Not Seinfeld's "Maestro"...But An Inevitable Simulation....

 

 

Bradley Cooper's film, "Maestro" is getting a lot of buzz.

A gentleman named Matthew Behrens posted his point of view this week.

My point of view....regarding his point of view.....follows his point of view....

 

Really disappointed in viewing as a holiday movie, Maestro (apart from the wonderful performance of Carey Mulligan), since the film seemed more about Bradley Cooper (vanity piece, ie, wow, the fake nose, the look, the accent!) than Leonard Bernstein, the composer, conductor and lefty in all his nuance and complexity.

Mostly, I found the film to tell a story completely divorced from the dynamic history of which Bernstein was a part (including what I thought was a missed opportunity to look at his being gay in the context of the soon to emerge LGBTQ liberation movement that was percolating during the 40s and 50s despite the significant risks of being "exposed")

How could this film completely ignore 50 years of history in which Bernstein played a part, from being more or less blacklisted in the early 1950s and having his passport revoked (and then more or less giving in with a loyalty letter) to his support for civil rights and opposition to the war against the people of Vietnam?

Not a single mention of the New York fundraising events for the civil rights movement or for the anti-war movement (“Broadway for Peace”), the latter where a song by Bernstein was premiered with him at the piano accompanying Barbra Streisand. The anti-Semitic Nixon hated Bernstein; the war criminal president requested the rather militaristic “1812 Overture” for his 1973 inauguration; Bernstein and others arranged a counter-concert at Washington’s National Cathedral, scheduled at precisely the same time as Nixon’s, but presented Haydn’s “Mass in Time of War”. Now THAT would be a fine movie moment contrasting the two concerts.

The film also fails to explore the role of Bernstein as an energetic member of a generation of composers (Aaron Copland, Florence Price, Marc Blitzstein, Hugo Friedhofer, among others) who redefined musical theatre and film scoring (when he was at Harvard in 1939, Bernstein organized and led a performance of Marc Blitzstein's controversial working class musical, The Cradle Will Rock.)

It also fails to explore (only mentions) the revolutionary role he played with his educational concert programming; for over 25 years Young People's Concerts comprised the most influential series of music education programs ever produced for prime-time television. As one of his kids wrote: "All over America, families gathered in their living rooms in front of their big, bulky black & white TV sets, and watched Leonard Bernstein tell them all about classical music. I can't tell you how many people come up to me now, everywhere I go in the States, and they say something like: "Oh, I used to watch your father's Young People's Concerts on TV, and I've been a music lover ever since!" And an equally large number of orchestra musicians come up to me and say, "I watched the Young People's Concerts when I was a kid, and that's why I'm a musician today!"

It also would have been fascinating to explore his mixed feelings working on West Side Story and On the Waterfront, among other pieces, alongside snitches who turned in (with often lethal consequences) the names of fellow artists to witch-hunting committees (you know the ones, Kazan, Robbins et al.) The film also ignores the infamous Black Panther fundraiser held at the Bernsteins’ upscale residence (later condemned by Tom Wolfe as “radical chic.” Montealegre sharply condemned the response in a letter to The New York Times, writing: "The frivolous way in which it was reported as a 'fashionable' event is ... offensive to all people who are committed to humanitarian principles of justice.")

Bernstein's FBI file began filling up in the 1940s as he got involved in progressive causes like peace and civil rights, and it continued with his involvement in the civil rights movement, Vietnam War protests, nuclear disarmament and AIDS advocacy.

It also erases the politics of Felicia, who was the first chair of the Women’s Division of the New York Civil Liberties Union, \was arrested at an anti-war protest in Washington in 1972, co-authored a 1974 report to the New York State parole system with Civil Rights leaders including Coretta Scott King, and collaborated with Amnesty International in the wake of Augusto Pinochet’s 1973 coup in Chile, where she was raised. The film makes much of her Chilean background but fails when it most counts.

That said, there are some marvelous moments where you see how Bernstein got caught up in the music he conducted and became one with the score. Maybe Netflix will give Bernstein his proper due one day. IMHO, this film didn't.

