Archives

“Late Night” Review

Written by Mindy Kaling (this is important)

Emma Thompson and Mindy Kaling walk into a bar…

Well, not quite.

Age. Gender. Breaking into a male-dominated business.

This is a good movie; well-written, well-cast. Not overly preachy, although dealing with timely issues of gender politics. I’m considering going a second time and adding it to the personal collection. Definitely personal collection.

Mindy Kaling stars as Molly Patel, a showbiz outsider who longs to be an insider. Like the actress who plays her, Molly has a great sense for comedy and timing.  I don’t want to spoil things, but as a chemical plant quality analyst in Pennsylvania, she comes up with a brilliant plan to get an interview as a  writer for the show she has loved and studied since she was a kid.

Emma Thompson stars as Katherine Newbury, the host of a late-night talk show, “Late Night with Katherine Newbury.”  It’s a somewhat intellectual show, but in danger of going under because ratings are flat and dropping. She won’t engage in Jimmy (Fallon/Kimmel) hijinks with her guests. And her guests aren’t the kind that would necessarily indulge themselves. Doris Kearns Goodwin in Tight Pants? No. Just no. Katherine is not your warm-fuzzy type of personality. In fact, she is rather detached, especially what’s going on with her show and with the people who work for her. I wouldn’t call Katherine a bitch. She’s not knifing anyone in the back (although, there comes a twist in the third act). She’s not out to emasculate her all-male writers room. She  is stubborn and not a fan of change, thus the 10 year decline in quality and ratings. The show is safe and stale, but she won’t see it.

The talk show host who came to mind as I watched was not Samantha Bee, but Dick Cavett. Same higher-brow content, same dry humor.


Katherine is a tough boss. She is not portrayed as an unreasonable demanding bitch, like Meryl Streep in “The Devil Wears Prada” (another workplace comedy). She’s intelligent and intellectual and knows what she wants. Unfortunately, it’s not necessarily what’s best for her or for her beloved show. As mentioned, she is detached from what’s going on with her staff (one guy died years ago and she didn’t know), or the changes in the world. At one time, Katherine herself had done stand up (Emma Thompson, before we in the US came to know her, had been performing sketch comedy for years with Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry, among others). Her sense of humor is displayed in some of the cutting remarks she makes in defense of her positions, and in an unplanned stand-up set. it’s a step forward in depicting powerful women. Representation matters.

The network president, a talent agent, and the writer’s room all want Katherine to change her format to the more sophomoric ones put on by the late-night guys.

Molly’s opening into Katherine’s world is precipitated by Katherine firing one of the writers who asks for a raise. When she says “No,” he protests based on having additional expenses due to a growing family. The firing isn’t because he asked, it’s because he  objected and based the request on HIS needs rather than warranting a raise for a greater contribution to the show. Katherine tells him it’s sexist. (Okay, so we do have some preachy) She’s right in that his reasoning has nothing to do with his work. Sound logic. Good business sense. However, because she’s not giving in to the emotional appeal (“Please, Sir, may I have some more?”), she seems heartless. Katherine isn’t. She’s just thinking more practically. More of what we perceive as “masculine thinking.” The writer fires back that she’s a sexist because she does not work well with other women. There are some facts to support this: Katherine has a dismal track record of retaining female staff.

Enter Molly.

The writers for the show are all white men, most have Ivy League credentials on their resumes, and the head monologue writer, played by Reid Scott (“Veep”), was expecting to have his brother hired for the open slot. His brother who had run the Harvard Lampoon. That’s a solid credential. The first time Molly goes to sit in a meeting, they deny her a seat at the table, literally, saying one open chair was for a guy who was running late because he was trying to sort out a now long-distance relationship. She end up sitting on a waste basket. This is what you call a visual metaphor. An even greater one is that, since women were scarce, the writers have been using the ladies room when they shit, something Molly learns the hard way. I’ll come back to that later.

Before I go further, let’s delve into Molly’s creator/portrayer, Mindy Kaling. She had the same education track as those writers, a top private school in Boston, BBN, then graduated from Ivy League in 2001 (Dartmouth. Big whoop. We at UVM routinely eat their lunch at Winter Carnival. Go, Cats, Go), interned for Conan O’Brien, did stand-up, and began with the American “The Office” in 2004 as a write/performer, for which she won an Emmy as a writer. After “The Office,” she went on to “The Mindy Project,” creator/lwriter/producer. This is her big screen writing debut, I believe, but my point is that Ms. Kaling knows her stuff. She is intimately familiar with writers rooms, television production, comedy, lack of representation. They tell you “write what you know.” She has. Some of the casting reflects her experience as we see faces we know from “The Office” (Amy Ryan) and “The Mindy Project” (Ike Barinholtz).

