I GREW UP IN A HOUSE that accepted both of our city’s daily newspapers. For some people, this was unusual. Though there was never anything stated or shown in the papers that would clue the reader into the publishers’ viewpoint, it was well known that one newspaper had a conservative bent, while the other was considered more liberal. At the time, when I started to read them, I had no idea; there simply were certain things about each paper that I enjoyed reading. Because of their different physical sizes, I gravitated to one of them more often, especially if I was going to take it with me to read on the train or bus. Its format was like an oversized magazine shape as opposed to the other one which was delivered folded in half. Once unfolded, it could take up a good sized portion of a dining room table, if one wanted to read it while eating a meal; plus the Sunday version of it was humongous, filled with advertisements and its entertainment/travel magazines. One of the most important things about both dailies was their yearly feature article on the Oscar nominations. Both of them listed all the nominations, plus provided an entire page listing the categories, perfectly laid out in order, which I would tear out and use to make my predictions, circling the films that I thought would win in each category.      WHEN I MOVED OUT ON MY own, I only subscribed to one of the newspapers for delivery; the other I would only buy on certain days, when I knew the paper would have an extra section for its weekly featured topic. No matter where I moved or when I traveled out of state, I would always have this same arrangement. My current residence is a multi-family building. When I first moved in, every morning the residents’ newspapers were stacked and bound together, wrapped in plastic and left in the foyer of the building’s entryway. There was close to two dozen newspapers that would get delivered to each subscriber. Over the years, I have noticed this amount has slowly decreased. Taking in account, the departure of some of the residents, the majority of readers still live in the building; however, they no longer have their newspaper delivered. I can only assume they either read it online or have stopped reading it all together. For all I know maybe they only buy an edition when a big story has broken, or go to the library and read it there. At present only six apartments in the building receive a daly newspaper, which is around ten percent of the total occupancy. It is a drastic change which is why I understood the pressure the editor-in-chief was having in this comedic drama.      IN THE CHAOTIC WORLD OF PRINTED media, a former employee returns to a previous employer to help save it from further decline. A completely different scenario compared to her past dealings with the organization and its ruthless leader. With Meryl Streep (Let Them All Talk, Only Murders in the Building-TV) as Miranda, Anne Hathaway (Mother Mary, She Came to Me) as Andy, Emily Blunt (The Smashing Machine, The Fall Guy) as Emily, Stanley Tucci (Conclave, Spotlight) as Nigel, and Kenneth Branagh (A Haunting in Venice, Oppenheimer) as Stuart; this satirical sequel was a fun watch for me. The cast was outstanding; I felt like I was visiting friends I had not seen in a long time. Also, I enjoyed the various cameos sprinkled through the movie. Granted there were some farfetched scenes, but I believe they go with the territory. With even-handed direction and a witty script, not to mention some of the outrageous fashion choices, this was a breezy, entertaining viewing experience. Honestly, if the powers to be decided to write another script for a further installment, that kept all the same characters and actors who played them, I would not hesitate to go see it.

3 stars