From: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org (JMDL Digest) To: joni-digest@smoe.org Subject: JMDL Digest V2010 #344 Reply-To: joni@smoe.org Sender: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-joni-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk Unsubscribe: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe Website: http://jonimitchell.com JMDL Digest Wednesday, November 17 2010 Volume 2010 : Number 344 ========== TOPICS and authors in this Digest: -------- Re: acoustic jazz guitar NJC [Mike Pritchard ] Re: how did you find her [Anita G ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc [Anita G ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc [Lieve Reckers ] Re: Movie Talk - njc [Lieve Reckers ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc [Gerald Notaro ] Re: acoustic jazz guitar, njc [Les Irvin ] Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc [Lieve Reckers ] Re: Movie Talk - njc [Lieve Reckers ] Re: Movie Talk - njc [Mags ] Re: Movie Talk - njc [Lieve Reckers ] New Library item: Joni: both sides now [TheStaff@JoniMitchell.com] Yahoo Concert with Herbie and Joni [est86mlm@ameritech.net] Re: Movie Talk - njc [Mags ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 11:05:54 +0100 From: Mike Pritchard Subject: Re: acoustic jazz guitar NJC And then there is John McLaughlins wonderful homage to Bill Evans compositions, entitled Time Remembered. Worth a listen, imho. mike in Barcelona np Eddy Grant  Gimme Hope, Joanna ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:33:15 +0000 From: Anita G Subject: Re: how did you find her Hi Les Like Bob, have been clicking the View Festival programe but no joy either from here. Ahh the joys of being web meister Anita x On 17 November 2010 02:30, Les Irvin wrote: > Once there, click the link that says "View festival program here." > > On 11/16/2010 3:39 AM, Bob Muller wrote: >> >> Nothing there yet, maybe it's still on the way. I'd love to see it. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:57:36 +0000 From: Anita G Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc Hi Lieve We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family (or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is all good. I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! Anit x On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: > Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must say > that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with family > life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the > much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of > characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting > and > improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters > appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had > anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It > seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and > covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised > dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go and > see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! > > Lieve in London > ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:55:52 +0000 (GMT) From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc You're completely right, Anita, it was Imelda Staunton, and yes she was amazing. I was just so annoyed that her appearance was left at that and did not lead to anything further. And now don't you go mentioning those photos! I let you take them in a moment of weakness. I have much better ones from subsequent films that I can trade them for, but let's keep that off line, shall we? :-) Big hug, Lieve ________________________________ From: Anita G To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro ; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 15:46:17 Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc On 17 November 2010 12:58, Lieve Reckers wrote: > I felt that the WAY in > which this was presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not > really lead to any further insight. For me, there was an uncomfortable mirror, not least the counsellor but also the 'happily contented' couple, but hopefully not being 'smug.' > And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of > Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or > so with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to > reappear in the story? Wasn't it Imelda Staunton? I'm not sure now, but she was brilliant. In fact the whole scene was very,very real. When Gerry did the 'on the scale of one to ten' I wanted to crawl under my seat. This movie made a real impact on me and the last Mike Leigh movie about that cheery girl left me cold. I also noticed, dear Lieve, that the movie 'Burke and Hare' was also showing. I wouldn't EVER throw rotten eggs at you, but I don't forget I have the photos of you as an extra in that film!!!! Lots of love Anita x ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:14:52 -0800 (PST) From: Laura Stanley Subject: Re: acoustic jazz guitar, njc Paul Ivice wrote: Jazz guitarists who play acoustic include Ralph Towner (nylon string & 12 string), Tommy Emmanuel, John Abercrombie, Jeff Linsky, Peter Sprague, Frank Vignola, John Jorgensen.... and here's an example of some brilliant acoustic work by Mahavishnu John McLaughlin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIMOJNxVIw8 If you look on youtube, you'll also find several versions of him playing Goodbye Pork-Pie Hat. Paul C wrote: Thanks for posting, Paul - had 'My Goals Beyond' and "Extrapolation" on vinyl back in the day - always loved "Follow Your Heart" - which I discovered after your post - is the title of a new book just published - "Follow Your Heart - John McLaughlin Song By Song" by By Walter Kolosky, with a foreword by Chick Corea http://bit.ly/a6nlY4 Here's a promotional video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59JNZYmH9p8 Recently came across another fabulous acoustic jazz player - Swedish guitarist Ulf Wakenius, who is playing here in London at Ronnie Scott's next week - love his version of Jerome Kern's 'Smoke Gets In Your Eyes' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkYooc753Ag very best to all PaulC NP Ulf Wakenius - Cry Me A River http://blip.fm/~ynnzm Wow two Pauls!!! Hi PI and PC, Thanks for the information! I just played the YouTube videos from the room I'm in and now my 15 year old is son (Justin, who wanted to go to Pazfest II but had school) in the next room is subconsciously resonating with his trumpet playing mouth the sounds he heard on the videos as he is getting ready for school. Jazz is a magnet for him! I really appreciate you both! Love, Laura ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 16:58:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc Mags, from what you say and from what I notice, I think for some reason the JMDL messages are not being delivered. I'm copying Les in for that reason. Lieve ________________________________ From: Mags To: Lieve Reckers Cc: joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 16:02:26 Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc Lieve, Im only getting the one copy of your mail, as you said, you have sent it cc to me. Hmm not sure why. As well, I see a lot of messages from the JMDL going directly to my spam folder...puzzling. Anyone else having that problem lately? - --- On Wed, 11/17/10, Lieve Reckers wrote: >From: Lieve Reckers >Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc >To: "Mags" , "Gerald Notaro" >Cc: "Anita G" , Warrenkeith91354@aol.com, >joni@smoe.org >Received: Wednesday, November 17, 2010, 9:04 AM > > >Hi Mags! >Maybe not "how it is", but yes, "how I see it" - otherwise what's the point of >saying anything, eh? > >It's funny, I know my messages must have arrived in your and Jerry's >mailbox because I am getting your replies, but I haven't yet seen my own >messages in my JMDL inbox. Could you just let me know if you saw my mail via >the JMDL, or only in your individual inboxes because I copied you by name? > >Lieve in London > > > > ________________________________ From: Mags >To: Gerald Notaro ; Lieve Reckers > >Cc: Anita G ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; >joni@smoe.org >Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:51:51 >Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc > > >ah Lieve, I love the way you tell it like it is! And I appreciate the opines of >others. I shall see it when it arrives on the Prairie, as Ive said numerous >times ;) Jerry, agreed, one hundred fold, love love love Brenda Blethyn; truly a >marvel > > > >Mags, currently watching season 3 of The Wire > > > >--- On Wed, 11/17/10, Lieve Reckers wrote: > > >>From: Lieve Reckers >>Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc >>To: "Gerald Notaro" >>Cc: "Anita G" , "Mags" , >>Warrenkeith91354@aol.com, joni@smoe.org >>Received: Wednesday, November 17, 2010, 8:35 AM >> >> >>It did quite well, I think, Jerry. At least, it got attention in the press etc >>and was also shown on TV. I think it must have done modestly well in the >>cinemas. It was a nice little film, especially written for its main acress Jane >>Horrocks. She did shine in that film, but has over the last years been getting >>seriously on my nerves with her silly Tesco adverts on TV. The way her accent >>and way of speaking is exploited and exaggerated in those ads makes my skin >>crawl. >>Oops, must be my bitchy day today... >>Lieve in London >> >> ________________________________ From: Gerald Notaro >>To: Lieve Reckers >>Cc: Anita G ; Mags ; >>Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org >>Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:04:45 >>Subject: Movie Talk - njc >> >>Love all this movie talk. One thing I like almost as much as Joni. Speaking of >>Brenda Blethyn, Little Voice is one of my favorite movies. I always have it on >>my iPhone. No one has even heard of it over here. How did it do Great Britain? >> >>Jerry >> >>NO: Great Mandella on WMNF - Thinking of you, Wily Pearl! >> >> >> >>On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Lieve Reckers >wrote: >> >>Hi Anita! >>>Thanks very much for your take on Another Year. I really hope Mags and anybody >>>else who sees it will enjoy it like you did, of course! >>>Knowing I couldn't possibly spoil it for anyone who is meant to enjoy it (just >>>the way we are wired, I suppose!) I will just perversely explain one more time >>>in explaining why I was disappointed by the film! :-) >>>Of course, I recognised the real-life issues presented in the film, such as the >>>passage of time and loneliness, and I was fine with that (i.e. I don't always >>>need to be cheered up by a film!) but I felt that the WAY in which this was >>>presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not really lead to any >>>further insight. I could literally see and feel Lesley Manville's acting and >>>over-long improvising going on. It felt to me like we just saw a few portraits >>>of people with problems and a few portraits of rather smugly "happy/contented" >>>people, and to be honest I know enough people in my own life that I can observe >>>with more insight than this film gave me. >>>And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of >>>Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or so >>>with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to >>>reappear in the story? I would rather have focused on her for the rest of the >>>film, than on the flaky types we got instead! >>> >>>Anyway, that is just my own disappointed reaction. I wish everybody else who >>>sees it a lot of enjoyment and/or deep insight! >>>Lieve >>> >>>PS To just continue a little longer in my mischievous rant, I sometimes wonder >>>whether people are so keen to see films that are not Hollywood-produced, that >>>they feel they must appreciate films made elsewhere, even if (or maybe exactly >>>because) the seams are showing and the links are clunky... (OK, I will duck now >>>because I can feel the rotten eggs come flying my way...) >>> >>> ________________________________ From: Anita G >>>To: Lieve Reckers >>>Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro >>>; joni@smoe.org >>>Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 10:57:36 >>>Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc >>> >>>Hi Lieve >>>We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last >>>week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you >>>say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family >>>(or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. >>> >>>Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although >>>definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it >>>had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes >>>inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of >>>isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As >>>someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors >>>for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming >>>adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate >>>colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic >>>platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's >>>terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling >>>over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the >>>film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is >>>all good. >>> >>>I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! >>>Anit x >>> >>>On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: >>>> Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must >>say >>>> that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with >family >>>> life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the >>>> much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of >>>> characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting >>>> and >>>> improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters >>>> appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had >>>> anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It >>>> seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and >>>> covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised >>>> dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go >and >>>> see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! >>>> >>>> Lieve in London >>>> ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 23:29:59 -0500 From: Gerald Notaro Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc Birds of a feather! I LOVED Topsy-Turvy and Vera Drake. Both great movies. May I recommend the Japanese film Departures for you all? Wonderful film. Jerry On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Mark wrote: > -----Original Message----- From: Lieve Reckers > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:55 AM > To: Anita G > Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com ; Gerald Notaro ; joni@smoe.org > > Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc > > You're completely right, Anita, it was Imelda Staunton, and yes she was > amazing. I was just so annoyed that her appearance was left at that and > did > not > lead to anything further. > > Hi Lieve, > > Imelda Staunton gave a devastating performance in another Mike Leigh film, > 'Vera Drake'. She plays the title character and although the entire cast is > excellent, she really carries the movie, imo. I'm not going to go into the > plot but this movie packs a punch and raises a lot of questions about a very > controversial subject. > > I haven't seen this latest movie. I didn't even know there was a new Mike > Leigh movie. I really enjoyed 'Secrets & Lies'. 'Topsy-Turvy', the one > about Gilbert & Sullivan writing 'The Mikado' was beautifully made but I > found myself getting bored with it after awhile. A bit too long I guess. > But beautiful production. > > And I'm afraid that's the extent of Mike Leigh films I have seen. > > Mark in Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:13:47 -0700 From: Les Irvin Subject: Re: acoustic jazz guitar, njc > Paul Ivice wrote: > > Jazz guitarists who play acoustic include Ralph Towner (nylon string& 12 > string), Tommy Emmanuel, John Abercrombie, Jeff Linsky, Peter Sprague, Frank > Vignola, John Jorgensen.... ... Bill Frisell, Pat Metheny, Bireli Lagrene, Pierre Bensusan, Django Reinhardt... ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:58:53 +0000 (GMT) From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc Hi Anita! Thanks very much for your take on Another Year. I really hope Mags and anybody else who sees it will enjoy it like you did, of course! Knowing I couldn't possibly spoil it for anyone who is meant to enjoy it (just the way we are wired, I suppose!) I will just perversely explain one more time in explaining why I was disappointed by the film! :-) Of course, I recognised the real-life issues presented in the film, such as the passage of time and loneliness, and I was fine with that (i.e. I don't always need to be cheered up by a film!) but I felt that the WAY in which this was presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not really lead to any further insight. I could literally see and feel Lesley Manville's acting and over-long improvising going on. It felt to me like we just saw a few portraits of people with problems and a few portraits of rather smugly "happy/contented" people, and to be honest I know enough people in my own life that I can observe with more insight than this film gave me. And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or so with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to reappear in the story? I would rather have focused on her for the rest of the film, than on the flaky types we got instead! Anyway, that is just my own disappointed reaction. I wish everybody else who sees it a lot of enjoyment and/or deep insight! Lieve PS To just continue a little longer in my mischievous rant, I sometimes wonder whether people are so keen to see films that are not Hollywood-produced, that they feel they must appreciate films made elsewhere, even if (or maybe exactly because) the seams are showing and the links are clunky... (OK, I will duck now because I can feel the rotten eggs come flying my way...) ________________________________ From: Anita G To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro ; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 10:57:36 Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc Hi Lieve We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family (or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is all good. I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! Anit x On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: > Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must say > that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with family > life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the > much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of > characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting > and > improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters > appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had > anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It > seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and > covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised > dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go and > see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! > > Lieve in London > ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:46:11 -0800 From: "Mark" Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc I seem to have missed some as well. There are responses to other posts coming in but in some cases I did not get the emails being responded to. Mark in Seattle - -----Original Message----- From: Lieve Reckers Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 8:58 AM To: Mags ; lesirvin@gmail.com Cc: joni@smoe.org Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc Mags, from what you say and from what I notice, I think for some reason the JMDL messages are not being delivered. I'm copying Les in for that reason. Lieve ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:04:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc Hi Mags! Maybe not "how it is", but yes, "how I see it" - otherwise what's the point of saying anything, eh? It's funny, I know my messages must have arrived in your and Jerry's mailbox because I am getting your replies, but I haven't yet seen my own messages in my JMDL inbox. Could you just let me know if you saw my mail via the JMDL, or only in your individual inboxes because I copied you by name? Lieve in London ________________________________ From: Mags To: Gerald Notaro ; Lieve Reckers Cc: Anita G ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:51:51 Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc ah Lieve, I love the way you tell it like it is! And I appreciate the opines of others. I shall see it when it arrives on the Prairie, as Ive said numerous times ;) Jerry, agreed, one hundred fold, love love love Brenda Blethyn; truly a marvel Mags, currently watching season 3 of The Wire - --- On Wed, 11/17/10, Lieve Reckers wrote: >From: Lieve Reckers >Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc >To: "Gerald Notaro" >Cc: "Anita G" , "Mags" , >Warrenkeith91354@aol.com, joni@smoe.org >Received: Wednesday, November 17, 2010, 8:35 AM > > >It did quite well, I think, Jerry. At least, it got attention in the press etc >and was also shown on TV. I think it must have done modestly well in the >cinemas. It was a nice little film, especially written for its main acress Jane >Horrocks. She did shine in that film, but has over the last years been getting >seriously on my nerves with her silly Tesco adverts on TV. The way her accent >and way of speaking is exploited and exaggerated in those ads makes my skin >crawl. >Oops, must be my bitchy day today... >Lieve in London > > ________________________________ From: Gerald Notaro >To: Lieve Reckers >Cc: Anita G ; Mags ; >Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org >Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:04:45 >Subject: Movie Talk - njc > >Love all this movie talk. One thing I like almost as much as Joni. Speaking of >Brenda Blethyn, Little Voice is one of my favorite movies. I always have it on >my iPhone. No one has even heard of it over here. How did it do Great Britain? > >Jerry > >NO: Great Mandella on WMNF - Thinking of you, Wily Pearl! > > > >On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Lieve Reckers wrote: > >Hi Anita! >>Thanks very much for your take on Another Year. I really hope Mags and anybody >>else who sees it will enjoy it like you did, of course! >>Knowing I couldn't possibly spoil it for anyone who is meant to enjoy it (just >>the way we are wired, I suppose!) I will just perversely explain one more time >>in explaining why I was disappointed by the film! :-) >>Of course, I recognised the real-life issues presented in the film, such as the >>passage of time and loneliness, and I was fine with that (i.e. I don't always >>need to be cheered up by a film!) but I felt that the WAY in which this was >>presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not really lead to any >>further insight. I could literally see and feel Lesley Manville's acting and >>over-long improvising going on. It felt to me like we just saw a few portraits >>of people with problems and a few portraits of rather smugly "happy/contented" >>people, and to be honest I know enough people in my own life that I can observe >>with more insight than this film gave me. >>And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of >>Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or so >>with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to >>reappear in the story? I would rather have focused on her for the rest of the >>film, than on the flaky types we got instead! >> >>Anyway, that is just my own disappointed reaction. I wish everybody else who >>sees it a lot of enjoyment and/or deep insight! >>Lieve >> >>PS To just continue a little longer in my mischievous rant, I sometimes wonder >>whether people are so keen to see films that are not Hollywood-produced, that >>they feel they must appreciate films made elsewhere, even if (or maybe exactly >>because) the seams are showing and the links are clunky... (OK, I will duck now >>because I can feel the rotten eggs come flying my way...) >> >> ________________________________ From: Anita G >>To: Lieve Reckers >>Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro >>; joni@smoe.org >>Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 10:57:36 >>Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc >> >>Hi Lieve >>We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last >>week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you >>say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family >>(or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. >> >>Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although >>definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it >>had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes >>inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of >>isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As >>someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors >>for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming >>adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate >>colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic >>platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's >>terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling >>over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the >>film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is >>all good. >> >>I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! >>Anit x >> >>On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: >>> Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must >say >>> that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with family >>> life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the >>> much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of >>> characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting >>> and >>> improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters >>> appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had >>> anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It >>> seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and >>> covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised >>> dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go and >>> see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! >>> >>> Lieve in London >>> ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:51:51 -0800 (PST) From: Mags Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc ah Lieve, I love the way you tell it like it is! And I appreciate the opines of others. I shall see it when it arrives on the Prairie, as Ive said numerous times ;) Jerry, agreed, one hundred fold, love love love Brenda Blethyn; truly a marvel Mags, currently watching season 3 of The Wire - --- On Wed, 11/17/10, Lieve Reckers wrote: From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc To: "Gerald Notaro" Cc: "Anita G" , "Mags" , Warrenkeith91354@aol.com, joni@smoe.org Received: Wednesday, November 17, 2010, 8:35 AM It did quite well, I think, Jerry. At least, it got attention in the press etc and was also shown on TV. I think it must have done modestly well in the cinemas. It was a nice little film, especially written for its main acress Jane Horrocks. She did shine in that film, but has over the last years been getting seriously on my nerves with her silly Tesco adverts on TV. The way her accent and way of speaking is exploited and exaggerated in those ads makes my skin crawl. Oops, must