For me, it started with Shirley Temple movies.
In childhood, my local library was tucked away in a school district building, limited to a long stretch of a hallway and two cramped children’s rooms. The library has since become a sprawling, gorgeous building a block away from this old location, but my formative memories as a reader rest within visions of that confined space, its dirt-brown carpet, the holiday season’s glass case display of a wintry village, and the chapter book alcove’s solar system mural.
At the end of the long hallway were the shelves of VHS tapes, when DVDs were still a novelty, when your main hope for a movie selection was that the person who checked it out before you had rewound the tape. In a time when our movies now start within a short series of clicks, I marvel over how foreign rewinding seems to me now. God forbid you check out a dramatic epic that was split between two VHS tapes.
Thanks to the bitterly cold and snowy first two weeks of January and more free time than usual before I started a new job, I finished six books in January that were all downloaded onto my Kindle. I’ve recently found that I can get through a book much quicker by reading it on my e-reader — maybe it has to do with seeing a smaller amount of text on the screen than on a single page?
Seeing as I’m out of school now and working on my computer all day, I think I’ve felt more drawn to reading during downtime, so I’m very excited to see if I read a similar number of books in February. So, for the first time on my blog, I’m sharing my thoughts about the books I read this month!
Lunch in Paris: A Love Story, with Recipes, by Elizabeth Bard (★★★☆☆)
This is a travel memoir capturing the author’s budding relationship with a Frenchman and her transition to full-time life in France when their connection turns serious. It includes French recipes that Bard tried out while adjusting to the stylistic and cultural differences of an European kitchen.
I skimmed through the recipes included in the book and enjoyed the author’s personal story, but I’ve definitely read similar books, so Lunch in Paris wasn’t particularly special in the end.
Each month, in an attempt to keep up an active feature on the blog, I’m going to highlight a film I watched for the first time and, well, talk about it. Did it resonate with me? Was it over-hyped? Was it worth a watch? I’ve also kept a list of movies I watch in a year since 2011, so I thought this would be a fun way to highlight films that may have stuck out to me in a special way.
Moonstruck has been on my watchlist since it became available on both Hulu and Amazon Prime a short while ago. It wasn’t until the movie started that I recognized how familiar the characters and their cultural quirks were to me. Three of my grandparents were born and raised in New York City boroughs as the children and grandchildren of immigrants, and the fourth, from upstate New York, went to nursing school in Brooklyn. I’m half Italian, and my Italian grandfather grew up in Brooklyn, where the 1987 movie Moonstruck takes place.
In addition to that familial connection, growing up on Long Island exposes you to plenty of older people who grew up in Brooklyn or Queens apartments, watching their fathers renovate their homes on their own and one day becoming frequent DIY patrons of the Home Depot near their suburban homes. I’ve had an understandable fascination with mid-to-late 20th century New York for a long time, and this movie was the perfect dose of familiarity and discovery for me. Several weeks after I watched it, John Mahoney, whose character Perry I couldn’t help but grow fond of, died, which made this viewing feel even more coincidental.
I had the pleasure of seeing Waitress on Broadway back in October as a belated birthday present. My mom, sister, and I took advantage of the show’s “Buy One, Get One for $10” deal to grab discounted tickets for a Sunday matinee, and as much as I’ve gotten used to the post-evening show hustle through Times Square to make my train home, it was nice to drive in with people and leave the theater a little more relaxed than usual.
Waitress has been on my list of must-see Broadways show for awhile, and at this point, it was really the only new musical that I was interested in seeing. Even now, I’m more looking forward to next season’s revivals than its new shows. The cast recording became essay-writing music for me in my last semester of school, and I figured that, if anything, seeing the show would be a fun, girly afternoon with my mom and sister.
Based on the 2007 indie film, Waitress tells the story of Jenna, a diner waitress in a small southern town who finds herself pregnant by her abusive husband. In addition to feeling ambivalent about becoming a mother, she has a talent for baking unique pies, and schemes to raise enough money to enter a pie-making contest that could allow her to leave her husband and start anew. Things become complicated when Jenna starts falling for her married OB/GYN, and the plot also explores her coworkers’ experiences with finding love.
I was that weird twelve-year-old who had no problem watching the nearly three-and-a-half-hour long film Fiddler on the Roof. I’ve talked about my history with the musical before, but given that I’ve not watched the film in so long because of its length, I wonder what about the film made me so captivated. There’s always that one thing you love when you’re young that’s just weird or totally unexpected for your age – for me, it was probably fairly bleak movie musicals and Shirley Temple movies. It was likely the sisters’ relationship and the joyful music that hooked me.
