dorian Corey see these changes with a disdainful eye, preferring the glamour over the realness. We also learn that Venus Xtravangaza, a young aspiring ball queen, was murdered. Venus had been dead for four days when found under a bed in a sleazy motel, strangled.

The world of Paris is Burning is a fascinating one, almost like an alternate universe. The various figures that are profiled would probably be quickly rejected in the straight world. They would especially be rejected in a black or Hispanic macho world. Yet here, the various Houses could be seen as a variation of street gangs. You are loyal to them. They take the place of your biological family. The rumbles are not done on the street. They are done on the dance floor. I think one of the participants interviewed even said that walking at the ball (going down to compete) was like getting jumped. 

The viewer sees the ball contestants strip away from the stereotype of drag queens attempting to look as glamorous, if not as outrageous, as one can. Yes, there are those who do go all-out in elegant to elaborate costumes. However, there are also competitions where it is more about how much you mirror the world that rejects you than about how elegant you appear. I think many, me included, would be surprised to learn that some of the house members can win trophies for looking downright bourgeoise. Who would think that one could win a drag ball competition for looking like a businessman on Wall Street?

It is almost as if the world of Paris is Burning is a reaction and mockery of the world that has excluded the participants. Even in the drag world, the black and Hispanic men felt exclusion due to their race. Here, they created their own universe, one where they not only fit in but rule. The world bends to their will. Here, they can both integrate and be separate from the straight world. Paris is Burning not only captures this world of men strutting their stuff for the world to marvel at. It is an affirmation of themselves and an open mockery of those who reject them due to race or sexual orientation. In some ways, the drag balls are an act of resistance, a successor to cakewalks danced to mock dominant white culture.

Paris is Burning probably did not create some of the vernacular that is fully part of everyday American speech. I figure that perhaps it introduced it to a wider audience. Being able to "read" someone, delighting in "throwing shade" at a rival, these are things that we say without thinking where they came from. 

Paris is Burning is an extraordinary look into an almost lost world. While I figure that balls still exist, we saw at the end how they were coming out into the mainstream. Some of the old school ball members did not like it. The film also does not hide the tragedy and danger in this world. Venus Xtravaganza was the most extreme example, murdered during the filming. However, the specter of AIDS hangs over this world, which would claim some of the people interviewed. 

The men and women in Paris is Burning are fierce, fabulous and unafraid. They are masters and mistresses of throwing shade and not answering to anyone other than their housemates. 

DECISION: B+ (8/10)

Anita: Speaking Truth to Power. A Review

ANITA: SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER

In 2018, accusations against then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh became a fierce battle fought in the halls of Congress and in public spheres. Caught up in the maelstrom of the Me Too movement, then-Judge Kavanaugh was accused of sexual assault. The Congressional hearings had a woman accuse a man nominated to sit on the highest court of a sex crime. 

We have been here before. Twenty-seven years prior, another woman accused another man nominated to sit on the highest court of a sex crime. Anita Hill, the subject of the documentary Anita: Speaking Truth to Power, never accused now-Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of sexual assault. Instead, it was sexual harassment. Anita is a sympathetic portrait of the woman who nearly brought down a Supreme Court appointment. Perhaps therein lies the problem.

Anita opens with a surprising voicemail from Ginny Thomas, Justice Thomas' wife, asking Anita Hill for an apology. From here, Professor Hill tells of her experience pre-and-post testimony. She speaks on how she thought that the confirmation hearings and her own hearing would be nonpartisan. New York Times reporters Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson, authors of Strange Justice, a book about the hearings, are also interviewed. 

Professor Hill speaks about her family, who moved to Oklahoma to escape racism (her grandfather threatened with lynching). She also talks about the longest day when she gave her testimony. She found Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter very adversarial and Delaware Senator Joe Biden unhelpful. According to other interviewees in Anita, Utah Senator Orrin Hatch used race to get Judge Thomas angry about his treatment. This was all part of a Republican plan to shift the narrative from sex to race. Ultimately, Justice Thomas was confirmed, and both he and Professor Hill have moved on.

Hill's testimony was the catalyst for electing more women to the Senate, the sight of old white men questioning both Hill and Thomas about pubic hairs and "Long Dong Silver" too incendiary for some. Hill now continues her advocacy for women, with her long-term companion Chuck Malone beside her. 

One should watch Anita with an open mind. A whole generation has passed since now-Justice Thomas faced serious accusations that still haunt him and his reputation. However, Anita does not pretend to be even sided. Everyone speaking in the Freida Lee Mock documentary is clearly on Professor Hill's side. As such, Anita will not make a case that Hill's accusations were false or politically motivated. That is understandable in that Anita is about Hill's perspective. 

