Archive for the ‘Films’ Category

Service of Horror Films

Monday, October 26th, 2026

I posted “Service of Fear,” on Halloween 2016. At the time I asked fellow tenants in the office space I rented for their favorite horror movies since I don’t like to be scared so I avoid them.

They mentioned:

“The Haunting”

“When a Stranger Calls”

 “The Birds,” “Psycho” & “Rear Window” 

“The Conjuring” 

“The Gate”

“The Strangers”

 “Halloween II”

 “The Thing”

 “The Shining”         

  “Poltergeist”

   “The House of Wax”

   “Bones”

I asked AI if there was a correlation between horror movie popularity and scary political times. “Yes — research and cultural analysis show a strong historical correlation: horror film popularity often peaks during periods of political unrest, social anxiety, or ideological polarization, as the genre reflects and amplifies collective fears.”

Some examples AI provided:

“Great Depression (1930s): Films like Dracula, Frankenstein, and White Zombie reflected fears about outsiders, immigration restrictions, and racial prejudice.”

“1960s religious upheaval: The breakdown of traditional religion fueled occult horror (The Exorcist, Rosemary’s Baby)”

“Post‑9/11: Horror emphasized random violence and ‘us vs. them’ nationalism (The Strangers, Cloverfield)”

What am I scared about? Shenanigans that impede a legitimate election that has already begun with DOJ holding hostage 20,000 votes in Los Angeles and the president ordering DOJ to block the Alaska Senate race if Republican, Senator Dan S. Sullivan loses.

Are you a horror film fan? What are your favorites? Does your yen for the genre increase when you feel anxious about political unrest?

8 Comments »

Service of Vintage Films, TV Series and a Few New Ones That Make You Smile

Thursday, July 2nd, 2026

There are some vintage films and TV series that consistently warn my heart. In the former, just a few are “Out of Africa,” “The King and I,” “Moonstruck,” “Brief Encounter,” “A Little Romance,” and “Roman Holiday.”

I’m having a wonderful time rewatching “West Wing,” on Netflix. The script, acting and plot twists can’t be beat. “Downton Abbey,” and the original “Law and Order,” especially with Jerry Orbach, also top the TV list. “MASH,” if I’m in the mood, “Mike and Molly,” in small doses and “Cheers” are fun to revisit.

Among new series I look forward to episodes of “All Creatures Great and Small,” “Grantchester,” and “Lincoln Lawyer” and I mourn when the series are done.

I wonder if the directors and screen writers knew that they were producing such special films/series. What are your favorites–old and new?

13 Comments »

Service of Favorite Movies

Monday, November 17th, 2025

My Pope socks are among my favorites, a special gift from Nancie Steinberg.

Pope Leo XIV met with Hollywood actors and directors on Saturday. They included Cate Blanchett, Alison Brie, Dave Franco, Adam Scott, Spike Lee, Chris Pine and George Miller.

In this context, a few days before, he named four of his favorite movies during an interview with Variety: “It’s a Wonderful Life, 1946,” “The Sound of Music, 1965,” “Ordinary People, 1980,” and “Life Is Beautiful, 1997.” [All but “It’s a Wonderful Life” won Oscars.]

Edward Segarra, USA Today, quoted a statement from the Vatican that the Pope “has expressed his desire to deepen dialogue with the world of cinema … exploring the possibilities that artistic creativity offers to the mission of the Church and the promotion of human values.” [A little stuffy but….]

“Casablanca,”1942, and “Brief Encounter,” 1945, headed my husband’s list of favorites.

And some of mine? “Roman Holiday, 1953,” “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” 1961, “The King’s Speech,” 2010, “Moonstruck,” 1987, “Uncle Buck,” 1989, “A little Romance,” 1979, “Arthur,” 1981, “Philomena,” 2023, “An Affair to Remember,” 1957, and “Good Morning Vietnam,” 1987.

I hardly–if ever–go to the movies anymore. I fear it’s a habit a lot of people have dropped. I see a bunch at home, mostly on Netflix, PBS or TCM.

What are some of your favorite films? Will movie houses survive?

