#Shakespeare: Rise of A Genius

[safedistancefrombeingsmart]

Martin Freeman in the BBC documentary Shakespeare: Rise Of A Genius Martin couldn't help himself and he was swearing twice. 😂

[martinfreemanspotter]

We briefly returned to yellow after not having done that for ages. It was a quiet month, but still interesting. (that leak!!)

October 2nd

The trailer for Miller's Girl got leaked. Lionsgate (the big studio behind the movie) did a good job in removing it from the web. If you're very keen to watch the trailer anyway, you can still probably find it somewhere. (I'll just go to my HDD.)

October 11th

Today it was announced that Martin will appear in an upcoming documentary about William Shakespeare, Shakespeare: Rise Of A Genius.

October 16th

Martin was finally spotted again in Liverpool, filming The Responder. ( x ) ( x )

October 18th

We got a short video with the Breeders crew! 🥳

October 19th

We got this lovely interview with Martin and Daisy, promoting the UK release of the 4th season of Breeders.

October 20th

We were blessed with this lovely Behind the Scenes video from the set of Breeders.

Also, the 4th season of Breeders finally arrived in the UK.

October 26th

Martin is presenting a new podcast about The Beatles to celebrate the band’s upcoming new track release.

October 27th

Double spotting today: Martin was seen once again in Liverpool, filming the 2nd season of The Responder and he has a short scene in the trailer for the upcoming documentary Shakespeare: Rise of A Genius.

October 30th

Martin was spotted filming in Liverpool. 🙂 (thx @colourfulwatson 😘)

I am curious what we'll get to see in November. Maybe the offcial release of the Miller's Girl trailer? Some more pics/ videos of Martin filming season 2 of The Responder. And Rachel is due for another update. ;)

[judi-daily]

Shakespeare: Rise of a Genius, 2023 Photo credit: 72 Films/BBC

*Another one from this, as tis such a beautiful photo of the Dame.

[themousefromfantasyland]

Megalopolis Review, or, Why Nobody Seems to Realize the King is Naked

Brace yourselves, this will be a long post @ariel-seagull-wings @thealmightyemprex @the-blue-fairie @mask131 @tamisdava2

Today I watched Francis Ford Coppola’s Megalopolis and never has a movie made me so frustrated and irritated as I’m now. 

The film is absolutely awful. Not in a so bad it’s good but in a so awful it’s awful. Pardon the language but not even if Coppola broke into my house and shit on my face I would be as angry as I am for him having made this movie. 

But let’s go in parts.

The Premise

The film is a mixture between soft sci-fi and magical realism. We are in an alternate universe where the United States is a direct continuation of the Roman Empire and New York city is instead the capital of the empire, New Rome. 

Cesar Catilina is a brilliant architect and scientist that gained a Nobel Prize for inventing the Megalon, a miraculous substance capable of doing anything. Cesar is a mysterious and lonely genius, with a mysterious past involving an accusation of murdering his own wife and the power to stop time itself. 

He wants to use the metal to rebuild New Rome into a utopia, Megalopolis. Because of that he wages a political battle against the mayor of New Rome, Franklyn Cicero, who wants things to stay the way they have always been. The Mayor has a daughter called Julia, and she falls in love with Cesar. Meanwhile a gossip reporter called Wow Platinum has her eyes on both Cesar and his rich uncle, while Cesar’s cousin, Clodio, a decadent playboy wants to destroy Cesar once and for all.

The Problems

Now that we went into the premise of the movie, let’s see in all the ways this premise falls apart

1 - The Film as a whole makes no sense

Film is art, and art doesn’t need to fit in traditional plot structures or pacing styles. 

But art is about communication. An artist has to communicate ideas, feelings, and impressions to their public. A piece of art that can only be understood by its creator is a bad piece of art.  

A good film, as a good piece of art, has to have the minimum of coherence and cohesion to express the ideas, feelings, and impressions of the filmmaker to their public. If the movie is unable to do that, then the movie is a bad piece of art. 

A good film has to either have coherent story, characters, or at least themes.

Megalopolis doesn’t have either of those.

Megalopolis has a complicated plot filled to the brim with pointless characters and it goes nowhere. Some of the characters are killed off in cut-way jokes and the climax happens in the last twelve minutes of the film. The film lasts more than two hours, and still feels rushed, with scenes that feel missing and scenes that seem superfluous.

It has long surreal sequences that don’t fit the characters, the themes or the story. It’s weirdness for weirdness’ sake. It means nothing. 

The characters are painfully shallow and have nothing to say but famous quotes and juvenile language filled with profanity. 

The film draws painfully long scenes quoting Shakespeare among other writers and philosophers, trying to say something deep about humanity, civilization, politics and the pursuit of utopia, but everything that comes out of it is shallow and contradictory.