At times though, Anita seemed too worshipful of the subject. Near the end of the documentary, we hear actress Anika Nomi Rose recite a poem about Hill. I cannot remember if Professor Hill was in attendance. Even if she wasn't, including adoring poetry about the documentary's subject did strike me as both pretentious and grandiose. 

Anita, I think, should also be seen through new eyes. With the contentious Kavanaugh hearings now in the history books, I cannot help but wonder whether something John Carr, a longtime Hill friend and supporter, said. "This wasn't about the truth. It was about winning". Clearly this statement was meant to define the Thomas supporters who wanted to see him on the Court.

However, could that not equally apply to those who were determined to stop Thomas and later on Kavanaugh from interpreting legislation? Such an idea, as distasteful and shocking as it is, cannot be summarily dismissed. While I have not seen the two films based on the Thomas hearings (Strange Justice and Confirmation), I figure that they take the position that Clarence Thomas is guilty. Any accusation should be investigated, but an accusation is not proof that said accusation is true no matter who makes the accusations.

A great film can hopefully be made about the machinations behind political appointments. Anita is not that film, though I do not think that it aimed to be. Instead, it is about Anita Hill, catalyst for one of the biggest political fights of the twentieth century. I do not think we learned much about the person or about the hearings themselves. Anita is not as insightful about the subject as I had hoped. It is one-sided, though it all comes from her perspective, which her supporters agree with. 

I don't know if there will ever be a truly balanced take on the Clarence Thomas hearings. We have their own books (those from their supporters and champions are in my view suspect to bias). We have various documentaries: this and Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words (which I have not seen as of this writing).  Each deserves his or her own chance to state their case. It is the proper way.

DECISION: C- (4/10)

Sally: A Review (Review #1989)

SALLY

How to look over the life of a somewhat reluctant icon and heroine? You could deify her, turn her into a perfect goddess for future generations to worship. You could diminish her, focus on the negative aspects of her private life or attempt to give her feet of clay. Dr. Sally Ride, the subject of the documentary Sally, was many things: pioneer, scientist, lesbian. Sally does an excellent job covering her public, private and secret life, neither glorifying nor tarnishing this now legendary figure. 

Sally Ride loved science and tennis. These two loves gave her a leg up when NASA at long last decided that it would seek out both female and minority candidates to be astronauts. In 1978, 35 new applicants were accepted into the space program, including, and I quote, "six females, three blacks and one Oriental".

Sally, in using archival footage, does give us many such cringeworthy moments that reflect their time. 

Ride's excellent hand/eye coordination due to her tennis prowess, along with her extensive knowledge of physics, were a major component over why she was ultimately selected to be the first American woman in space. Another reason, not spoken of at the time, was how she did not appear to seek the limelight. This gave her an advantage over her closest rival, Judith Resnick, who did appear to be more eager to bask in the notoriety of being the first. Sally, however, reveals that Ride did want to be the first but wouldn't admit to it. 

Another thing that Dr. Ride could not admit to was about her homosexuality. While she did not keep it a total secret, she also was not about to wave pride flags around NASA. Sally reveals that the reasons for her closeted life were more complicated than mere social stigma. The entire Ride family was very closed up emotionally. Whenever Sally visited her parents, mother Joyce would greet her with, "Hello, oldest daughter," then go back into the house to do whatever she was doing prior. Ride also saw what happened to her friend and mentor, tennis legend Billie Jean King, when King was outed in a palimony suit. The ensuing scandal cost King millions in endorsements and legal fees. 

All those factors played into some of Ride's various decisions pre-and-post flight. That is not to say that Ride was some dour woman. Sally reveals that when on a jet when training, she let out enthusiastic cries of "WEE!" when the jet spun. Once STS-7 lifted off, her comment was, "This sure is fun". Becoming a historic figure, however, had its drawbacks. Her rejection of a bouquet of flowers when the Challenger returned caused an uproar. The constant celebrations drained her. The Challenger explosion, which killed among others her frenemy Resnick, all took their toll.

In all those years, Dr. Ride's relationship with Tam O'Shaughnessy was her rock. Their relationship was not perfect. O'Shaughnessy would have preferred that Ride be more open about their lives beyond just business partners. They made it work, somehow, until Dr. Ride's death. With her now gone, O'Shaughnessy is able to fully acknowledge her life partner. 