You get the idea, Molly has to prove herself to a bunch of skeptics and wants to save the show. From the outset, she’s depicted as intelligent, driven, and willing to think outside the box to achieve her ends. So, we have an underdog to root for and we have a near-impossible task we want the underdog to master. And the focus is on Molly’s work rather than her personal life. (“Why are you making a point about that?” We’ll get there) So this is a workplace comedy.

We also get #MeToo elements, some romcom elements, big missteps. Look, it’s a great movie.

This movie hit my feminist nerve endings from nearly the start. Not in a bad way. I mentioned the the writers preventing her from taking a seat at the table. The fact that the Late Night writers were all white male. Racial comments were made. Sexist comments.

The biggest metaphor for me was the men using the ladies room to shit. And continuing to use it even after Molly’s arrival. What bugged me was when, in the middle of Molly having a private breakdown in what is supposed to be a ladies’ room, one of the guys comes in to do his business. They have a quick, somewhat sympathetic exchange over her meltdown, but he still insists on using her facilities and SHE LEAVES TO ACCOMMODATE HIM.

My God, that pissed me off no end! Yes, there’s something to be said for him insisting on still getting his way, but goddammit, she should have yelled, “GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE AND DON’T FUCKING COME BACK!” Ms. Kaling is a damned good, very experienced writer, but this was a missed opportunity for Molly to claim some power and autonomy.

What also pissed me off was the twenty something white man sitting two seats down constantly fiddling with his phone during the movie, at one point, something loud started to play. I yelled at him. With support. It was analogous to what was going on with the movie. People, if you want to talk or fart around with your toys during a movie, do the rest of us a favor and wait for it to come out on Red Box, huh? You have a responsibility, when out in public, to behave in a way that is considerate of that public.

The above picture speaks volumes. When yours has been the only voice in the room and things aren’t working so well, perhaps it’s time for different perspectives. Part of the ongoing snark in the writers room was how, as a woman of color, maybe the writers (or the brother of the head monologue writer) could gain advantages in hiring. The boys’ clubs in certain industries weren’t established so much as treehouses with no girls/people of color/LGBT/different religions allowed as they were networking within an insular sphere. Nepotism. Friends of friends. Alumni of the same college. Fraternity brothers. It’s a tribal thing: we will favor the members of our tribe until there is no room for anyone else. This dynamic plays out in the men in the story pressuring the star of the show to do what the men are doing, things. Rather than working to perfect what she’s doing, they insist on things being done their way, their idea of what’s funny. The threatened replacement for Katherine is a male comic in the same age range as the writers.

I’ve worked in the financial industry on and off for 35 years and I saw it up close and personally: in the mid-1980s, we had the invasion of the “Suits,” who fit one of the above categories. Didn’t know what in the hell they were doing, but damn, they got promoted fast. I spent a lot of time talking to angry customers cleaning up after the messes they’d made.

But, Molly shows her smarts and eventually wins over the other writers. And that brings up another thing that bugged me:

It’s a workplace comedy. There was no good reason for trying to go to romcom territory.

And

The guy in the blue shirt is Reid Scott playing the “Head Monologue Writer.” The guy on the street is Hugh Dancy playing one of the other writers. There are subtle undertones of working towards a romantic relationship (very subtle) with the Reid Scott character, and a flirtation with the Hugh Dancy character that ends abruptly. He is where we get the #MeToo content, but not what you’d expect. During their first flirtation, he mentions it taking 3 weeks to get her into bed and that’s treated as something cute. While this movie could pass the Bechdel test (Two women having a conversation that doesn’t center around men), given the subsumed hostility of Molly’s work environment, romance just doesn’t belong. And it’s not necessary. Ms. Kaling has made comments that Valentine’s Day is Christmas Day to her. Okay.  That’s your thing, Mindy. In my perspective, when it started to come up, my response, “Aw, Jeez! Really? Do we need this?” This is how women get stereotyped: always looking for love. This sort of subplot is why, even as late as 1998, women at my law school were told that we were just there to find husbands. (If that was the case, it’s an expensive damned method you’ll pay for the rest of your life. Literally) What I loved about Molly, is that this was the first time I’ve seen Mindy Kaling play a  major character that wasn’t “bubbly,” obsessed with pop culture and shopping, or boy-crazy (Kelly Kapoor and Mindy Lahiri, her two biggest roles prior to this one. Mrs. Who in “A Wrinkle in Time” doesn’t count). Are women not interesting if they’re focused on a goal other than a romantic relationship?