On the bottom of my wonderful Pope socks.
17 Comments »

Service of a 1939 Movie

Monday, October 13th, 2025

Flipping channels one night on TCM I found “Bachelor Mother” a movie starring Ginger Rogers, David Niven and James Coburn that was made 86 years ago. Did it have any relevance to the first quarter of the 21st century?

Some similarities between 1939 and 2025 are eerie. Prices were rising as was global fascism and the country was in for a life-changing innovation thanks to technology: New York broadcast the first TV program.

I asked Google about the country’s mood during the New Deal under FDR: “The mood in America in 1939 was one of wariness and anticipation. The nation was at a critical inflection point, balancing isolationist tendencies with the escalating crisis in Europe.” Pearl Harbor and WWII were two years away.

“The Neutrality Act of 1939 formalized the U.S. policy of neutrality, but the escalating situation forced a re-evaluation of the country’s strategic posture and technological preparedness. The year was marked by significant technological advancements, political maneuvering, and looming global conflict.”

In some ways, the film was way ahead of itself. Ginger noticed a baby on the steps of a foundling home and the staff determined it was hers, which it wasn’t. She meets David who is the son of the department store owner where she works. She ends up keeping the baby and both David and his dad, James, who also believe that the infant is hers, don’t blink twice. In ’39 I doubt they would have been that accepting of a woman having a baby out of wedlock.

Today the screen writer would have had to address the fact that the baby had no papers, no birth certificate and that his mom could afford daycare while she worked as a department store clerk. The foundling home staff or someone from the state would have checked into Ginger’s background and ability to feed and care for the infant.

Wardrobes in some films both then and now baffle me. Characters with no money sport amazing clothes and these days they arrive at a destination with a small suitcase and countless changes of day and eveningwear.

I love a cheery ending and there was one. Wealthy David falls in love with Ginger and even wealthier grandpa/father James adores the baby and they all live happily ever after.

Would the Hallmark Channel produce such a film today? Is an unwed mother such a yawn these days that the screenplay wouldn’t pass muster? Do you enjoy vintage films? Can you overlook the conveniences and innovations we enjoy today that are missing from the oldies?

4 Comments »

Service of Legislating Art

Thursday, May 11th, 2023

Image by Lukas Bieri from Pixabay

I was once forced to follow another PR agency’s format both in presenting to the client the year’s placement results and my proposal. I froze. My mind didn’t accept their system. I had to fight to overcome what was to me cockamamie, convoluted organization. Normally, I plow into such a task with no trouble, especially enjoying the proposal part once I’ve determined my approach.

You can’t equate my dilemma with the creativity required to write a play or movie, but if the talent is given parameters and restrictions, inspiration must be tested. Nevertheless, I thought of my nightmare after hearing what a playwright’s agent told me and what Richard Dreyfus recently brought to light about the Oscar’s guidelines.

The agent said that in her stable of playwrights there is one of Hispanic background who has more work than he can handle. The others can’t get anything produced either because the subject matter or their characters don’t meet new strictures which specify required percentages of diversity and/or because the writer isn’t part of a minority.

And film? According to Lisa Respers France, CNN, “beginning in 2024, movies must meet certain criteria for representation to be eligible for the Academy Award for best picture.

“Films have to meet at least two of four benchmarks, which cover – among other things – whether the lead actors are from underrepresented groups or if at least 30% of the cast and crew come from these groups. Dreyfus criticized the new rules because, France quoted, “it’s an art. And no one should be telling me as an artist that I have to give into the latest, most current idea of what morality is.”

I am sad about this because while most recognize and hope to repair past wrongs, the powers that be show, once again, that they aren’t able to do so in a way that doesn’t negatively impact some. This solution is much like the one I described in a recent post, “Service of a Well-Meaning Initiative That Creates More Problems than it Solves.” To level the playing field so more would be able to buy a house the Feds ignite divisiveness by raising the monthly mortgage payments of buyers with good credit scores and large downpayments giving more favorable terms to riskier borrowers, reducing their fees.