Sally is both portrait of a woman and metaphorical time capsule of women in flight. One fascinating bit of discovery in Sally has nothing to do with Ride herself. In the 1950's, there was thought of having women go into space before Valentina Tereshkova became the very first woman in space (Ride being the third overall). Again, via archival footage, Sally shows aviatrix Jerri Cobb being interviewed and stating that women were perfectly capable of being astronauts. This idea was pretty much dismissed by NASA and reenforced by the culture, which made films where female astronauts collapse emotionally.

Sally shows us that even in the early 1980's, some ideas still held. Footage from the press conference with Ride and her fellow astronauts show a particularly ghastly moment. One reporter asks Dr. Ride (she would quietly but firmly ask people to refer to her as either "Sally" or "Dr. Ride", but not "Miss"), "Now, Dr. Ride, during your training exercises as a member of this group, when there was a problem, when there was a funny glitch or whatever, how did you respond? Did you weep?". She was able to at most smile dismissively at these comments, deflecting to ask if her fellow crewmen did likewise. 

Sally Ride wanted to make history. She wanted to be the first. She was aware of the historic nature of being the first. She also was not keen on having her sexual orientation be one more "first". Ride was in a vague area when it came to her sexuality, neither fully out of nor fully in the closet. Sally, however, reveals that her reticence was due to a variety of factors. Shame was not one of them. She was just a pretty closed-up person, focused on the job, sometimes to the detriment of the personal. 

In between the various footage of Ride asking tough questions to NASA administrators over what happened to the Challenger or her delight at being Cap Com (the voice at Ground Control to the astronauts), we see and hear O'Shaughnessy going through the home that they shared. O'Shaughnessy looks through photos, including the few that they have of them together in private moments versus public engagements where they were not officially a couple. These, coupled with O'Shaughnessy's comments and interviews, are some of Sally's best moments. We get a glimpse into the woman behind the myth.

Sally has various interviews from the many people who worked and lived with Ride. There is her mother Joyce and sister Karen, better known as Bear, who is a Presbyterian minister and like her sister is a lesbian. We get interviews from one of Ride's former partners and her colleagues and friends. Each gives us their insight into this most private of public figures. The archival footage blends well with the interviews. A particularly strong blend is when NASA officials, flummoxed at a woman's specific needs, wonder exactly how many tampons Ride will need when going into space. The inclusion of a makeup kit and suggestion of one hundred tampons is something that everyone now can laugh about. Even Sally Ride via archival footage.

A touching moment near the end is when O'Shaughnessy reads out a letter from Mike Mullane, a former astronaut who trained with Ride and was dismissive of women as astronauts. He not only offers condolences to her on the death of her long-term partner but acknowledges that he was wrong. He also sees that Ride is a true and great heroine for his daughters to look up to. Mullane, who was one of Sally's on-screen interviews, does talk about how he made sexist jokes. He was not asked about the letter. Perhaps he did not know that O'Shaughnessy would read it. 

Sally is a respectful and more importantly insightful portrait of this legendary figure. It does not make her infallible. She was closed off emotionally to where her manner kept some at a distance; she was willing to have an extramarital affair. Like so many of us, Dr. Sally Ride was complex, sometimes contradictory. Sally looks into those complications and contradictions, a woman who was not emotional yet thrilled with glee at flying.

I do not know if, had she lived longer, she would want to be known as "the lesbian astronaut". It was enough to be known as "the first American woman astronaut", which she used to get more girls to pursue scientific interests. Dr. Sally Ride will remain an icon and heroine for all Americans. Sally is an excellent way to get as close to the woman as she could ever let anyone get.

DECISION: A- (9/10)

Thrilla: A Review

THRILLA

The COVID-19 pandemic hit everyone in many different ways. For Mike "Thrilla" Davila and Adam "Bomb" Collaride, it put both their business and championship dreams close to ending. The documentary Thrilla chronicles their joint struggles while giving us a background into the men themselves. Well-told albeit with a few hitches, Thrilla is a rarity in documentary filmmaking: a film that documents something.

Thrilla, the documentary notes, was filmed during the summer of 2020, a tumultuous time as the world was in panic over the COVID-19 virus among other things. Among those whose lives COVID-19 impacted are Mike Davila and Adam Collarile, jiu-jitsu fighters and newly established businessmen. While the world was in the grips of social distancing, Davila and Collarile were focused on getting Davila to make the required weight to compete in the Eddie Bravo Invitational, a Jui-jitsu competition in El Paso, Texas. Davila, whose nom de guerre is Thrilla, knows that winning the Invitational will be not just great for his and Collaride's Legends Martial Arts business. It will be a crowning achievement in his career.