The romantic comedy element, though distracting, did not ruin the story for me. I liked that Molly found her way on her own. No mentoring from within the boys club, you know, no “I’ll help you, Little Lady.” Molly solved her own issues. Molly breaking into a rarified world isn’t about race or gender. It’s about making the argument using your own skills and merits.

Representation. It matters.

 

 

 

In a Word, It Isn’t

Image result for Isn't It Romantic

There are actors and actresses who can “sell me a ticket,” as I put it. You know; they are the reason you go to a particular movie.

Rebel Wilson is not one of them.

I have nothing against her. What I had seen of her work didn’t really make me a fan. Or hate her on sight. (I saw one or two episodes of her ABC sitcom, whatever it was called. Haven’t seen the “Pitch Perfect” movies)

Same with Adam Devine.

And Liam Hemsworth, although I enjoy living on a planet with multiple Hemsworths. The idea of standing in the middle of them is an entertaining one.

Image result for hemsworth brothers

Nothing against any of them, but none of them have ever motivated me to buy a movie ticket.

And yet, I went to “Isn’t It Romantic?”.

Part of my motivation was that I wanted something undemanding and stupid. My expectations were exceeded. What could have been a light-hearted and witty handling of skewering a genre turned out to be leaden, heavy-handed, and a waste of talent.

The plot: our heroine, Natalie, watched a shit ton of romantic comedies as a child and eventually turned on them. We have the near-standard “hit your head and end up in a parallel universe” (I think we blame “The Wizard of Oz” for that one) where the entire world is romantic comedy clichés. Of course, she fights against all of it, comes up with a big message, and wakes up back in her world, the end.

I seldom want to walk out on a movie, but this one, I wanted to run. However, since I saw it as part of my AMC A-List, I couldn’t get a refund, so I stuck it out. What can I say? Sometimes I’m a masochist.

If you don’t know me already, let me tell you something about myself: I’m fat. This will be important in a sec. I have a friend who prefers the term “juicy girl,” which (for the moment. That’s another post) is not as laden with negative baggage as the word “fat.” Going forward, we will talk about Rebel Wilson in juicy girl terms.

Here’s what REALLY bugged me about this movie: facial inequality or inter-facial dating, as I’ve seen it called.

Natalie (Rebel Wilson) has a professional job, architect. Not assistant or support staff or office manager. She is one of the ones to be assisted. She is smart, she’s gainfully employed (I wouldn’t judge it by her “In Real Life” (IRL) apartment because rents in New York City are ridiculous. She may be living in a closet, but she’s not sharing it with 3 other people). She is making it on her own. In actual real life, she’d be considered a good match (Honey, romance and falling in love at first sight is great for storytelling, but stability keeps things fresher longer). In the movie, she spies Blake (Liam Hemsworth) and falls in lust with him (Mama Hemsworth has some very handsome sons), while being friends with Josh (Adam Devine) whom she thinks is lusting after the woman in an ad. She is ignored by Blake while she ignores Josh. I would ignore Josh. Adam Devine is a skilled comic actor, but he’s not a Hemsworth by any stretch.

In the parallel head bonk universe, Blake Handsome falls in love with her, Josh Friend falls for the woman in the ad, Blake turns out to have jerk tendencies, and at the last minute, she realizes it’s been Josh all along blah blah blah.

We’re living in a world where the importance of representation is finally dawning on Hollywood, but it’s missing from this piece.

What we’re seeing here is reinforcement that fat people are not supposed to be with “pretty” people. Fat has been successfully demonized for decades as a moral failing, a physical manifestation of weakness and shame, and proof of a person’s bad character. If you want to see a fat person depicted as human, capable of being loved and admired, go see “Stan & Ollie” (which is EXCELLENT). And even then, they put John C. Reilly in a fat suit.

