Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings
Tax the Rich

Movie Monday

Today is newsletter printing day and kids-home-all-day-because-of-spring-break day so time is tight. But I wanted to post because I just can't carry the second episode of Mildred Pierce around for another week.

First, I asked a woman who had been a child during the Depression and had grown up in NY and NYC to watch the first part (No, I didn't have to pay her.) Some of her comments were: 1. For what Mildred charged for the birthday cake, she could have bought the bakery. 2. There were not as many cars around at the time. (She remembers she and her step-mom driving into NYC and parking in front of Macy's well after Mildred's time period.) 3. She didn't think that hot dogs came in packages as shown in Mildred's grocery scene and she knows they wouldn't have been wrapped in plastic. 4. Women didn't dress in the morning around the house. They wore Hooverette aprons over house dresses (I guess because they didn't get worn outside) and then "dressed up" in the afternoon." On my own, I noticed the Great Books collection in Mildred's den. I don't think that iconic collection was around that early (early 1930s.) I think it was the also iconic Harvard Classics which occupied that time period and the Great Books "look" shown in the movie was its later face lift.

But while I find such incongruities fascinating, let me get to Mildred Part 2. A summary: Ray, the delightful, younger daughter has died, Mildred new restaurant is a success, Monty really becomes the freeloader, and Veda is still soooo obnoxious.

I'll keep this short: the movie is still way too long and now it's become just silly. First, an example of the length: We don't need the long shot of Mildred driving to the polo club and the pan of the rich people in contrast to Mildred's "sensible Republican" suit as prelude to the "Mildred picks up Veda who is with Monty and his rich friends" scene. Two examples of silly: Why would a mother allow her lover to babysit her pubescent daughter regularly? (One thing even I know: labor was cheap to hire during the Depression. There wasn't another woman like Letty around?) and why didn't Mildred drown in her mad car dash from Monty's house in hurricane-like rain, in the dark, on flooded roads she was unfamiliar with?

Finally, in a "kids get off my lawn" grouch mode, I am getting tired of the naked sex. It's not really advancing any plot or theme. We know she has the hots for Monty. Do we need to see them pinned naked against the wall? Do their contracts state "one horizontal and one vertical naked sex scene?" It's getting to be just another time filler; this one geared to the current movie sex scene climate. (And no, I'm not a prude. Perhaps Mildred is just making me grouchy.)

I know I own the novel, Mildred Pierce, bought during my "Oh, look, there's a book sale, let's stop" days and I'm going to search my zillions of books for it so I can make a comparison. This movie analysis has become a sick obsession I fear.

Bottom line for this week's section: Good acting, dull dialogue. I would say it also needs a cruel editor but I don't think even a top-notch editor can cut through molasses.

Next week: Last section, I think. We get to see Veda played still so obnoxiously but by another actor. See you then.