When they arrive in El Paso, Davila is at 150 pounds, but he must get down to 145 with days if not hours to go.  That he is at 150 pounds is actually a major improvement from where Davila was seven weeks earlier, which was at 188 pounds. That means Davila has to lose 43 pounds in less than eight weeks, a daunting task even for a fit athlete. As Thrilla counts down the weeks, noting the impressive weight loss, we also see the inner strength that both Davila and his friend and business partner Collaride have.

We learn from them about their backgrounds: their struggles in bonding with their fathers, their determination to build up something not just for themselves but for others. Mike Davila at one-point remarks that he had get comfortable with being uncomfortable. Collaride, for his part, notes that Mike is a sweetheart but when he is on the mat, he's a killer. 

They had become friends over time, though Mike initially was a bit leery of how joyful Adam was. At long last, they work on opening Legends Martial Arts studio, getting help from families and friends to make their dream come true. Legends opens on February 8, 2020. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo orders all non-essential businesses to close March 22, 2020. Owing to the proximity of jiu-jitsu, Legends finds itself fighting for its life almost at birth. Davila and Collaride may be down, but by no means are they out. They keep working, keep training and push on. They push on with their business and push on with the tournament. Will Thrilla win in El Paso? Will Mike and Adam not just become legends but build a legacy for future legends?

Thrilla is a wonderful portrait of two men who are both competitors and brothers-in-arms in so many ways. The most obvious way is in competing in Jiu-jitsu, a field which Davila and Collaride are passionate about. They also, however, compete within themselves. Davila's fraught relationship with his own father, Collaride's determination to leave something good behind, all are showcased in Thrilla. 

The film is not just about these two men, but about the importance of friendship and loyalty. Adam, a strong jiu-jitsu fighter in his own right, will accompany Mike to Texas despite the New York COVID restrictions because Mike needs someone in his corner (COVID prevents an audience). There's more than poetry to that analogy. These men, despite their different personalities, know that they have each other's backs. Mike, Adam, another instructor by name of Steve Ramos, and all those who go to Legends: they are more than training their bodies. In a sense, they are training their hearts and souls. 

It takes a great skill to make a weekly countdown of weight loss almost tense. Credit to director Ricardo Aguirre, Jr. for managing to build up suspense as we get a weekly countdown. Davila goes from 188 in Week One to 179 in Week Two, 172 in Week Three, until we get to 12 hours before the official weigh in. The tension and suspense are built up so well, and by this time we know and care about Mike and Adam, that when we see the disparity between Mike's weight scale and the tournament weight scale, we are as equally flummoxed and frustrated when they do not match.

As a side note, I marveled at not just how much weight Davila was able to lose in a relatively short amount of time given how I have twenty pounds that stubbornly won't shift after two years. I was amazed that Mike Davila is at the time of the tournament 37 years old. 

Intentionally or not, Aguirre, Jr. in Thrilla made a film about more than two men training for a jiu-jitsu tournament and working to keep their new business alive amidst the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic. He made a film about friendship, loyalty and how a man can measure his strength from more than whom he can defeat on the mat. 

Davila and Collarile are business partners and friends, but they are also distinct personalities. Even on how they came up with the name Legends for their workout studio appear to have different origin stories. I believe Mike said that it came due in part to their proximity to Sleepy Hollow, trading in on the Legend of the Headless Horseman. 

However, in their stories of where Legends came from, we see their life philosophies come through. "Everyone wants to be a legend", Adam says, keeping to the idea of the importance of leaving something behind. Mike, for his part, notes on the importance of what comes between your birth and your death. Referencing how headstones are inscribed, he says, "That small dash is your legend". Despite any cliches about fighters, these two muscular and fit athletes are quite poetic.

Thrilla has one or two issues that stick out. A particularly embarrassing moment is when on-screen text notes Governor Cuomo's decree. It reads that Cuomo "orderd" (sic) businesses considered non-essential to shut down in order to combat the spread of COVID-19. I also think that Thrilla is not strictly speaking about Mike "Thrilla" Davila, so it is a bit of a misnomer. Adam "Bomb" Collarile is just as much a part of Thrilla as Thrilla is, so I was a bit puzzled why the film was named Thrilla. Granted, these are minor details, and hopefully the misspelled word is fixable. It just looks bad.

"Opening the gym has always been a dream, and dreams come slow", Adam observes halfway through Thrilla, emphasizing the last word. Dreams, however slow or small they seem to others, are worth fighting for. Mike "Thrilla" Davila and Adam "Bomb" Collarile, two decent men well profiled in Thrilla, show that legends are not born but made, and made with others beside you.

DECISION: B+