Fat women get short shrift in romance. It’s only in the fantasy realm that Natalie is considered a suitable partner for handsome, successful Blake. In her “real world,” she’s only good enough for Josh. As I said, Adam Devine is a very skilled comic actor, but he’s not a leading man.

Let’s let that sink in: the leading lady in a romantic comedy does not get the leading man type. Rebel Wilson is capable of leading a romantic comedy, but they’re not letting her get the handsome guy as, perhaps, Anna Kendrick or Jennifer Lawrence would have.

Yes, Blake is a jerk and Josh is a better person. However, I think other filmmakers would have engineered things a bit differently for another actress with another attractive (not necessarily Hemsworth) man in the Josh role, but with glasses and schlumpy clothing until the big reveal.

Why can’t fat people be seen as attractive? Would it upset the diet industry too much? Would it put Marie Osmond out of a job shilling for Nutrisystem? Too many billions of dollars at stake to let Rebel Wilson be anything more than a joke or second banana. (This thing needs to fail and when it does, they’ll blame her, not the crappy writing and execution)

Melissa McCarthy is revered. And she led a successful sitcom for years on “Mike & Molly.” Once again, though (and I enjoy the show in reruns. Great comic cast), she was paired with someone who was not a leading man (again, Billy Gardell is a deft standup and comic actor, but he’s not a Hemsworth).

Image result for mike & molly

In “Isn’t It Romantic?”, the pretty people are depicted as ultimately vain and shallow (another stereotype) and not worthy of love. But, I think the was to reinforce Josh as a more suitable choice for Natalie.

(Here’s where I honk my own horn)

I wrote “These Foolish Things” which depicts two people in their forties falling in love for the first time. Ty is Hemsworth (or Clooney) handsome and successful, Liz is overweight (not necessarily fat), has a professional career, lives on her own, and is a good, stable match. She’s insecure because, well, fat is a moral failing, dontcha know?

I wrote this as a response to all the romantic stories depicting the leads as twenty-somethings with perfect looks. I get escapism, but c’mon. How many kidnappings by motorcycle gangs, vampires, shape shifters, nobles in disguise, vampire motorcycle gangs, and undiscovered fashion models are too many?

Why not have a story where one could easily see herself as the heroine? “Hey! She’s like me!”

Are we trying to convince people who don’t fit the current model of beauty that they are not attractive? Of course, we’ve got a President* – who was just officially declared obese – who calls women who oppose him “fat pigs.” When I’ve been attacked on social media, the first thing they go for (usually men) is my weight or my looks (with makeup and hair done, I look okay. Without, meh). Men are usually running the studios and deciding which films get made under what conditions. What came out with the #MeToo movement was stories of male film execs making casting decisions on whether or not they thought a particular actress was “fuckable.” Not seeing much change going on.

What we have is a celluloid world (well, technically it’s digital these days) that refuses to depict juicy girls as genuine romantic leads. (I’ve seen pictures of these guys. They’re not Hemsworths)

Image result for harvey weinstein

So much for representation.

Even if you are a huge Rebel Wilson/Adam Devine/Liam Hemsworth fan, save your money on this one. “Isn’t It Romantic?” isn’t.

 

“Aquaman” Review (Yes, there are spoilers)

“You are not the intended demographic for a comic book movie. Why the hell did you go?”

This.

Any questions? By the way, the audience was at least 50% women my age. What can I tell you? Some of us like to window shop.

Seriously, I wouldn’t have gone but Jason Momoa in “Justice League” was the most fun thing in it (and I went because I love Henry Cavill. And whoever fired him as Superman screwed up). He’s not my movie hunk type; this is:

However, Jason Momoa is not only easy on the eyes, he seems to be a pretty decent human being. Fer chrissakes, he grew up in Iowa. Repnasty Steve King aside, Iowans are decent, grounded folk. Well, for the time being:



Anyway, in interviews, when he’s being Jason Momoa, he comes across as a mensch with intelligence and some humor. What can I say? I like a man with a brain. Things that can get caught in zippers aren’t good for decision-making.

This was not a good movie.

It hit the superhero cliches: the backstory is either one of not having/knowing one has powers (Harry Potter/Luke Skywalker) or manboys avoiding their destiny (Ironman. Yes, there’s a whole other argument in there). In the present case, we have Arthur Curry as a big lug, not the sharpest knife in the drawer, rejecting his heritage. Cliche Number 1, check.

(Momoa is the sexiest Arthur you’ll ever see. And, later in the movie, we get a fairly “duh” parallel to another Arthur. There is foreshadowing.  So much foreshadowing. Dear God, the only one who does heavier handed foreshadowing is Dan Brown, who all but stands there with a bullhorn in “DaVinci Code” and his other books saying, “Hey! You’re going to see this again later on! Pay attention!” Dan: You write good stories, but..)

It’s not a super hero movie without villains.

Black Manta, who looks like he came from a 1950s B movie (Yes, Fanboys, I know this get-up is from the comic book. Don’t get your tighty whiteys in a bunch). He gets the back story. And it involves Aquaman hitting his pirate dad in the face with a torpedo.

In the face. With a torpedo.

Because getting a fist in the face from a guy who just lifted a submarine out of the water isn’t hard enough, gotta use torpedoes (and not according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Neither Raytheon nor General Dynamics recommend using their products for hand-to-hand combat).

It’s inappropriate for Black Manta to get a sympathetic (“You killed my dad!”) story because WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO SYMPATHIZE WITH HIM! Hellloooo! This is the bad guy! Of a superhero movie, not Tolstoy. Minimal motiviation works best. “I am evil. I want to steal stuff. Your brother is paying me to help him.” ‘Nuff said. Tarantino made the same mistake in “KIll Bill Vol. ” with Lucy Liu’s character. Don’t divide loyalties (unless you’re planning to spin off the bad guy into a franchise. They’re bad, they’re about to get defeated by our hero, we don’t want to feel sorry for them for the ass-kicking we’ve paid to see).

And, once he looks like this, about 5 minutes of screen time before he’s out of the movie altogether. It’s a shame because in the inappropriate-for-the-bad-guy “getting ready” montage (complete with a comedic “oops, I don’t know my own strength” flourish), he put a shit ton of work into looking like something Raid makes a spray or motel for.

Here’s the REAL bad guy:

 

Aquaman’s half-brother, Orm.

“Aquaman” should come with a subtitle: “Mom Always Liked You Best!”

Mom was played by Nicole Kidman. Before getting dragged back to Atlantis to be married to Orm’s daddy and stay with him, she fell in love with Aquaman’s dad on the land. And loved him, not Orm’s father, for which there was much resentment. Of course, this gives rise to “You’re not really one of us” and cries of “bastard.” (Which is more appropriate for Orm. He’s a big, soggy dick). This is not a feminist movie.

If you saw “The Incredibles,” you’ll remember Frozone and Mr. Incredible reminiscing about their superhero days and Frozone talking about Baron von Ruthless monologuing. BvR has nothing on these two. We are  talking speech patterns bordering on Victorian for Orm. Loong speeches. He could have been throat-punched repeatedly, or given an atomic wedgie (since Arthur was still in big frat boy mode at that point). Perhaps fatally. I was hoping.

I was also so uninterested in what he was saying, I was more focused on figuring out what perfume the woman sitting next to me was wearing (No. It wasn’t obnoxious, and neither was she. However, I got a few whiffs and spent time trying to match a name to the scent. Much more engaging than the movie at that point). (Somewhere around Orm’s third speech, I realized it was “Elizabeth Taylor’s White Diamonds.” It’s a lovely scent, but only certain people can wear it successfully. Before you buy it for yourself or someone else, take it on a test run)

I digress.

I like Patrick Wilson as an actor, despite my introduction to him being “The Watchmen.” (I have no idea what I was thinking going to that movie) As you can see, he was made up to look like the lost Malfoy. And when he was talking about kicking Momoa’s half-human ass, I was thinking, “Oh, Honey. It looks like he’s got at least 9 inches on you and about 50 lbs more of pure muscle. And he’s playing the title character. Give up.”

Undulation  is the word for this movie. Hair. Seaweed. Capes. Many, many capes. Edna Mode would have killed herself.

(“Seriously? Why did you go?”)

 

This.

There was a underwater rumble. Several of them, in fact, but the first one had guys on seahorses facing off against guys on sharks. My thought: this is not exactly West Side Story. You know, Jets v Sharks? Huh? Huh? “When you’re a Seahorse, you’re a Seahorse all the way…” Nah.  The sharks DID have laser beams, so if Dr. Evil from “Austin Powers” was in the audience, he probably wept.

