Living dangerously - Jung's near-criminal behavior and Keira Knightly's dislocated jaw

Finally got to see David Cronenberg's "A Dangerous Method" and found it weird and provocative - liked it more than I thought I would, in fact. It's not really so great as a movie - it does seem very static and stagy, and I wasn't surprised to see in the credits that it's adopted from a play: psychoanalytic case studies have proven to be very fertile ground for playwrights (not so much for filmmakers), and Dangerous Method is particularly interesting as an examination of some of the great issues in the early days, and maybe still, in psychoanalysis - particularly the rivalry between Freud and Jung, and the ever-present issue of transference and the ethical issue of when a doctor can become involved with patients, if ever - these issues all in debate in the early days, and doctors were obviously way out of their depths back then discussing the sexual drives and fantasies of their patients - Jung behaved in a way that would be near-criminal today, having a long sexual relationship with a patient who was clearly disturbed and vulnerable. At the time, the rules were hazy - though he knew he was doing wrong, but was virtually helpless in trying to resist. Cronenberg does a good job establishing the lineaments of the characters - and Keira Knightley is good as the disturbed patient, though her jaw may be permanently displaced by her two hours of facial distortions and you might break out laughing when you hear her talk with what she imagines is a Russian accent. Funny, this time intentionally, to see Freud and Jung together, too - including some memorable quips, as when F. corrects Jung's pronunciation of "psych-analysis." Not a great movie - but at least a movie about ideas and a movie that gives us a glimpse into the lives of some very intelligent, competitive, and tormented people.

Arrived in Deadwood. Headin' outta town.

Honestly, I tried. On recommendations of J. and daughter A. and remembering how much brother-in-law R has loved this series, M and I watched the HBO series "Deadwood," the first 4 episodes of Season 1 (from 2004?), and try as I might I could not get into this work. Admittedly, I have never been a huge fan of Westerns, though I've admired some great John Ford movies of course and a few other classics and have been somewhat interested in seeing a "contemporary" Western - which I guess Deadwood is supposed to be: the classic western lawless outpost town but with a lot of more swearing, sex, and drugs (the drinking, gambling, and fighting have always been part of the genre). The series does have the high-quality production values that we've come to expect from HBO, though in this case it's not the bright imagery of, say, Rome, or the gritty realism of the Wire, but visuals of a dark hue: lots of mud and muck and dark interiors of saloons and that look as if they've just been nailed together overnight (much like a movie set, for that matter) - not pretty to watch, but no doubt accurate to the time. The bigger problem for me is the convoluted development of plot, which never took fire for me because I never grew to care about any of the characters: the main character, an ex-sheriff (Bullock - Timothy Olyphant) who's apparently in Deadwood to set up a hardware business, doesn't seem true or particularly deep - I suppose he's not there just to set up a store, he seems to wily and talented for that, but over four episodes his character hasn't opened up at all. The "villain," a bar owner named Al Singeltaire (?), is cartoonish rather than frightening, which is vulgar mouth and his eyes always popping out of his head. We've come to understand from many other great shows that the scariest characters are generally not the loudest of most fierce. Something slowly seems to be developing regarding a dispute over a gold claim, and I was kind of getting interested in one of the few historically accurate characters - Wild Bill Hickock - but unfortunately he was shot in the 4th episode. Maybe the season grows on you, slowly, but too slowly for me. I'm headin' outta town.

Season 5 of Mad Men at last came together in episode 4

We're four episodes into Season 5 of "Mad Men," and I'd been holding off for a number of reasons but mainly because I was somewhat disappointed in the first 4 episodes - especially the dull 2-hour season opener (far too long a time segment for this kind of incrementalist series). Season 5 seemed to be having some trouble establishing, or re-establishing characters and finding an over-riding theme: Don settling into marriage with Meagan and dealing with issues such as his wayward past, his being much older than Meagan, his sense of guilt about the breakup of his marriage - kind of well-worn territory; Betsy's angst about her weight and a medical scare as well (January Jones either gained weight for the part or the did some digital reimaging); the breakup apparently of Joan's marriage to that stiff. All of this, however, came together beautifully in episode 4 (directed by my clone, John Slattery) - a terrific and really funny blending of several plot lines: the insufferable Pete gets into a fist-fight with the needy and nerdy Lane, a hilarious suburban dinner party and Pete's in which Don wears a weird madras jacket, fashionable at the time, and Don becomes the new exemplar of marital fidelity (!). The only thing slightly off in episode 4 was the young exec's writing career, which he keeps under wraps - not sure why that would be so, thousands of ad guys (Heller, Yates, Gaddis) pursued serious writing on the side. I also really like the rough-edged genious ad guy Ginzberg introduced earlier, who had no role in this episode - and I hope he stays a part of the team.

Two productions of Twelfth Night: Daughter and Dad, 25 years apart

Enjoyed last night a Susanna Wolk's directorial debut in Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night," a weekend production at Harvard's Ex Theater - I can say I've had the pleasure of watching Susanna's production and, many years ago, her dad's direction of TN in NYC - a lot of differences in time and place since then but some elements carry across the years in both father and daughter's take on the play: in both productions, a strong emphasis on youth (till recently, so many productions of TN play the leads as mature adults unmoored by love, when it should have been long obvious that they're young, kids even) and on the music: dad Andy Wolk had a "house band" including live piano player (John Lewis) on stage for much of the show; Susanna used lots of original music, most sung by the (female) Feste (Amelia Ross) with a backup guitar duo - very nice. Some differences though: Andy's production emphasized the beauty of the characters: his was one of the first I saw that didn't make them, particular Malvolio, repulsive and idiotic - they were more like wealthy prep-school kids you'd seen on any campus. Susanna emphasized the partying aspect - a lot of heavy drinking, smoking, sexual allusions - they were college (or high-school) kids gone to riot, and settled at the end. Her Malvolio (Ari Brenner) was excellent, very dignified rather than mean or stupid. I always like to look for little unique touches: Susanna had two in particular: the "pirate" Antonio was actually wanted for "music piracy" - as some "Wanted" posters on display pointed out to the audience; and the letter of challenge that Agucheek wrote was penned on a pizza box, which got a laugh out of the line that the letter is rather "saucy." A good, well-paced production - lots of fun.