“Twice Upon A Time” is a Doctor Who episode in which the Twelfth Doctor, as played by Peter Capaldi, regenerated after an encounter with his first encounter.  Since William Hartnell has been deceased for some time, David Bradley was the actor who performed the role well enough.  BBC Books had published a few novelizations of episodes from the era of Doctor Who which was a revival that began in 2005.  “Twice Upon a Time” aired on Christmas Day 2017.  Paul Cornell was the author who adapted the original script conceived by Steven Moffat.

As mentioned before, I think Peter Capaldi was a fine casting choice for the Doctor, however many of his actual stories had some real problems in the writing.  Moffat ended up not being all that great as a show runner, in my opinion. Also, this regeneration story is one of the weakest in the series as a whole.  I thought it was pretty cool to revisit the First Doctor era though, even if it was with a different actor.  Bradley had played the role of William Hartnell in a dramatization of the early days in Doctor Who known as “An Adventure In Space and Time”.  He also has been doing a series for Big Finish Productions in new audio plays featuring his version of the First Doctor.

Cornell’s novelization doesn’t work any miracles as far as me appreciating Moffat’s script more, but he does add some nice touches and expansions that helped me enjoy his contribution more.  It’s a very short novel, but Cornell make the most of what he could with it.  Of course, the idea of how traumatic a regeneration could be for the Doctor is a fascinating aspect to explore.  There were moments in the television story that were kind of moving at times, but the overall plot was rather nonsensical, and Cornell just could not help me forgive that.  Cornell is a pretty good record with a long history of contributing his talents to the survival of the franchise in its various media.  He has written original novels for Virgin Publishing and BBC Books for years.  This particular book is well written, but it’s based on an episode which I found to be a bit below average.

So it’s back to the less frivolous of literary journeys with a new author to me.  Next up,,,”A Man Called Ove” by Fredrik Backman.

“A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” is a biographical drama film…sort of.  The late Fred Rogers is featured as played by Tom Hanks, but the journalist assigned to profile him as really at the center.  This is a pretty unique way to reexamine the life and messages of Mr. Rogers.  Marielle Heller is the director who brings to life the script written by Micah Fitzerman-Blue and Noah Harpster. It was based on an article written by Tom Junod in 1998 which was published by the magazine, Esquire.

Tom Hanks dons the familiar sneakers and red sweater as Mr. Rogers.  Matthew Rhys is the journalist who is named Lloyd Vogel in the film.  Vogel is struggling with a lot of resentment toward his father over some serious past transgressions, and it is affecting his relationship with his wife and their newborn son.  Chris Cooper, Christine Lahti, and Maryann Plunkett are also part of the cast.

The film does present the life and wisdom of Fred Rogers in a rather creative manner.  Rogers is sort of relegated as a supporting presence in the film at times but  a profound one.  Anyway, most of this works quite well.  Hanks does well in his depiction of Fred Rogers, which is impressive since he does not really resemble the real Mr. Rogers without a lot of help from the make-up department.  He sure made me regret not following Mr. Rogers more closely when he was alive.  The other cast members did fine too,  There was also some pretty slick visual effects with scene changes that were done in a manner which could have been seen in “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood”.

The movie was quite charming and poignant at the same time.  Although it could have stood more exploration of Rogers’ faith and philosophy, I think it was likely a very fair and loving depiction of a man with a singular mission to use television as a means to reach and comfort children in a world that can often be dark and confusing.

This is not my usual genre of preference when it comes to my film viewing, but I was glad to see this one.  I was quite curious to see how this would turn out when I heard about it, and I think it Fred Rogers would have been pleased with the result as well.

“The Uncertainty Principle” is a Doctor Who audio play written by Simon Guerrier for Big Finish Productions.  It is part of the range known as The Companion Chronicles and stars Wendy Padbury alongside her daughter, Charlie Hays.  This continues a series in which Zoe Herriot is being questioned by an investigator for some ambiguous agency known as The Company.  Fans of the television series would know that Zoe had her memory of her travels with the Doctor erased by the Time Lords when they were captured in the serial known as “The War Games”.  Jamie McCrimmon had been the 18th century Scottish denizen who had been with them during that era.  The Company has found a way to break through the memory block imposed by the Time Lords, however the method is a little unreliable.