Heroes go on quests. To find themselves, mentors, or stuff. In this case, stuff, so in addition to two bad guys out to get him, we have a Heroic Scavenger Hunt!

Goody! Go to Point A to find Clue 1, nearly get killed, then go to Point B, which is where Clue 1 sent you, nearly get killed again, until Clue 2 sends you to the object’s resting place (Threes. Pay attention, Kids: attempts, clues, etc. come in threes. If it’s only the second attempt or the second strike, our hero will not succeed).

On the way, we meet weirdo sea creatures. There was a trailer for “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” before the movie and I wondered if we had a crossover going. There were also extinct ones and I checked my ticket to make sure I wasn’t in “Jurassic World.”

At this point, the Heroic Scavenger Hunt is successful and we see Arthur Curry finally in the yellow and green Aquaman outfit. He looked like a cross between a metallic evening clutch and a 57  Cadillac (Costume tailfins. So many tailfins)

 

See what I mean?

Jason Momoa was in “Game of Thrones” as Khol Drogo. We got to see his butt. It’s an asset. (See what I did there?)

In “Aquaman,” we get one shot of covered butt. Speaking for the rest of the audience that matched my demographic (and we were numerous), there should have been more.

DC, maybe have me write a movie for you. Rehire Cavill, let me put him in a buddy movie with Momoa, maybe scamming an intergalactic villain played by Josh Brolin by faking horse races and …no. That’s “The Sting.” Newman and Redford. It doesn’t get much better.  Damn good movie, by the way.

However, we did get wet Jason Momoa. And that’s a good thing. Lots of wet Jason Momoa. He undulated at times. Everyone did cuz, you know, they were underwater, and the movie makers wanted us to be sure we knew they were underwater. And when he wasn’t underwater, he was mostly wet. Hmm. Wet Jason Momoa…

Maybe DC was writing for middle-aged women after all.

Taking on a Life of Their Own

I’m writing again and not just this blog and tweets hurled at the current occupant of the White House (Secret Service hasn’t been by to visit). In order to have new material, I have to sit down and actually create it (no chip in my head to translate to the Internet for your viewing pleasure. It’s a crazy, scary, jumbled mess up there anyway with calculations, mortgage guidelines, cat videos/memes/memories, and visualization of myself with the winning Powerball ticket. And stories, fragments, and “what ifs.” If my brain was a TV show, it would be an episode of “Hoarders” subtitled “The Craziest Pile of Shit We’ve Found Yet.”)

Looks about right

Looks about right

But I digress.

So, I’ve started work on a short story (whopping 802 words over 3 nights. Woo). I start out with pen and notebook (leopard print) writing narrative. It’s like jump-starting a standard transmission; hold in the clutch, get your friends to push it, when you get to around 10 MPH, pop it in first. My throwing it into first is moving the words from ink and paper to pixels on a screen.

And, that’s where the craziness happens.

Ask any author (and any author who reads this blog is invited to comment): At some point, your characters stop obeying your wishes and start doing things on their own. For instance, my current story (it’s a short story, so if I post spoilers, there won’t be anything left for you to read). I had an idea for what I wanted Patti and Ed to do. Their own words started coming out of their mouths. And then they started moving and doing “stuff” faster than I could keep up.

Time to turn off the motor, i.e., go back to the pen and paper to take notes.  (Please note: that is the proper use of i.e. Merriam-Webster wouldn’t lie)

This is really my notebook

This is really my notebook

So, I started scribbling. (I’m afraid to try to read my own handwriting) Dialogue fragments, questions to myself about the direction, various storylines (my initial one wasn’t necessarily going to remain). I almost wish I smoked (Never have). Just seems like a cigarette would be a useful prop for thinking. Cross-outs, margin notes, more questions…

All because two imaginary people decided to take on a life of their own.

My goal is to have this story complete (edited, printed, bound) in time for Book Obsessed Babes 2017 in Jacksonville on April 8 (Should my local friends read this, bring back a bagel and coffee from Einstein’s for me on Sunday, please).

After I finish writing this post, finding amusing photos to insert (or half naked men. They can be amusing, too), I will see where Patti and Ed lead me.

Half naked

Half naked