 

 

this review of "Maestro" and the comments 'reviewing' the review brings at least one unavoidable 'inevitable' into focus.....

the classic, if blunt, axiom...."opinions are like elbows and assholes....everybody's got em...."

and Cooper's artistic decision (and his prerogative, by the way) to portray, let's call it, a single chapter in the very multi layered life of the larger than life, real life maestro is inevitably going to draw fire from those whose 'go to' is lasering in on what ain't....as opposed to what is....

(oldie but goodie....how many bluegrass musicians does it take to change a light bulb?....two....one to change the bulb...the other to bitch about it being electric....)

Behrens offers an obviously detailed, admittedly articulate personal opinion (again, we must, in fairness, refer back to 'elbows and...') as to the what "ain't" in this movie.

But those in the comment thread who climb aboard either the caring "love it, darling" or classic Costanza "can'tstandya!" trains, especially like those, including Behrens himself, who go to great lengths to praise or condemn in lengthy detail, miss an important, if inconvenient, truth that is easily, and often, missed.

Once again....elbows....

I developed, what in hindsight was, an interesting habit during my last few years of doing talk radio.

Essentially telling listeners who openly criticized my shows to fuck off.

But not for the reason that one might instantly assume having read that last sentence.

Yeah, I can be a cocky little imp, but I never fool myself into thinking, let alone believing, that I'm without flaw, smarter than anyone and/or incapable of gaining from other's points of view.

I leave that mutation of character to clinical narcissists and sociopaths.

And presumptive GOP nominees for President.

But that's redundant.

The 'eff off' response, on my part, was always, and only, triggered not by content....but by attitude.

If a listener chose to engage me in discussion/debate about whatever issue was on the table in the moment, I not only welcomed it, I encouraged it. That is, after all, what healthy, useful, non-masturbatory talk radio is, theoretically, all about.

And doing a talk radio show expecting, even only allowing, to hear solely from people who agree with the host is neither intelligent nor professional.

It's egotistical. Arrogant. Possibly destructive. Even dangerous. And certainly embarrassing.

In other words, makes for lousy radio....a great red cap rally....but lousy radio.

And even if the back and forth got a little hot and bothered, I kept a firm hand on the wheel to insure that we never went off the cliff resulting from allowing that wheel to be yanked too far left...or right.

When and where did Mr. 'hey, thanks for your call...now fuck off' make an appearance.

When the caller decided to use 'the issue' as an excuse to harass, hassle, even try to hang the host.

"you know....your show would be a lot better if......"

Or the more articulate, erudite, always enlightening....

"you suck, man...."

Gotta love the American skill with a Thesaurus, ya know?

And what, one might ask at this point, is the difference between hot and bothered disagreement on an issue and crudely voiced condemnation of a show, and the host, itself?

Inviting callers to call in and speak up on the issues is what the show is for and is (what) I asked for.

The content, approach, style, method and/or skill with which I presented said show?

Hey....who asked ya?

Yeah, yeah, everybody's entitled to their opinion and all that other yada yada blah blah bromide bullshit that has become in 'made great again' America an excuse...a blank check....to suspend the rules of respect and courtesy and ratchet up the asshole-ness to DefDumb1.

You want to go toe to toe, cheek to cheek, mano y mano on the tingly and turbulent topics of our time....call in and let's bat those bitches back and forth.

You don't like me or the way I do what I do?

Flip your 'blowhard bully' switch to off and go get yourself your own fucking talk show.

I'll be both honored, and locked and loaded, to be your first caller.

Bradley Cooper made a movie about Leonard Bernstein.

It tells only a small part of the remarkable life of a very complicated human being.

See it. Don't see it.

Discuss, debate, even argue on the topics Cooper illustrates...bi-sexuality in the 1950's...the impact of 'classical music' on, then, more traditional Broadway productions....the challenges of marriage between two very unique and individual personalities....even the long lost art (malady) of chain smoking.....

You don't like Cooper....or his use of a fake nose....or his choice to focus on one facet of a mucho multi faceted life?

Thought I was gonna say "fuck off", didn't ya?

Not my place.

That's Mr. Cooper's prerogative and/or pleasure.

Me?

Here's my two cents.

Go make your own fucking movie.

 

 

 

The Glass of 2024

 

America is big on conspiracies and mysteries and who dunnits these days.

A case might easily be made that one of the more likely reasons for this surge in solving is the uncontrollable chaos of the political section of the peanut gallery. Mere mortals have a tendency to seek out things they can accomplish or achieve or...wait for it...solve....when other things are beyond their reach...or skill sets.

Most especially when those "other things" include little this and that things like, say, the future of democracy as we know it.

Here's a nuclear Rubic's level puzzle...that first appeared almost a decade ago, popped up again almost four years ago and is slowly but surely rearing its Whack A Mole head once again as the Benny Hill meets Monty Python meets Stephen King shit show that passes for a "Presidential" campaign down shifts into full fast and furious.

To lighten the dark tragedy of it, imagine, for a moment, the next few sentences in the voice of Jerry Seinfeld....

 "....what is the DEAL...with Ted Cruz?...."

"....what has HAPPENED....to Lindsey Graham?..."

and a new fly in the original ointment, buzzing in just in the past few days....

 "....Chris Sununu said WHAT?...."

For those unclear, unsure, confused and/or disconnected from the 'state of the Union' over the past almost decade, here's a Cliff Notes 'splaining that even Ricky Ricardo would comprende'..

Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham, currently United States "Senators" (Cruz from Texas, Graham from South Carolina) were arguably the most vocal, of dozens, hundreds, of loud vocalists in the, then, Republican Party of 2016 who were convinced, to hear them actually tell it (which you can easily do by some Google of them vocalizing at the time) that Donald Trump (then a joke who became a serious candidate faster than you can say 'we keep the White House in tippy top shape') was not only a joke as a candidate but a clear and present danger to the democracy, the nation, hell, the whole world...if it was 'put in his hands' (the whole, wide world, as a matter of fact) in the form of the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania.

Trump, of course, 'articulately and eruditely' responded with the graciousness, maturity and intelligence that that 'whole world' has to come know and dread.

Give or take 75 million 'Americans' who, to paraphrase Master Yoda, "a fucking clue, they have not".

Trump trash talked Cruz's wife and essentially accused his late father of being directly involved in the removal of John F. Kennedy's skull with a 6.5 caliber cartridge in November of 1963.

Meanwhile, the orange wonder who made "The Apprentice" sure to win a Peabody Award alluded to Graham's 'manhood' in as close as one can get without letting 'fag' slip into the sentence construction.

And, at the time (2016) Trump assessed the lovely Lindsey's mahhvelous medulla.

“He’s one of the dumbest human beings I’ve ever seen,” Trump said.

Fast forward to 2023. (Let alone 2020).

Both Cruz and Graham would throw themselves in front of a bus (campaign or other wise) to give their lives in sacrifice to their king, their monarch, hell, practically their Pope.

Pope Orange Julius the First. Has a certain hip snap to it, don't ya think?

And the newest WTF? in a long,long....very, very, very long...line of those "Republicans" who have not only become loyalists of the first order, but have also, tragically, developed what could prove to be a fatal drinking problem....a seemingly incurable addiction to orange Kool Aid....

...the brand new member of the "Are You Effin Kiddin' Me Club"....the current 'Republican' Governor of New Hampshire, Chris Sununu.

Who, as recently as this past August, was not only being touted as a fresh, clean, mature and intelligent possible candidate for the White House gig himself, but came (comes) from a long line of "traditional" Republicans, not the least being his father John who was New Hampshire's Guv in the 80's and served as George H.W. Bush's chief of staff.

Sununu, when asked this past week who he would vote for in 2024 if that election is a sad and soggy rematch between Joe Biden and the orange wonder who made "The Apprentice" sure to win a Peabody Award, answered as follows....

“I’m a Republican.”

For those who didn't get translation card or a pair of those 3D glasses they give away in the lobby so you can see what the hell is going on, those three words are stunning not for what they say but, rather for what they don't.

They don't say "I will not vote for Donald Trump."

Sununu's side step of the inevitable wave of WTF? consists of his repeated, oft expressed belief that Trump will, in fact, most, even very, likely not actually end up being the candidate next year.

The problem, of course, with words like "most" and "very" is that they leave a lot of room for "oh...yeah....well, what do you know....I was wrong...."

And it does nothing to ease the fears that tens of millions have that the historically skilled used car salesman who wants to "use the military to take care of those who oppose the President" in his second term will actually wake up the morning after Election Day to the hysterical cheers of tens of millions of others who have given him that second term.