I proposed a solution for the mortgage situation—focus first on putting a chicken in every pot rather than on home ownership and take away the halo around the latter–but have come up blank regarding how to achieve equity for creative endeavors. There must be a better way than putting virtual handcuffs on writers. Any ideas?


Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay
2 Comments »

Service of Subscriptions: A Winning Business Model—Sometimes

Thursday, August 9th, 2018

Before Amazon customers buy a toothpick, its 100 million Prime subscribers have handed the company from $77.88/year to $119/year, representing the cost to students and everyone else respectively. [Some may be grandfathered at $99.99.] Nobody outside the company seems to know the breakdown so you can’t do the math but 100 million paying $1/year would represent a tidy sum.

Subscribers get benefits such as free fast shipping for eligible items, shopping deals, streaming films and TV shows.

According to Rachel Siegel of The Washington Post, “The real money, though, is in the buying power these shoppers wield: Prime members reportedly spend an average of $1,300 a year on Amazon, compared with $700 for its customers who are not members.” And it seems that many of the former don’t comparison shop.

The subscription model works for others such as Netflix, which Siegel reported has 125 million members. Health clubs too—which count on people paying for a year and not returning after a few months.

On the other hand, MoviePass has had trouble calculating its fee and benefits–a shame as the concept originally served a purpose, especially for customers in cities where one movie ticket costs upwards of $15. Its monthly fee will soon increase to $14.95 from $9.95. According to Nishant Mohan in The Wall Street Journal, “MoviePass, which has more than 3 million members, lost $98.3 million on $48.6 million of revenue in the quarter ended March 31.”

Tuesday’s Journal reported that the company would limit subscribers from one movie a day to three a month. Ben Fritz wrote that the company had forecast 5 million subscribers by December 2018 which chief executive Mitch Lowe admits might not happen quite that fast. He told Fritz: “Ultimately, I believe this is a 20 million-subscriber business over the next three to four years.”

Meanwhile, it’s trying to stay afloat. It has competition such as AMC Entertainment Holdings with 175,000 members with a monthly $19.95 charge to see three movies a week at its US theatres. MoviePass “plans to limit the availability of first-run movies opening on more than 1,000 screens during the first two weeks.” It also has had technical glitches. One recent day its app featured showtimes for e-ticketing theatres, only, and none others.

I’ve noticed disgruntled customers gripe on social media. One subscriber wrote on Facebook: “I’m unable to cancel my account. They say you’re liable for a year. It’s crazy. You have to go thru their app for customer service and that took more than 2 hours.”

Have you had trouble getting out of a subscription? How many times can a company stumble and succeed in the end?  Are there some subscriptions you endorse? Any you don’t?

4 Comments »

Service of the Comfort of Vintage

Monday, January 23rd, 2017

Whatever “vintage” means to you—if you’re 20, 1980s films, fashion and décor might describe it while if you’re 50, it could be all things 1950. For some there’s comfort and perhaps a soothing visual to live with a grandparent’s furnishings; for others, reminiscences shared with an uncle while watching Audrey Hepburn on Turner Classic Movies brings smiles.

I thought of this after seeing “La La Land,” a movie I enjoyed. The writer/director Damien Chazelle is 31 yet he picked the 1940s/1950s romantic musical genre for the setting of his story. He added zero pyrotechnics, violence or gore and none were missed. The film set a record at the Golden Globe Awards winning seven including recognition for best motion picture—musical or comedy—performance by an actor and actress, director, screenplay, original score and original song.

Elle.com ran a article about what’s in or out in fashion. Nikki Ogunnaike reported we should “anticipate a shift toward contrast denim styles in vintage silhouettes.” [This look is in contrast to skin- tight jeans popular today.]

I’d saved a December, 2016 section of The Wall Street Journal‘s “Off Duty,” because of its cover story, “Presents with a Past,” that featured 50 nostalgic gifts “whose origins date back decades and beyond.” The subhead continued that the gifts will “conjure a simpler time when the holidays were lower-voltage, but just as bright.”