Zoe does manage to recall an adventure that starts off with the Doctor and his two companions attending a funeral for a young scientist whose experiments brought very unusual aliens to Earth.  These aliens have an unusual ability involving electricity, and the scientist’s actual death may be in doubt…or it may not.

Padbury is engaging enough as a performer in these episodes, and her daughter Charlie Hayes, is fine as well.  Guerrier’s script is a bit hard to follow at times though.  He has written several episodes for Big Finish, and he usually comes through.  This era of the program is a favorite of mine though, so I relish any opportunity for a new Second Doctor adventure.  This episode isn’t bad, but I am not sure there is anything that remarkable that makes this one memorable.  Padbury does great and seems able to capture the spirit of Patrick Troughton’s interpretation of the Doctor.  It’s evident that the mother and daughter seem to enjoy working together.  Big Finish has yet to put out something that I actively disliked, but occasionally, there are stories that just fall short of capturing my attention with any intensity.  Unfortunately, this particular episode is one of those.

“The Goldfinch” is a Pulitzer prize winning novel by Donna Tartt.  It is told in first person from the perspective of a kid named Theo Decker.  The novel starts off when Theo is about thirteen years old.  A trip to a New York art museum is shattered when a bomb is detonated, killing the mother.  In the confusion, Theo has managed to grab a painting of a pretty bird and hold on to it over the years.  He was first taken in by a family of a school friend before his ne’er-do-well father turns up and whisks him off to Las Vegas.  He meets a Russian immigrant named Boris who has a big impact on his life.  Theo gets hooked on drugs and returns to New York where he lives with a friendly art and antique dealer. He is in love with a tragically unattainable pretty girl who was in the museum with him at the time it was blown apart.  Theo is quite the mess, understandably.  The novel delves pretty heavily into the underground art scene, which isn’t without interest.

Here’s the main problem I have with this thing.  It is well over 950 pages long. and I’m not that sure that it needed to be.  Tartt is actually a talented enough wordsmith, but detail she puts into scenes and reflections really makes reading this thing like slogging through wet cement sometimes.  I appreciate the complex characters she has and the complicated dynamics in some of the relationships.  The plot itself is interesting, but I am not sure it needed to be such an opus.

There is a lot I am leaving out in describing this novel, but it’s over 950 pages so I will just have to forgive myself for any perceived oversight and ask for some grace from any readers.  It actually has some merits to it, but I had a hard time with staying in a state of enthrallment.  The experience felt more like a chore than a diversion at times, but I am too stubborn to give up on something once I have started reading.  Plus, I think sticking through it and enduring something like that gives me more credibility when commenting in this blog.

Now on to something considerably less weighty!  One of the joys I had as a youngster was collecting the Target novelizations of the classic Doctor Who episodes.  A few years ago, the experience was recreated with a selection of episodes from the revived series. The next step on my literary journey will be with a novelization of the final adventure of the Twelfth Doctor, played by Peter Capaldi, “Twice Upon a Time” by Paul Cornell.

“Tartarus” is a Doctor Who audio play presented by Big Finish Productions and was written by David Llewellyn with Scott Handcock serving as director.  Peter Davison is back on deck as the Fifth Doctor with Sarah Sutton and Janet Fielding pitching again as Nyssa and Tegan, respectively.  This episode is rather a special one for Big Finish since it is a crossover into one of the newer original series about a rather important writer and orator in Ancient Rome.  Samuel Barnett joins the Doctor and his crew as Cicero.  George Watkins also lends his talents as a slave known as Marc, whose significance expands as the story unfolds.  Laura Riseborough, Joe Shire, Tracy-Anne Oberman rounds out the guest cast as well.

Even a Time Lord can be a fan of someone.  The Doctor brings his companions to meet Cicero, who has retired by the year 63 BC to the village of Cumae. During a small gathering, strange lights in the sky are a precursor to the Time Lord, Cicero, and company being whisked to a place where the ancient Roman legends and myths are coming to life, risking the lives and sanity of more than just the Doctor and his friends.

This was a pretty interesting and enjoyable installment.  I am not familiar with Cicero or Big Finish’s interpretation of him from their other series, but Barnett seems to be a wonderful foil for Davison and other main cast members.  Yes, there are elements that seem to be more for the sake of a good gimmick, but it works.  There was an effort to not have one lead character overshadow the other much, since both the Doctor and Cicero would have such strong and imposing personalities.  Indeed, Cicero’s gift of oration and debate does become important in this particular adventure.  It was revealed in the cast interviews that Watkins is actually a nephew of Peter Davison, so that was a pretty neat revelation.  Of course, Tegan has a rather overly bombastic disdain for the practice of slavery, which once again the writer sometimes makes her sound a little bit of an overwrought dunce.  Yes, we know that slavery is a very inhumane practice, however Tegan thinks that the practice should be overthrown before history runs its course.  Yet again, the audience has to endure another reminder of the devastating effects of such an endeavor.  I think at this point, Tegan can be toned down a little when it comes to her outrage and impulsiveness.  I think the writers can find ways to stay true to her character but still smarten her up a bit where the Doctor doesn’t have to give her the same repetitive chastisements.  Saying that, I like having Janet Fielding participating in these recordings, and she herself is an effective performer, but Tegan could stand a little more depth on a consistent basis and a little less yelling and bossiness at times.  Sarah Sutton was fine, as she usually is.

The relationship between the Doctor and Cicero was written quite well with what turns into just the right amount of rivalry once Cicero adjusts to his bizarre and threatening surroundings.  Llewellyn gets most things right in this script.  Maybe….just maybe, I will try out the Cicero series from Big Finish.

“The Haunted Palace” is a horror film released in 1963 and stars Vincent Price, Debra Paget, and Lon Chaney.  The screenplay was written by Charles Beaumont, and the film was directed by Roger Corman.  The story seems to have a strange mixture of influences from a poem by Edgar Allen Poe and a novella by H.P. Lovecraft.

The audience is first introduced to a little town known as Arkham, Massachusetts. As Batman has shown us over the years, nothing good ever happens at anywhere named Arkham.  The story starts off in 1765 when the town becomes suspicious of the not so friendly neighborhood warlock named Joseph Curwen and decide to interrupt whatever troubling ritual he is performing.  Curwen is burned at the stake, however has one last trick up his sleeve and curses the town.

Life goes on until 1875, when Curwen’s descendant, Charles Dexter Ward and his wife arrive in Arkham to inspect the mansion that he has inherited.  Ward bears an uncanny resemblance to his great-great-grandfather, and both of these guys bear an uncanny resemblance to Vincent Price.  Paget plays the lovely wife, and while Chaney is the creepy groundskeeper.

The town is also afflicted with several of their residents burdened with troubling deformities.  The make-up isn’t all that convincing, but it’s a Roger Corman film and it’s 1963, so that’s not so unforgivable.

Anyway, Charles starts having strange turns in his personality while at the mansion, and we soon see that Curwen’s spirit is still lingering around and has the ability to take over the bodies of family members or something.

The set designs are pretty cool, and Vincent Price is almost always fun to watch, but I am starting to suspect he is not an actor with the broadest of range.  His performance slips into the realm of silliness at times.  I need to see more of his films to really get his appeal to fans.  He isn’t terrible, but I am starting to be a bit concerned that he could be a little overrated.  On the other hand, it’s a Roger Corman film, whose work I have often found to be quite campy.

Lovecraft was probably one of the most disturbing and controversial writers of the early twentieth century, and the special effects did a fair job of bringing his twisted imaginings to life for this piece.

“The Haunted Palace” is an interesting film to see once, I suppose just because of the pedigree of those involved, however I did not find it to be very remarkable in any substantial way.

“Ford V Ferrari” is a sports drama film that chronicles the rivalry between Ford Motor Company and Ferrari leading up to 24 Hours of Le Mans of 1966.  James Mangold is the director with Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, and Jason Keller as scriptwriters.  Matt Damon stars as former race car diver and later designer, Shelby Carroll while Christian Bale is cast as the fiery British racer, Ken Miles. Tracy Letts has the role of Henry Ford II with Josh Lucas as the traditional snide Ford executive whose ambition puts him at odds with the two protagonist.  Miles and Carroll are enlisted to design a racing car for Ford which can beat the Ferrari engines.  Caitriona Balfe plays Miles’ wife.

The two leads work very well together, which really isn’t all that surprising.  Miles is depicted as a seemingly loose cannon with a short fuse while on the track and has a doting family man during the moments with his wife and son.  Bale plays both sides convincingly, as he usually does.  It was interesting to note that Shelby Carroll’s family life wasn’t explored at all, but a bit of research reveals that he didn’t have a very encouraging track record when it came to marriage.  It does sort of make the film seem a little unbalanced through, but a lot of other aspects in this piece do make up for it.

The film is pretty long and occasionally feels like it, however the performances and the final race does make it worth the time.  I had some trouble following the jargon at times as well.

Although there are times where my attention wandered a little, I ended up enjoying the movie.  The performances were engaging for the most part.  Although I don’t think he really steals the film, I found myself intrigued by one of characters by one of the head team members of the Ford crew working with Carroll and Miles.  Ray McKinnon plays a guy named Phil Remington, who I am not sure is a real person but could be.  Anyway, Remington was a pretty intriguing presence and had some poignant moments.  McKinnon is one of those actors I have seen over the years in supporting roles but something about his presence here made him a bit more noticeable to me.

I think avid racing fans will enjoy this, and I bet most people who know very little about this sport such as myself will still find plenty of moments to enjoy.  If it emerges victorious on the weekend box office numbers, I would consider it well deserved.

“Harriet” is the biographical film about the most prominent abolitionist in American history.  Kasi Lemmons is the director of this film, which she co-wrote with Gregory Allen Howard.  Cynthia Erivo dons the title role of Harriet Tubman.  Leslie Odom Jr., Joe Alwyn, and Janelle Monae are included in the cast as well.

First of all, Erivo is an inspired casting choice, although I was pretty amused to read she is actually British.  Well, she fooled me because her performance with an American accent was quite convincing.  I will have to keep an eye on some of her future projects.

I am not sure where the artistic license came  into play, but the movie was quite riveting.  There are some truly amazing and at times heart-wrenching moments as expected in a movie that centers on the brutal practice of slavery.  The film also touches on the sometimes complex relationships between the slave owners and their perceived property.  The film does make anyone with a conscience glad that this practice is long gone in the United States.  Tubman and other abolitionists are already easy for me to applaud, but Erivo’s depiction solidifies that sentiment.

I will also note that the costuming was quite well done.  Tubman’s coat and hat during the escape scenes looked pretty slick.  The set designs were also well realized.  The movie just looked good.

The other aspect that I appreciated is that there was an acknowledgement of the white people involved in the Underground Railroad.  In today’s political climate, it is easy for some movie producers to sell the idea that all or most white people approved or celebrated the idea of slavery when that was not the case at all.  What Lemmons also did well is just basically sticking to Tubman’s story without a political and social commentary hidden in the film beyond the obvious position that the practice of slavery need to end.  The movie just demonstrated the inherent evil of slavery and celebrated Tubman’s relentlessness when it came to freeing as many slaves as she could.  She apparently was also quite germane to the Union efforts during the Civil War, although this film centers on the years leading up to that conflict.