I’ve wanted to see the most recent Fiddler on the Roof Broadway revival since I knew the production was happening. The earliest I remember hearing about it was probably winter 2015 – maybe even towards the end of 2014? I’ve followed its cast members on Instagram, watched the Broadway.com vlogs by Adam Kantor, and read or watched any tidbits related to this production.
In the last nine years or so of regularly watching award shows, a lot of ceremonies inevitably blend together. When an Emmys ceremony once again has Jimmy Kimmel as host – or any late night comedian, for that matter – it feels like something we’ve seen one too many times. Is it because, even if it’s only happened once before, any late night host at an award show is a safe and familiar prospect? Does our (perhaps daily) habit of watching their interview or viral clips give us the feeling that we’ve seen any and all things a host is capable of?
I found Jimmy Kimmel to be a strong host of Sunday night’s 68th Primetime Emmy Awards. I’ve given up on truly critiquing an award show host simply because, in today’s TV climate, I feel that the same old jokes will be recycled, no matter who is on that stage. This leaves me with no judging system besides equating host success to few cringe-worthy moments.
Much like last year, the recent announcement of Emmy nominations wasn’t even on my radar. After seeing the complete list, I understand why – nearly all of the shows nominated are just not on my spectrum at all.
I was out of the country for last year’s Emmys, so maybe I’m just out of the loop about what’s the norm now, but when did these categories widen to include so many slots? Although it’s great that this allows for more deserving people to be recognized, I almost find it overwhelming, particularly with the categories for Best Comedy and Drama. Although I’m terrible at keeping up with current shows, I do like to have at least some exposure to the nominated works and their actors, and that has become increasingly difficult to do with these kind of nominations.
Meg Wolitzer’s The Interestings was one of my favorite books I read in 2014, and a random scroll through Tumblr tonight brought me a screenshot of theater actor Corey Cott’s (Jeremy Jordan’s replacement in Newsies, Vanessa Hudgens’ love interest in Gigi) Instagram post promoting his role in something called The Interestings. My mind immediately became churning as I thought of the book, counted the people in the promotional photo, and tried to fathom how this was made without my knowledge. A quick Google search brought me to the show’s Amazon page and a review alluding to major disappointment about the adaptation, giving me both intense interest in and trepidation about this show.
The Interestings is an extremely intricate and internal story, and the book weaves in and out of time within chapters. When I read it the first time, I never felt fully grounded in just one time period. As a result, it’s one of those books that just sweeps you up and keeps such a hold on you that you feel wrong finishing the story and leaving the world of these characters. You’ve seen them grow and become different selves, and it feels unsettling to leave them behind even though, in the case of The Interestings, you’re exposed to practically their entire lives.
I’ve made it clear that I have no credibility to talk about theater except for the fact that I just read a lot about it online and genuinely find it interesting. Over the last few years, the Tonys have become my favorite awards show, mostly because of the performances and because, compared to the stars at film and TV award shows, these nominees are not always accustomed to the glamour and excitement that a day of recognition provides and seem truly genuine.
This year’s Tony nominations came out today, and it’s already a record-breaking year – Hamilton has gathered 16 nominations, more than any other Broadway musical in the past. Once again, I haven’t seen the show and I consider myself a newer fan, but just listening to the cast album (it’s quickly become my background music for when I’m writing essays) and watching Lin-Manuel Miranda interviews proves that this record is well-deserved. While one show and its actors sweeping so many of the slots almost takes away the suspense of who will win, it does make it even more exciting for both the winner and the audience if someone from another show does win. As of now, I’m predicting at least one non-Hamilton actor win in the musical categories – find it below!
This semester, my roommate and I quickly formed a Sunday night tradition. We would vow to get our work done by 8 or 9 in order to tune in to PBS for our “Old Lady Nights.” If we had missed it, we would watch the previous week’s Downton Abbey at 8, followed by the new episode at 9 and then the latest episode of Mercy Street at 10. Mercy Street‘s finale and the penultimate Downton episode fell on the first Sunday of our “spring” break, so we weren’t together and didn’t watch either show.
After watching the (anti-climatic) Mercy Street finale during the week thanks to a HDMI cord and a laptop, we were psyched and ready for the very last Downton Abbey episode ever. We had assumed that, like always, the previous episode would air at 8 and we could just catch up that way.
I had just stepped out of the shower when my roommate screeched from the other room, “It’s not on!” When I came out wrapped in my towel, we stared in dismay at the PBS retrospective special playing. When a spoiler-y clip from the previous episode popped up in a montage, we knew that we had to be quick and watch it online.