Speaking of voltage, most of the suggestions would burn a hole in most wallets. There was a gold bracelet by Sidney Garber reminiscent of flexible metal coils first popular in the 1930s for $12,200; a 3-day slumber party at a historic English country estate @ $15,600/night for 16; Prada’s jewel encrusted mules for $1,150; a $685 pair of retro headphones; a mink stole for $5,500 and a chauffer to drive you from Paris to Versailles in a period Citroen starting at $370.

I don’t spend that kind of money for the loved ones on my list. The Wall Street Journal editors chose a few things under $100 too. There was a box of Turkish delight [$35]; a rubber band-propelled toy car [$25]; an apron [$47]; a ‘70s popular fondue pot [$95]; traditional Belgian speculoos cookies [$20]; a Mickey Mouse wall clock featuring a 1930s style rodent [$65], and an Italian knit necktie [[$90].

The J. Peterman Company catalog seems to be going strong with its focus on vintage-inspired men and women’s fashion.

Have you noticed vintage influences creeping back more now than in recent years? Do you welcome them or consider them old fashioned and therefore not worthy of your attention? Do you think that in turbulent times people look back to what they recall or think may have been a calmer period?

 

6 Comments »

Service of Fear

Monday, October 31st, 2016

It’s Halloween today. I decided that nobody is interested to know about everything that scares me nor would they want to address what scares them—we’ve got too many important things to be nervous about relating to the impending elections.

So I decided to lean on the “treats” side of the celebration and write about scary movies.

But scary movies frighten me so I’m not the one to write knowledgably about them. I loved “Wait Until Dark”– [anything with Audrey Hepburn] –but tend to avoid such flicks. Guess I’m normally nervous and don’t need additional stimulus.

So I asked the people in the office in which I share space. What amazed me is that everyone had a favorite and there is only one duplicate! This is their list: 

     “The Haunting” –Lee A

     “When a Stranger Calls” –Mike S 

     “The Birds,” “Psycho” & “Rear Window” & “Trump TV”—David R

      “The Conjuring” & soon, by DJ  Trump: “When Mexico Attacks” –Pat C 

            “The Gate” –Danny M 

            “The Strangers” —Brandt Z 

            “Halloween II” –Joshua C 

            “The Thing” –Stephen H 

      “The Shining” –James B AND Jeff M           

      “Poltergeist” –Dan M 

       “The House of Wax” –Bambe L

       “Bones” –Kori M 

Do you like to be frightened by movies? What is your favorite scary one? Is there a difference between creepy and scary?

4 Comments »

Service of Favorite Films

Thursday, January 7th, 2016

Over the holidays we saw “Auntie Mame,” [1958], with Rosalind Russell, on Turner Classic Movies. I’ve seen it many times and enjoy it each time. I can too easily ignore my list of “to do’s” on a Saturday when one of my favorites appears. All it takes is for me to see a moment or two and unless I have hard deadlines or apply enormous restraint, a few hours melt away.

Some other films I enjoy seeing again and again include:

  • “Roman Holiday,” [1953] and “Sabrina,” [1954] with Audrey Hepburn
  • “The Bridge on the River Kwai,” [1957] with Alec Guinness
  • “An Affair to Remember,” [1957] with Deborah Kerr
  • “The Apartment,” [1960] with Jack Lemmon
  • “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” [1967] with Katherine Hepburn
  • “Kramer vs. Kramer, “ [1979] and “Out of Africa,” [1985] with Meryl Streep
  • “When Harry Met Sally,” [1989] and “Sleepless in Seattle,” [1993], with Meg Ryan and
  • “The King’s Speech,” [2010] with Colin Firth

My reaction to other “great films” that are repeatedly played such as “Lawrence of Arabia,” [1962] with Peter O’Toole or “The Thomas Crown Affair,” [1968] with Steve McQueen is a brisk “I’ve seen that, I’m not tempted.”  I may even have enjoyed the first viewing but don’t need another.

Recognizing that everyone’s lists will differ, what gives some films legs/why do they stand the test of repetition and others not so much? Is it: The story? The acting? The setting? The directing? How the film resonates with the personality of the viewer? What are some of your favorite films?

18 Comments »
Get This Blog Emailed to You:
Enter your Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz