Unsightly Mental Blemishes

FAFO:

A reader writes concerning the fencing in Musketeers:

Good take Hue. Thanks for sharing that.

Whats your opinion on the physicality of the sword play vs. the Errol Flynn/Stewart Granger/Zorro films? I would think it was a realistic portrayal.

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen any Errol Flynn movies since I began fencing. Zorro with Banderas was quite athletic and, if not entirely realistic, a great deal of fun; I do recall seeing an installment with, I believe, Basil Rathbone as the bad guy, so it was probably the 1940 THE MARK OF ZORRO, and while not nearly as athletic as Banderas, I seem to remember thinking it was really good stage fencing.

When it comes to Granger I’ve only seen SCARAMOUCHE, and, yeah, while the movements are a little exaggerated, it does look something like what fencers do.

Syncope:

Syncope (SINK-a-pee) is another word for fainting or passing out. Someone is considered to have syncope if they become unconscious and go limp, then soon recover. For most people, syncope occurs once in a great while, if ever, and is not a sign of serious illness. However in others, syncope can be the first and only warning sign prior to an episode of sudden cardiac death. Syncope can also lead to serious injury. Talk to your physician if syncope happens more often. [Johns Hopkins Medicine]

Noted in “For decades, she endured brief blackouts. Then a scary one hit her.”, Sandra G. Boodman, WaPo:

“Is she about to chuck a pie at us?” thought Constance. “Ah, she’s such a vindictive woman!”

The Three Musketeers (1973) is the Michael York & a cloud of stars version of the old and venerable tale. This is the most comedic version of the old tale that I’ve seen, ranging from broad farce to subtle presentation of an English Duke completing an assignation with a French Queen in a laundry in the basement of the French palace, and includes such touches as capturing the offhand mutterings of characters, the disposal of slops and worse out the building windows onto passing traffic, that might be suppressed in a more dignified retelling of the story.

In terms of the story, there’s little enough out of the ordinary: D’Artagnan is dispatched to Paris by his sword-master and former Musketeer father to seek fame, fortune, fighting, and women. He encounters Rochefort and is insulted by Rochefort’s disdain for D’Artagnan’s Gascony homeland; later, as he attempts to arrange a duel with Rochefort, he inadvertently schedules duels with the eponymous trio of musketeers. Interrupted by the Palace guard for brawling, they and D’Artagnan pummel the guard and befriend D’Artagnan. From Constance to the Queen’s assignation with the Duke, and her gift of a rememberance to the Duke, and then Cardinal Richelieu’s devious request for a masked ball at which the rememberance should be displayed, it’s all here, executed with flair, dash, and the occasional bit of clumsiness. As a fencer, I appreciate the clumsiness, it enhances my self-esteem.

This is what I grew up on, and its carefree approach to heroism is a lesson in itself.

Still, it shows its age a little bit. Constance is distressingly helpless, and the disparate lives of the various classes can be appalling for those audience members not conscious of the utility of fidelity to social realities in period storytelling. And if you need your heroes to be ridiculously buff and testosterone-ridden, go elsewhere for your entertainment. Michael York, playing the lead, might be described as ripped, but he’s built like a collection of toothpicks, and he’s not the only such actor.

It’s too light-hearted and, to be frank, shallow to recommend, but if you haven’t seen it, if you like sword-play and quick wit and plain silliness, and have a couple of hours to while away, this might be a candidate for your time.

From CNN/Business:

First, it was disposable cameras. Then it was low-rise jeans. Now, Gen-Z’s latest “vintage” obsession is the flip phone – that mid-1990s era phone that has suddenly become oh so popular with millennials. …

Actress Dove Cameron, who rose to fame on the Disney Channel’s “Liv and Maddie” show, said in a November interview that she had switched to a flip phone. Spending too much time on her phone and looking at social media “is really bad for me,” she said.

Eschew timesucks, folks. Give yourselves time to think.

JD Sword and Jeff Dellinger noted in passing on The Morning Heresy:

Posters for artist Demi Lovato’s new album, Holy Fvck, have been banned by Britain’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for being “likely to cause serious offense to Christians.” According to CNN, the ASA received “complaints from four members of the public.” You know, out of the nearly 67 million people in Britain.

Surely there’s a religion out there that takes holy offense at any form of censorship?

The biggest natural pair of eyes in movies. No, I don’t know about the cap. Yes, that’s milk.

Carry On Cleo (1964) is the story of the Roman Empire at the time of Julius Caesar, his assault on Britain and Egypt, his relationship with Ptolemy, Marc Antony, and all the test, the Vestal Virgins, the slaves, and all the rest.

Told with bawdiness, puns, and no consideration for what’s possible and what’s not, Carry On Cleo is part of a 30-odd long series of movies covering various topics with a tongue in the cheek and a wink. Nothing is sacred nor profound, and the rest is, well, silly.

As we watched the pretty English lasses endure the leers of English cum Roman men, however, my Arts Editor said, “I should hate this, but it actually isn’t making my teeth itch.” Is there any better praise?

Sonification:

Sonification is the use of non-speech audio to convey information or perceptualize data. Auditory perception has advantages in temporal, spatial, amplitude, and frequency resolution that open possibilities as an alternative or complement to visualization techniques.

For example, the rate of clicking of a Geiger counter conveys the level of radiation in the immediate vicinity of the device. [Wikipedia]

Noted in “How sounds from space are revealing otherwise hidden cosmic phenomena,” Ajay Peter Manuel, NewScientist (28 December 2022, paywall):

It wasn’t until the 1960s that astronomers began listening to their data on purpose. And it was Donald Gurnett at the University of Iowa who pioneered the technique. When data came back from the Voyager 1 mission as it flew past Io, a moon of Jupiter, in 1979, Gurnett listened to the signals and identified low-frequency radio waves. In the 1980s, Gurnett and his colleagues used sonification to identify problems affecting the Voyager 2 mission as it traversed the rings of Saturn. When they converted signals from the craft’s radio and plasma wave science instrument into an audio representation, they heard sounds that they described as “resembling a hailstorm”. This led to the discovery that electromagnetically charged micrometeoroids the size of grains of dust were bombarding the probe.

Ears as highly sensitive sensory analyzers. BONUS: An example from the article, sourced on YouTube:

Benjamin Wittes of Lawfare thinks not, but cannot guarantee it:

This fact pattern, in which the president’s counsels on their own initiative identify and arrange for the return of classified material, is not obviously consistent with criminal misuse of that classified material—much less by the president himself. So depending on what investigators find, there may be scant evidence that a crime took place at all.

Right now, all we really know is that a relatively small amount of classified material from the Obama era has been found where it wasn’t supposed to be on three occasions and in three locations associated with the period between Biden’s vice presidency and his presidency.

It has to be investigated, to be sure. This kind of mishandling of classified material always triggers a referral to the Justice Department. And it has to be investigated by a special counsel. The regulations are pretty clear about that. But that does not mean it is likely to blossom as a criminal case. Indeed, it’s a most unpromising criminal case.

An unfortunate coincidence, perhaps. I’ve even speculated that the docs were planted, although how that could be accomplished escapes me.

So I’ll be watching and waiting, while ignoring propaganda from both sides.

Leadership is easy when the stream of events contains nothing of an adverse nature. It’s only when hard decisions come tumbling down the river, and the river gets out of its banks and threatens to wash away all held dear, does good leadership really come to the fore.

I’d say the town is washing away as GOP leadership – a word to be put in quotes by those of us with a quaint disposition – has failed to look beyond its nose when it comes to new Rep George Santos (R-NY):

McCarthy told reporters on Thursday that Santos has “a long way to go to earn trust” and that concerns could be investigated by the House Ethics Committee, but emphasized that Santos is a part of the House GOP conference.

“The voters of his district have elected him. He is seated. He is part of the Republican conference,” he said at a news conference on Capitol Hill.

The controversy surrounding Santos is presenting an early test of McCarthy’s leadership as speaker and has created a major issue for the new GOP majority.

Majority Leader Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, echoed McCarthy, saying, “Obviously, you know, we’re finding out more, but we also recognize that he was elected by his constituents.”

House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, a New York Republican who endorsed Santos in his race, would not call on the embattled freshman to resign on Thursday.

“It will play itself out,” she told CNN. “He’s a duly elected member of Congress. There have been members of Congress on the Democrat side who have faced investigations before.” [CNN/Politics]

Trying to focus on the facts about Rep Santos results in this.

These excuses are quite rank, easily disassembled by anyone willing to take a moment and think about them. This is not leadership. Leadership would recognize that Santos, a very bad apple whose depths may not yet be plumbed, should be expelled, and acted quickly to stanch the bleeding.

What are the consequences of ignoring the problem? McCarthy’s told every corrupt-politico wannabe that he’ll tolerate their presence in the House of Representatives’ GOP caucus. He’s told every voter who’ll pay attention that the GOP is loaded with scalawags and grasping power mongers, who are unworthy of any elective office.

He’s told his caucus that his leadership skills are non-existent.

And the caucus may be listening. At least eight GOP Reps (here and here) have expressed their dismay that Santos is in the House, and under the colors of the Republican Party. Most or all of them want him gone.

McCarthy & his leadership group are off to a very poor start. McCarthy was stripped and manhandled by the far-right extremists, and then here on his very first challenge, he’s refused to take decisive action.

That action would have been to move to expel Santos from the House. Yes, Santos managed to get himself elected by a GOP that failed to do its gatekeeper job, but McCarthy’s message would be We forthrightly cleaned up our mistake, and voters would have appreciated that.

Instead, he’ll be a festering, maggoty wound on the side of the Republican elephant, and when the special election does come around, chances are that the Democrats will easily take the seat. Indeed, this could be a problem for all swing-district Republicans, and those expressing disapproval may be trying to immunize their re-election efforts.

But McCarthy’s off to such a rocky start that I foresee withdrawing my labeling of Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) as the worst Speaker in the modern era, and moving that label to McCarthy.

Long-time readers may recall the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Succinctly, those States subscribing to the Compact dedicate their Electoral College votes to the Presidential Candidate who garners the most votes, nation-wide, each Presidential election cycle. This would prevent the perceived injustice of a victory in the popular vote obviated by a loss in the Electoral College, as happened to candidates Hillary Clinton and Al Gore. Paul Hogarth on Daily Kos has an update:

We are already 72% [of the winning 270 electoral votes] of the way there—with 15 states and the District of Columbia having passed a law joining the Compact, which totals 195 electoral votes. And in Colorado, after the governor and state legislature joined the Compact in 2019, it even survived a referendum challenge at the ballot box.

Getting from 195 to 270 electoral votes will not be easy, as we already got the “low-hanging fruit” of large blue states like California, New York, and Illinois. But the Compact has already picked up battleground states like Colorado and New Mexico, and in recent years, the Compact came very close to passing in Nevada (where it passed both houses of the legislature), Maine, and Virginia.

After the 2022 midterms, Democrats have a trifecta in Minnesota and Michigan—so in 2023, these two states will be top priorities for the Compact. We also now have a Democratic majority in the Pennsylvania state House, and are likely just one more election cycle away from picking up the legislature in Arizona.

It’s interesting that he thinks the Arizona legislature will fall to the Democrats in 2024.

This was written during the 15 elections for Speaker of the House, and then I forgot to publish it. Oversights happen.

Jennifer Rubin of WaPo thinks the House GOP is nuts, and not because of the ongoing fiasco of the electing anyone to the Speaker’s chair:

The OCE [Office of Congressional Ethics], which Democrats created in 2008, was designed as an independent office with the power to investigate ethics violations among House members. (The OCE, however, can only conduct preliminary investigations and make recommendations, leaving it to the House Ethics Committee to decide whether to investigate further and enact punishment.)

Ever since the office’s conception, Republicans seeking to avoid independent scrutiny have attempted to dismantle it. So it should come as no surprise that while they cannot agree on a speaker, Republicans have apparently agreed to introduce rules changes that would hamper the OCE’s ability to do its job, including imposing term limits on its board and severely restricting its ability to hire new staff.

Yeah, that’d be the corpse of the GOP there.

When someone is a third-rater, and finds themselves in a prestigious and powerful position such as being a member of the US House of Representatives, the first thing to do is put in place safeguards against detection.

Once detection is mitigated, then taking corrupt advantage of your position can begin.

We saw this with former President Trump as he fired or otherwise muzzled a number of inspectors throughout the Executive Branch; it’s no surprise that the House, temporary home to a number of highly questionable, if deeply self-righteous, individuals with allegiances to Trump and his corrupt methods, will be seeing similar actions taking place.

After all, this is the end-phase of the GOP. Already in the process of ripping itself apart, opportunists are rampant in the Party machinery. I expect we’ll be witness to quite a lot of corruption in the next two years. Unless the corruption actually takes the GOP out of power, which, given the small GOP advantage in the chamber, could certainly happen.

The FTX debacle is apparently scrambling some brains:

Collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX says it has recovered more than $5 billion worth of cash and crypto assets it may be able to sell to help repay customers and investors, an attorney for the company told a Delaware bankruptcy court on Wednesday.

Company advisers have identified a significant amount of crypto that it will be more difficult to sell without depressing the market price of those digital tokens, FTX attorney Andrew Dietderich said. The company is also trying to sell off other “nonstrategic investments” made by FTX that have a book value of $4.6 billion, he said. [WaPo]

I do hope the judge rules the “crypto assets” are worthless. That’s how I’d view it.

Now-Rep George Santos (R-NY), of ethical scandals fame, is refusing to fold under the pressure:

“He deceived voters,” Cairo said. “His lies were not mere fibs. He disgraced the House of Representatives … He’s not welcome here at Republican headquarters.”

Moments after the news broke, Santos, who was in Washington at the time, refused to resign.

“I will not,” he told reporters on Capitol Hill when asked if he will step down. He refused to answer additional questions as he went into an elevator.

The top Republicans in the House – Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Majority Leader Steve Scalise and Majority Whip Tom Emmer – did not answer questions from CNN about Santos and the Nassau County GOP’s calls for his resignation.

A source close to House GOP leadership said the calls from the county GOP will not have any bearing on their decision regarding Santos’s political future. [CNN/Politics]

Santos will be a continual embarrassment for the House GOP, but they do not dare expel him. Why?

Because it’d be an acknowledgment that there are, indeed, ethical lines in the sand.

And the Democrats would then know where to push any subsequent GOP scandals – right over that line.

Representative George Devolder-Santos, NY-CD3, currently

That’s why I quoted the House GOP leadership source, because I think it indicates they’ll be sticking their poo-covered fingers in their ears. After all, their current advantage in the House is only ten, when they had forecast something in the fifties a few months before the election. If Santos resigns, the advantage is nine – and if the Democrats win the special election, it’s down to eight. This effectively means the number of votes they can lose to out of sorts extremists actively working against them goes from 4 to 3, assuming all Democrats are present and voting en bloc.

But the more moderate Republicans are those that are thinking more than a week ahead, and they have already begun to press Santos to resign. While McCarthy would not agree, that’s the best result the GOP can hope for, as it doesn’t result in a goal for which Democrats can try to push the next Republican ethics scandal, but kicks out someone who puts out a vibe best described as pathetic and power-hungry. Pathetic Republicans will not attract enough votes to retain control of the House in 2024, and they’re already in trouble after the collapse of the GOP leadership during the Speaker elections.

But does Santos realize how pathetic he’ll look if credible evidence of campaign finance laws infringement emerges, if his misrepresentations concerning schooling, personal finances, religious position, and who knows what else continues to dominate headlines? In politics, winning elections is not the end-all, be-all. Truth be told, it’s barely the first step. Bungling the second step is a fool’s move.

Posit:

to suggest something as a basic fact or principle from which a further idea is formed or developed: … [Cambridge Dictionary]

Noted in “The T. rex may have been a lot smarter than you thought,” Dino Grandoni, WaPo:

[Johns Hopkins University evolutionary biologist] Balanoff said she would like to see future research with updated fossil measurements. She also called the notion of the T. rex forming cultures a “really fascinating idea” but added, “I don’t know that we’re quite there yet in being able to make this prediction.”

“That being said, I welcome the positing of big ideas to drive science forward,” Balanoff said.

One of our gutters is leaking, so we’re catching the water in a bucket. Here’s a little bit of what we found when we dumped it.

Not the best clarity, but a fight at night adds to the terror.

In horror movies featuring exotic monsters, their cult followings are often built despite their failures at traditional story-telling, rather than because of. Most or all of the Godzilla movies fall into this category (cardboard cutouts running around frantically), as do those of genre classic The Blob (1958) (cardboard cutout teenagers running around aimlessly), Destination Inner Space (1966) (why is the Technicolor lizard from the stars killing everyone else indiscriminately?), the Gamera franchise (sometimes there’s almost a good plot about this rocket-ass giant turtle and its attachment to human children), and quite a number of other movies reviewed on this blog.

King Kong (1933), however, falls into the sparsely populated alternative category of Damn, that was good! where it finds one of its relatively few fellow high achievers is Pacific Rim (2013). The progenitor of the eponymous franchise, none of the King Kong remakes and sequels, at least that I’ve viewed, match the original for excellence in story-telling. In this original, each major character has an explanatory backstory, from the movie-maker out to make the best movie he can, to the village chief trying to safeguard his village from a monster that isn’t on the island to safeguard the village, but to eat it, and desperate Claire and her new-found seaman beau. This results in a story, lurid as it might be, that makes real sense and brings a sense of urgency to it, rather than the peals of laughter that so many of the genre tend to generate.

Becoming a late night snack.

Are there complaints? Certainly, the special effects can be criticized, as Kong was a big challenge for the special effects masters of the day. But they achieve a certain creepy sexual effect that makes for quite a result: it forces at least the lustful male portion of the audience to ask themselves if they are as repulsive as Kong. Or do they?

And the science has its cracks. Why is a sauropod, of which there have never been any carnivorous varieties found, eating that guy out of the tree? But it’s still a terrifying scene, if the audience will buy into that mistake. In general, the mistakes are minor and in service to the plot. Moreover, the acting and sets are more than adequate, and the pacing is not at all lackadaisical.

There are certainly moral questions being asked and, perhaps, answered, in Kong’s escape after the reporters have been assured he can’t escape, his kidnapping of his love interest, Claire, and the scaling of the Empire State Building, and his eventual extermination. But there’s no dwelling on them, no ballpeen hammers between the eyes to make the audience irritable, to lure them from their ephemeral, yet real, bond with the film into sordid reality. The questions are presented but don’t become fetid clumps of monkey dung.

Recommended.

One word of warning: Find a good print. We watched a version on Amazon Prime that was virtually spotless; no doubt it was restored. It improves the experience we each individually remember from years ago immeasurably.

The pit of Santos continues to deepen:

A member of George Santos’ political team had a plan to raise money for the Republican congressman’s campaign: Impersonate the chief of staff of now House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Wealthy donors received calls and emails from a man who said he was Dan Meyer, McCarthy’s chief of staff, during the 2020 and 2022 election cycles, according to people familiar with the matter. His name was actually Sam Miele, and he worked for Santos raising money for his campaign, according to one GOP donor who contributed to Santos’ campaign. This financier and some others in this story declined to be named in order to speak freely about private discussions.

The impersonation of the top House Republican’s chief of staff adds to an emerging picture of a winning congressional campaign propelled by fabrications and questionable tactics. Santos now finds himself in the sights of investigators and in danger of losing his political career even after he’s been sworn into office. In raising money for his campaign, Santos fed donors the same falsehoods he gave voters, campaign fundraisers and others say. [CNBC]

Ethical? Nope.

Will McCarthy do anything about it? Expediency will outweigh outrage when the GOP’s House advantage is so slim.

But flattering donors with someone claiming to be SOON TO BE SPEAKER McCarthy’s chief of staff is not surprising, and nor that it worked. It might work on Democratic donors as well.

Still, where there’s smoke there’s fire, and between moderate Republicans mortified by the tactics, and anti-gay GOP activists, Santos may end up being pushed out before the depths of his electoral immorality is fully plumbed.

Which would be a pity.

A work by Vince Guaraldi Trio. Guaraldi also did the music for most of the Peanuts television specials. This is something else, though.

There is nothing I can write here that would be odder than this movie.

Men & Chicken (2015; Danish: Mænd og Høns) is the story of five men in search of their father, a man who was indiscriminate in his mates … and didn’t mate with them.

The two eldest, Elias and Gabriel, were sent away as babies, and don’t learn of their biological heritage until their adoptive parents are dead. So, between bouts of semi-public masturbation, they discover that their father is now located on a small, Danish island named Ork, and set out for it.

Their introduction to the island is sadly tragic, as Gabriel is run over by the local mayor and his daughter, leaving him an invalid, but they make it to the institution where their father lives.

And finding him, while fending off their three brothers, who appear to idiot savants – feel free to emphasize your favorite word of that pair as is your wont, or even want – is an adventure in dominance behaviors in and of itself.

But it all circles around and around and around the question that will afflict American audiences, if not Danish audiences: Why make this movie? Is this a Danish peculiarity, or someone’s perverted pet project of little pertinence nor perspicacity?

Acted with great competence, I’m still puzzling over it.

Pass the chicken.

Trepid:

(adjective) timid by nature or revealing timidity [Vocabulary.com]

Hah! I’ve not actually ever seen this word in writing anywhere that I can recall. While I was watching our elder cat, Mayhem, now in his twentieth year, contemplate a leap down from a counter, it occurred to me that he should be showing more trepidation. The adjective intrepid flashed to mind, followed by the question, What is the root of trepidation?

Example: It was a trepid koala, even for its kind, terrified of the shaking leaves that formed its tenuous diet.

For those readers remembering cryptocurrency platform Celsius, here’s a bit of a shock:

More than half a million people who deposited money with collapsed crypto lender Celsius Network have been dealt a major blow to their hopes of recovering their funds, with the judge in the company’s bankruptcy case ruling that the money belongs to Celsius and not to the depositors.

The judge, Martin Glenn, found that Celsius’s terms of use — the lengthy contracts that many websites publish but few consumers read — meant “the cryptocurrency assets became Celsius’s property.” …

The bankruptcy ruling focused specifically on whether Celsius as part of the restructuring can now sell $18 million in so-called stablecoins, a type of virtual currency, to help stay solvent. But its implications are much larger. By ruling that the money in the accounts wasn’t really owned by the 600,000 account holders, the court has basically said they are now just unsecured creditors. And “there simply will not be enough value available to repay” them, Glenn wrote. [WaPo]

And if Celsius worded their agreement in such a way, so will have some of their competitors and brethren. And when this news becomes rampant, will cryptocurrency users and investors rush to read their agreements, and then withdraw from these platforms in one mad rush?

Will we be seeing comparable collapses all across the industry?

I’m guessing the crypto platforms at risk saw Celsius and FTX collapse and are working hard to keep up and plug the holes by modifying their agreements, restraining their urges of greed in preference to those of survival. But one or two may not get it done in time, depending on how quickly the news spreads.

And they may join Celsius in the trashbin of history.

Newt Gingrich (R-GA), former Speaker, former Representative, and quitter, is considered in some quarters to be the grandfather of the modern GOP. If he is, it appears that he’s lost control of the grandkids:

Newt Gingrich called every anti-Kevin McCarthy Republican, “a blackmailing idiot.” pic.twitter.com/zYDOT3sFkp

— PatriotTakes 🇺🇸 (@patriottakes) January 4, 2023

And perhaps even more telling is Rep Boebert (R-CO) telling off her former idol, Donald J. Trump:

“Even having my favorite president call us and tell us we need to knock this off, I think it actually needs to be reversed,” Boebert said as she nominated Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., ahead of the fifth round of voting. “The president needs to tell Kevin McCarthy that sir, you do not have the votes, and it’s time to withdraw.” [MSN]

At that time …

McCarthy needs 218 Republican votes to become Speaker, however, he remains stuck at 201 votes after the fifth round of voting. Twenty House Republicans voted for Donalds.

And since then, today, McCarthy has flipped 15 votes back to himself. How? I believe I saw one report that said it was by having the former President call each of those Representative-elects to exert pressure, and not through further concessions.

I suspect those were threatening calls and not nice ones. McCarthy had been serving up entirely too much frosting and not nearly enough baseball bats.

But it’s also telling that the peak of the rebel population has been a mere twenty, less than ten percent of the GOP caucus, and they are effective only due to the failure of the GOP to fulfill the optimistic predictions of their leaders. Unless potential joiners are laying low for strategic reasons, no one wants to join them. In truth, these rebels are few and unpersuasive. It’ll be interesting, in a year and a half, to see how many of them make it out of primaries, and then how many persuade independents that they deserve another term. I know extremist conservative commentators want me to believe this is a great victory, but I remain unconvinced.

The game isn’t over just yet, but I expect some time tomorrow we’ll come to the end of this little drama. The trick for the audience is to not let antipathy for the rebels cloud one’s judgment of the extracted concessions. There may have been some justifiable complaints, such as permitting huge bills be voted on just after introduction, that will be remedied. It’s worth keeping an open mind.

Searching for clues at the local hop. Possibly while hopped up. Later, they were hopping mad.

Murder at the Gallop (1963) is a bit unusual. It’s a movie derived from an Agatha Christie novel that switches the lead detective from the famed Hercule Poirot to the nearly as famed Miss Marple, and it incorporates a more broad form of humor than do most, or all, of Christie’s works. I often think Christie is hiding just a bit of a grin as she sticks it to the target British stereotypes du jour, but this work takes advantage of several opportunities to go for the guffaws.

And, for all that, it is a successful show on its own terms. Marple is, possibly, a bit more aggressive than she often is in other shows, but enjoyably so, and the evil-doer is just one of a cast of reproachable and reprobates. Said cast are potential heirs to the fortune of their brother, who fell down the stairs to Marple’s witnessing. But what does he have that’s so valuable? My Arts Editor actually cringed when we examined the art due to be transferred. And, so, we’re off and running!

Throw in excellent acting, admirable cinematography, a nice plot, and quirky characters, and it makes for a lovely hour and a half or more of light detecting.