Joe Alwyn plays a fellow named Gideon Brodess, the son of the slave owner who inherited his father’s plantation and the slaves.  He also was the main antagonist, who manages to be quite nasty without slipping into a cliche character.  There are times when characters in this sort of film come off as a bit over the top.  Alwyn did well on avoiding that pitfall, in my opinion.  I think that specific character was fictional as well as the reasons for his obsession with recapturing Harriet, but the whole thing was handled and performed well.

The film just works on so many levels.  I think whatever lapses others may find in this particular telling of this extraordinary woman’s life should be forgiven since Tubman was very much involved in various forms of activism even after slavery was finally abolished, and it would be hard to properly display all of her accomplishments in a standard movie running time.  “Harriet” is probably one of the best films I have seen all year.

“Harry Houdini’s War” is a Doctor Who audio play released by Big Finish Productions. Ken Bentley is the director of this latest contribution by Steve Lyons.  Colin Baker and Nicola Bryant return again to their roles of the Doctor and Peri, respectively.  John Schwab plays the famous escape artist with Fiona Bruce, Mark Elstob, and Glen McCready rounding out the guest cast.

Harry Houdini is enlisted by the Doctor to help infiltrate a spy ring during the First World War which may be in possession of some alien technology.  The Doctor also has to play some cards close to the chest, giving Houdini some reason to not entirely trust the Time Lord.

 I usually am interested in what Lyons comes up with for the Doctor and his meanderings, however I don’t think this is one of his better efforts.  Once again, it is Colin Baker’s energy and talent which keeps this afloat.  This may be one of those releases that I will appreciate more on the second run.  The performances were fine, but I had some trouble following the plot.  I did find the second half a bit more interesting.  Schwab’s take on Houdini was rather engaging, and I wouldn’t object to see a return of this iteration of the iconic illusionist in the series. It was also rather interesting to see a more Machiavellian streak in this version of the Doctor.  That particular trait becomes more evident in his seventh incarnation.

Lyons is still a talented and imaginative author, and I have enjoyed plenty of his previous contributions, but this particular episode just didn’t grab my attention and keep it as much as I hoped.

“Terminator: Dark Fate” is science fiction action film that continues the franchise started by “The Terminator” which was released in 1984.  Original cast members Arnold Schwarzenegger and Linda Hamilton are reunited and joined by newer actors Gabriel Luna, Mackenzie Davis, and Natalia Reyes.  The screen play was written by David Goyer, Justin Rhodes, and Billy Ray.  James Cameron returns as a story contributor and producer.  Tim Miller is the director.

Well, much of the continuity from the first two films is blown all to hell.  Davis plays an enhanced human who makes a formidable opponent to the newer Rev-9 model Terminator who has traveled back through time to kill young Daniella Ramos, a resident of Mexico City.  An embittered Sarah Conner returns to the franchise after her son is murdered by a more familiar Terminator at the beginning of the film.  Schwarzenegger is back in the fold as well.  The cast did the best they could with some of the clunky dialogue they were given.  It was kind of cool to see Hamilton and Arnold back on screen together.

Mackenzie Davis really has the role of lead protagonist and does fine.  Luna was appropriately menacing as the Rev-9 Terminator.

Overall, it’s better than I anticipated.  Not much better, but James Cameron;s contribution was likely of some help here.

The fight scenes were pretty spectacular in their choreography for the most part.  There were some moments that seemed a little cartoon at times.

I ended up having some mixed impressions when it was all said and done.  The movie did fairly well in some areas but struggled in others.  I wasn’t a big fan of how Arnold’s Terminator was reintroduced.  It’s still fun to see him though.  I also appreciated how much Hamilton worked on her physique to make her action sequences seem reasonably plausible for a woman her age.  She’s fine for the most part, but the cynicism and sarcasm the writers saddled her with was just a little too cliche.  Saying that, I found that I didn’t really mind her presence.  Most of my misgivings about this film have to do with the plotting and dialogue.  And I also think this franchise has gone a little too long and has gotten a little too repetitive in some ways.  Although I found much of it underwhelming, it really wasn’t that bad.