NO MATTER WHERE ONE PLACES THE “BAR” there is always someone or something to cause it to be raised. Just look at the evolution of television. We started out with the Riccardo’s from I Love Lucy; they were not allowed to sleep in the same bed, despite being married to each other on the show and in real life. The censors would not approve them being filmed in the same bed. From that point in time there were a few television shows that had partial nudity if it was in the context of a documentary or historical event. The show that comes to mind is the mini-series Roots. Things took a bigger change in the 1990s when the TV shows “NYPD Blues” and “Once and Again” had episodes that contained nudity. For some viewers this was a big shock. Let me also add while this evolution was taking place there was another one going on that pertained to language. Scripts started showing up with slang and curse words in the dialog. I can still remember my shock hearing a TV character uttering a curse word; it took me by surprise even though I was a user of the word. Little did any of us know the explosion of nudity and swear words would be amplified upon the arrival of cable television. HONESTLY, I HAVE NOT GIVEN IT A lot of thought, but I wonder if there might be a connection between this viewing evolution, which by the way has led to reality shows, to blurring the lines between personal and professional lives. The reason why I am bringing it up is from my observations on how people focus their attention on other people’s personal lives. Look at some of the reality shows where people are being filmed 24 hours a day or the dating and swapping partner shows; I have no interest in such things. Two things I learned growing up; first, curse words were just adjectives. Derogatory words about race, gender, ethnicity and sexuality were the “bad” words. Secondly, if no one is being hurt, held against their will or abused; I do not care what they do in their private life. This fascination with people’s personal lives is weird to me. With the aggressiveness of photographers and reporters, there evidently is a market to sell intimate stories about celebrities and such. People judging and making decisions essentially about strangers is a waste of time and money, in my opinion. The reason I have been pondering this is due to today’s biographical drama. As I was watching it, it occurred to me that the events in this film were the beginning of people’s obsession with other people’s personal lives. APPEARING TO BE RIDING A WAVE OF popularity Senator Gary Hart, played by Hugh Jackman (The Greatest Showman, Eddie the Eagle), had his eyes set on the White House. A simple photograph would cause a detour in his campaign. This film festival winning movie also starred Vera Farmiga (Boundaries, The Commuter) as Lee Hart, J.K. Simmons (I’m Not Here, The Bachelors) as Bill Dixon, Mark O’Brien (Arrival, Bad Times at the El Royale) as Billy Shore and Molly Ephraim (Cricket, Last Man Standing-TV) as Irene Kelly. Set in the 1980s, what I found the most curious was the idea that Gary’s election campaign was the beginning of tabloid journalism. In fact, it was this aspect of the script I found the most interesting. I did not think the script otherwise was well written; it seemed as if events were broken down into cause and effect without much time spent on learning about the characters. I think a political junkie would enjoy this picture more than the average moviegoer. Maybe it is due to my disinterest in a person’s personal life, but I did not find this film very exciting, sordid details and all.
Before I talk about this movie I need you to know that I rarely pay attention to what a person looks like–unless there is some hygiene thing going on. Whether tall or short, big or small, blonde or black, glasses or not; the surface of an individual has no bearing on what type of human being they can be. For me, what is inside of a person means more to me, for example a good heart and a kind soul. With that being said, I found watching Helen Hunt (As Good as it Gets, Mad About You-TV) to be a bit disturbing. Her plastic surgery has given her the appearance of a Klingon. I do not understand why she felt the need to alter her appearance. The other issue I had, which I know is more valid in reviewing this film, was the continuous loss of her Boston accent for her character Cheryl. Inspired from a true story, Cheryl was a sex surrogate hired for an unusual job. Mark O’Brien, played incredibly by John Hawkes (Winter’s Bone, The Perfect Storm), was a polio victim who only had the ability to move his head. Using an iron lung to help him breath and a gurney as his only means of transport, Mark had the blessing of Father Brendan, played by William H. Macy (Fargo, The Cooler), to try and lose his virginity. Cheryl and Mark would discover the journey was more important than the end results. This movie could have been a downer, but the witty script and flowing direction kept the story moving along in a charming way. John Hawkes was amazing in this challenging role, able to convey feelings and emotions simply with his face and words. I found this engaging Sundance Film Festival winner to be a testament to the mind being stronger than the body and the heart giving us our humanity.