be my bitchy day today... Lieve in London From: Gerald Notaro To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Anita G ; Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:04:45 Subject: Movie Talk - njc Love all this movie talk. One thing I like almost as much as Joni. Speaking of Brenda Blethyn, Little Voice is one of my favorite movies. I always have it on my iPhone. No one has even heard of it over here. How did it do Great Britain? Jerry NO: Great Mandella on WMNF - Thinking of you, Wily Pearl! On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Lieve Reckers wrote: Hi Anita! Thanks very much for your take on Another Year. I really hope Mags and anybody else who sees it will enjoy it like you did, of course! Knowing I couldn't possibly spoil it for anyone who is meant to enjoy it (just the way we are wired, I suppose!) I will just perversely explain one more time in explaining why I was disappointed by the film! :-) Of course, I recognised the real-life issues presented in the film, such as the passage of time and loneliness, and I was fine with that (i.e. I don't always need to be cheered up by a film!) but I felt that the WAY in which this was presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not really lead to any further insight. I could literally see and feel Lesley Manville's acting and over-long improvising going on. It felt to me like we just saw a few portraits of people with problems and a few portraits of rather smugly "happy/contented" people, and to be honest I know enough people in my own life that I can observe with more insight than this film gave me. And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or so with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to reappear in the story? I would rather have focused on her for the rest of the film, than on the flaky types we got instead! Anyway, that is just my own disappointed reaction. I wish everybody else who sees it a lot of enjoyment and/or deep insight! Lieve PS To just continue a little longer in my mischievous rant, I sometimes wonder whether people are so keen to see films that are not Hollywood-produced, that they feel they must appreciate films made elsewhere, even if (or maybe exactly because) the seams are showing and the links are clunky... (OK, I will duck now because I can feel the rotten eggs come flying my way...) From: Anita G To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro ; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 10:57:36 Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc Hi Lieve We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family (or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is all good. I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! Anit x On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: > Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must say > that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with family > life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the > much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of > characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting > and > improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters > appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had > anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It > seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and > covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised > dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go and > see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! > > Lieve in London > ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:35:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc It did quite well, I think, Jerry. At least, it got attention in the press etc and was also shown on TV. I think it must have done modestly well in the cinemas. It was a nice little film, especially written for its main acress Jane Horrocks. She did shine in that film, but has over the last years been getting seriously on my nerves with her silly Tesco adverts on TV. The way her accent and way of speaking is exploited and exaggerated in those ads makes my skin crawl. Oops, must be my bitchy day today... Lieve in London ________________________________ From: Gerald Notaro To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Anita G ; Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:04:45 Subject: Movie Talk - njc Love all this movie talk. One thing I like almost as much as Joni. Speaking of Brenda Blethyn, Little Voice is one of my favorite movies. I always have it on my iPhone. No one has even heard of it over here. How did it do Great Britain? Jerry NO: Great Mandella on WMNF - Thinking of you, Wily Pearl! On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Lieve Reckers wrote: Hi Anita! >Thanks very much for your take on Another Year. I really hope Mags and anybody >else who sees it will enjoy it like you did, of course! >Knowing I couldn't possibly spoil it for anyone who is meant to enjoy it (just >the way we are wired, I suppose!) I will just perversely explain one more time >in explaining why I was disappointed by the film! :-) >Of course, I recognised the real-life issues presented in the film, such as the >passage of time and loneliness, and I was fine with that (i.e. I don't always >need to be cheered up by a film!) but I felt that the WAY in which this was >presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not really lead to any >further insight. I could literally see and feel Lesley Manville's acting and >over-long improvising going on. It felt to me like we just saw a few portraits >of people with problems and a few portraits of rather smugly "happy/contented" >people, and to be honest I know enough people in my own life that I can observe >with more insight than this film gave me. >And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of >Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or so >with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to >reappear in the story? I would rather have focused on her for the rest of the >film, than on the flaky types we got instead! > >Anyway, that is just my own disappointed reaction. I wish everybody else who >sees it a lot of enjoyment and/or deep insight! >Lieve > >PS To just continue a little longer in my mischievous rant, I sometimes wonder >whether people are so keen to see films that are not Hollywood-produced, that >they feel they must appreciate films made elsewhere, even if (or maybe exactly >because) the seams are showing and the links are clunky... (OK, I will duck now >because I can feel the rotten eggs come flying my way...) > > ________________________________ From: Anita G >To: Lieve Reckers >Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro >; joni@smoe.org >Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 10:57:36 >Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc > >Hi Lieve >We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last >week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you >say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family >(or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. > >Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although >definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it >had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes >inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of >isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As >someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors >for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming >adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate >colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic >platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's >terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling >over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the >film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is >all good. > >I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! >Anit x > >On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: >> Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must say >> that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with family >> life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the >> much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of >> characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting >> and >> improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters >> appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had >> anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It >> seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and >> covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised >> dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go and >> see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! >> >> Lieve in London >> ________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:48:38 -0700 (MST) From: TheStaff@JoniMitchell.com Subject: New Library item: Joni: both sides now Title: Joni: both sides now Publication: Radio Times Date: 1986.4.1 http://jonimitchell.com/library/view.cfm?id=2311 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 08:39:30 -0600 From: est86mlm@ameritech.net Subject: Yahoo Concert with Herbie and Joni Susan, Not the entire concert but found Herbie featuring Joni singing RIVER. It's now in the Video Library http://jonimitchell.com/library/video.cfm?id=241 Laura ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 08:02:26 -0800 (PST) From: Mags Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc Lieve, Im only getting the one copy of your mail, as you said, you have sent it cc to me. Hmm not sure why. As well, I see a lot of messages from the JMDL going directly to my spam folder...puzzling. Anyone else having that problem lately? - --- On Wed, 11/17/10, Lieve Reckers wrote: From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc To: "Mags" , "Gerald Notaro" Cc: "Anita G" , Warrenkeith91354@aol.com, joni@smoe.org Received: Wednesday, November 17, 2010, 9:04 AM Hi Mags! Maybe not "how it is", but yes, "how I see it" - otherwise what's the point of saying anything, eh? It's funny, I know my messages must have arrived in your and Jerry's mailbox because I am getting your replies, but I haven't yet seen my own messages in my JMDL inbox. Could you just let me know if you saw my mail via the JMDL, or only in your individual inboxes because I copied you by name? Lieve in London From: Mags To: Gerald Notaro ; Lieve Reckers Cc: Anita G ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:51:51 Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc ah Lieve, I love the way you tell it like it is! And I appreciate the opines of others. I shall see it when it arrives on the Prairie, as Ive said numerous times ;) Jerry, agreed, one hundred fold, love love love Brenda Blethyn; truly a marvel Mags, currently watching season 3 of The Wire - --- On Wed, 11/17/10, Lieve Reckers wrote: From: Lieve Reckers Subject: Re: Movie Talk - njc To: "Gerald Notaro" Cc: "Anita G" , "Mags" , Warrenkeith91354@aol.com, joni@smoe.org Received: Wednesday, November 17, 2010, 8:35 AM It did quite well, I think, Jerry. At least, it got attention in the press etc and was also shown on TV. I think it must have done modestly well in the cinemas. It was a nice little film, especially written for its main acress Jane Horrocks. She did shine in that film, but has over the last years been getting seriously on my nerves with her silly Tesco adverts on TV. The way her accent and way of speaking is exploited and exaggerated in those ads makes my skin crawl. Oops, must be my bitchy day today... Lieve in London From: Gerald Notaro To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Anita G ; Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 13:04:45 Subject: Movie Talk - njc Love all this movie talk. One thing I like almost as much as Joni. Speaking of Brenda Blethyn, Little Voice is one of my favorite movies. I always have it on my iPhone. No one has even heard of it over here. How did it do Great Britain? Jerry NO: Great Mandella on WMNF - Thinking of you, Wily Pearl! On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Lieve Reckers wrote: Hi Anita! Thanks very much for your take on Another Year. I really hope Mags and anybody else who sees it will enjoy it like you did, of course! Knowing I couldn't possibly spoil it for anyone who is meant to enjoy it (just the way we are wired, I suppose!) I will just perversely explain one more time in explaining why I was disappointed by the film! :-) Of course, I recognised the real-life issues presented in the film, such as the passage of time and loneliness, and I was fine with that (i.e. I don't always need to be cheered up by a film!) but I felt that the WAY in which this was presented in Anther Year was rather superficial and did not really lead to any further insight. I could literally see and feel Lesley Manville's acting and over-long improvising going on. It felt to me like we just saw a few portraits of people with problems and a few portraits of rather smugly "happy/contented" people, and to be honest I know enough people in my own life that I can observe with more insight than this film gave me. And what was, for goodness sake, the point of an actress of the calibre of Brendy Blethyn completely grabbing our attention in the first 5 minutes or so with her portrayal of a very intriguing, unhappy woman, to then never to reappear in the story? I would rather have focused on her for the rest of the film, than on the flaky types we got instead! Anyway, that is just my own disappointed reaction. I wish everybody else who sees it a lot of enjoyment and/or deep insight! Lieve PS To just continue a little longer in my mischievous rant, I sometimes wonder whether people are so keen to see films that are not Hollywood-produced, that they feel they must appreciate films made elsewhere, even if (or maybe exactly because) the seams are showing and the links are clunky... (OK, I will duck now because I can feel the rotten eggs come flying my way...) From: Anita G To: Lieve Reckers Cc: Mags ; Warrenkeith91354@aol.com; Gerald Notaro ; joni@smoe.org Sent: Wed, 17 November, 2010 10:57:36 Subject: Re: onlyJMDL Digest V2010 #316 njc Hi Lieve We must be walking parallel paths, as I went and saw both films last week. 'The Kids are Alright' was most interesting and I think what you say about both looking at what it is to be part of a family (or,indeed, to not feel part of a family) applies to both movies. Unlike you, dear Lieve, I simply loved 'Another Year', although definately not one to go and see if you need cheering up. I thought it had so much to say, probably in the OTT grotesques that sometimes inhabit Mike Leigh films, about the nature of the passing of time, of isolation and how we connect with each other (or don't connect). As someone who has worked as a counsellor and supervisor of counsellors for over 20 years, I found the relationship between the seeming adequate counsellor, Gerry, and her alcoholic and seemingly inadequate colleague/friend Mary excruciating to watch. The therapeutic platitudes and exercising of boundaries when confronted with Mary's terrifying isolation rang so very true to me. My toes were curling over watching. It really was quite unbearable. Steph and I saw the film completely differently, so it led to lots of discussion, which is all good. I found Another Year film multi-layered and I'd say see it,Mags, if you can! Anit x On 14 November 2010 18:21, Lieve Reckers wrote: > Hi Mags! I just saw that movie, Another Year, at my local cinema. I must say > that I compared it with "The Kids are Alright", because both deal with family > life in the broader sense, and I must say it came out of that comparison the > much weaker one. It seemed it was just based on an idea of a number of > characters, and they were allowed to do their party piece in terms of acting > and > improvising, but there were so many loose threads (interesting characters > appearing and never showing up again) that I felt the film really never had > anything to say, apart from some rather shallow and predictable stuff. It > seemed to me like the "naturalness" and "unglamorousness" were parading and > covering up for "nothing-much-to-say-ness". Even the acting and improvised > dialogues felt unreal and sketchy at times. It really made me want to go and > see "The Kids are Alright" one more time! > > Lieve in London > ________________________________ ------------------------------ End of JMDL Digest V2010 #344 ***************************** ------- Post messages to the list by clicking here: mailto:joni@smoe.org Unsubscribe by clicking here: mailto:joni-digest-request@smoe.org?body=unsubscribe -------