"Most" and "very" likely won't be the candidate"...is like assuring the parents of a sixteen year old girl that they shouldn't be too concerned, that their daughter is only "a little bit" pregnant.

Waffles are more common on Capitol Hill than they are at all the IHops on the planet. What makes this particular waffling so dark is that it's not coming from an obvious gutless sycophant "Texan" who would turn in their mother to curry the favor of the king....or their wife who was trash talked...or their father who had absolutely nothing to do with killing JFK.

Or a South Carolina sweet magnolia who screamed so loud and hysterically in 2016 about how the sky would fall if Don Corleorange wasn't stopped by Barzini that Chicken Little, himself, urged the lilting Lindsay to "ah say, ah say, ah say, ya'll calm down a little there, boy...."

The waffling is coming from a guy who has come off, at least up until the last few days, as a fresh, clean, mature and intelligent possible candidate who recognizes what a completely inept, psychologically damaged pile of both flotsam and jetsam the currently presumptive nominee is.

Yet, there he is. Not provably saying that he's "fer" Pope Julius.

But not saying the word "agin'", neither.

Write that one down as "genuinely disappointing".

And, for the time being, qualified for status as "....next....on Unsolved Mysteries"....

As far as gutless sycophant Rafael....and sweet honey Graham cracker are concerned?

Absolutely no mystery "a tall".

It's simply a matter of shattered glass.

Seven years ago, as it became apparent that the "joke" that was the "candidacy" of Trump was, like the most persistent and infuriating weed, starting to take serious root, Cruz and Graham (along with dozens of "good, honest, "for the people" "Republicans) recognized that it was time to stop putzing around and get serious about letting the "we, the people" that enjoy shovelfuls of their particular brand of horseshit that they needed to wake up, smell the Orange and put an end to running along the bandwagon at all, let alone climbing aboard.

And it wasn't because the gutless gang was all that offended, even bothered, by the "straight talk" (read: blunt, crude, offensive, foul mouthed demagoguery) that MAGAboy was spewing out by the Tweet tonnage.

In fact, a lot of the actual 'agenda' underneath the used toilet paper that Trump wrapped it in was the kind of agenda that the Right Wing Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight had dreamed of for decades, if not generations, from the garden variety "tax cuts for the rich and fuck the middle class" and "put Christ not only back in Christmas but in everything else from sea to shining sea"...but also the more insidious, even puritanical, sexist, ageist, racist sewage that had been, ostensibly, put in the bottle and corked by the "advancement" of the 'God fearin' carnival disguised as a 'civilization' known as "America" in the post World War II years.

It's just that Cruz and Graham and their assorted sidekicks modeled after Curly, Moe and Larry knew they dare not pull the cork out of that bottle, fully aware that to do so would result in 'general election' backlashes that would do precisely the opposite of what they hoped and prayed for...and dreamed of.

Not returning things to those thrilling days of narrow minded, tunnel visioned, don't even think about wearing short shorts yesteryear. 

But a forward surge of 'liberalism' that would make (in their eyes) Sodom and Gomorrah look like a backyard BBQ at Joel Osteen's profanely palatial testament to how the Old Testament doused liberally (pun unintended but a chortle, nevertheless) with gullibility was a recipe for riches beyond even the master snake oil sales staffs wildest dreams.

Revelations, it turned out, wasn't just a chapter in the good book.

And one of those revelations that finally found their way into the moist mush medullas of Ted and Lindsay (and Moe, Larry and Curly, oh my) was that they didn't have to pull the cork out.

Donald had already done that.

And it not only wasn't resulting in his being condemned as a charlatan, false prophet, even Anti-Christ.

It ended up resulting in a four year lease on the big white building at 1600...

Banishment from the Garden? 

Hell, he was even celebrated for grabbing Eve's pussy.

How d'ya like them apples?

America is big on conspiracies and mysteries and who dunnits these days.

But "what about", "whatever happened" and "what's the DEAL with" when the "what" is applied to Cruz and Graham and their insufferable ilk?

Eeezy peezy. 

They're now having their cake....and eating it, too.

Courtesy of the orange impeached, indicted 'political war' criminal.

Who pulled the cork out of the bottle, poured the poison into the mainstream

And threw the fake gold brick...through the plate glass window of "Uncle Sam's Bakery".