In some points Cesar’s desire to build his utopian city is framed as almost an act of anti-consumerism and anti-materialism, vices that are endorsed by Mayor Franklyn Cicero. But then Cesar demolishes several apartment buildings, leaving hundreds homeless and hungry, and the movie almost becomes Atlas Shrugged, where the genius has to rise above the stupid masses that drag him down. 

Cesar’s jealous cousin, Clodio, is built as a Trump stand-in, but then his politics are about helping the immigrants and the poor against Cesar’s plans. And he openly dresses in drag. 

In some way, Clodio is a mixture of Trumpism, Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter in a single character, ignoring the obvious ways these ideologies are completely different from each other.

In the end Cesar gives a passionate speech to the crowds that Clodio aroused, and it’s no deeper than Facebook messages of “We can disagree politically and still be friends”.

The film has a lot to say about culture and politics, but with a simple glance you realize that Coppola doesn’t understand neither politics or culture. 

Megalopolis is a film that has a lot of things to say about humanity, culture, and politics, and almost everything is pure gibberish.

2 - The film is misogynistic, biphobic and a little bit transphobic.

It’s no wonder that Coppola took almost 30 years to finish this film, because the script has the trademarked sexual prejudices of the 1980’s. 

Only two female characters are really important in this story, and they role seem to reinforce the madonna x whore dichotomy that Coppola seems to believe in.

We have Julia, our madonna. She has a Mary Magdalene complex. She’s initially presented as a shallow, decadent socialite, who only knows how to party all day and kiss passionately her female friends. She is implied to be bisexual, but her bisexuality is presented as just another vice of the decadent elite of New Rome.

Then she meets and falls in love with Cesar and becomes nothing more than his love interest. She becomes the one responsible for his moral support. Her bisexuality is stripped away and she is resumed to nothing more than  a supportive wife.

Then we have Wow Platinum, a gossip reporter that marries Cesar's uncle, is interested in Cesar himself, and has sex with Clodio, Cesar's cousin. She is a shallow gold digger and the film uses every chance it has to slutshame her. She is a typical femme fatale without any nuance or complexity, a disgusting sexist and demeaning caricature without any depth. 

And then we have Clodio and his drag scene, and just like Julia, his crossdressing is presented as just another form of the decadence of New Rome.

3 - Vesta

There’s a plot point that comes out of nowhere and goes nowhere. 

New Rome has a pop star called Vesta, and she is meant to mirror the Vesta priestesses of Ancient Rome. She is clearly modeled after Taylor Swift. 

Clodio forges a video of Cesar and Vesta having sex, and since Vesta is a minor, he is arrested. But then Julia discovers that Vesta was lying about her age and is actually a 23-year old woman. After her true age is revealed and after the video is revealed as fake, Vesta reinvents herself as a provocative pop-rock star.

This whole plot point lasts ten minutes and has no bearing on the overall story.

I know for sure that it was written in the late 2000’s, because more than being inspired by Taylor Swift, Vesta is inspired by the transition that Miley Cyrus had from sweet Disney girl to provocative pop star. 

It’s very creepy and off-putting considering everything that we now know about how Coppola deals with young women.

Honestly it just feels like he wanted to fuck Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift back in 2010. 

4 - It’s just a giant ego trip

Only one thing is consistent in Megalopolis, how Cesar is portrayed as a genius that has to fight to have his vision of utopia come to life, and it’s obvious how he is an author self-insert.

It’s so annoying and irritating watching Coppola worship himself for over two hours.

He paints Cesar as this tragic figure that is misunderstood by society and how everyone should just listen to him. How he is a genius that has all the answers to solve humanity’s problems.

It’s the equivalent of watching Coppola masturbating while looking at himself in the mirror for two hours. 

The King is Naked

Listen, I too was at first excited about Megalopolis. I wanted this project to succeed. I wanted to see a creative and bold vision. I wanted to see more authoral cinema. 

But Coppola is just a rich creep with delirious visions of grandeur. 

He used this film to worship his obscene ego and to sexually exploit extras on his set.

And now I see people trying to find excuses for him, or trying to defend this thing.

Listen, if you found something positive about Megalopolis I respect your opinion, but this film is a huge piece of shit made by a more gigantic piece of shit, and his talent and past accomplishments can’t excuse this.

The film is awful, the director is awful, and the king is naked. He doesn’t need protection. 

Can we be totally sincere with this film? At least with ourselves?

I want to see films that are original and take risks, but I want from creators who aren’t megalomaniacs, sexual perverts or that at least can develop coherent ideas. 

[nicolikesmoms]

gonna discuss two topics that are very similar in regards to pjo that may be controversial. One annabeth chase would not listen to taylor swift, i dont even think she would like taylor swift. And if you don't like this opinion please just block me, dont leave hate comments. Annabeth grew up in chb, with satyrs and nymphs. She would not support someone who's personal carbon emissions are as high as taylor swifts. There may be some projecting in this, as someone who doesn't like Taylor swift. People like to say taylor swift is proof you can rise to fame without nepotism especially because apparently she was raised on a farm (a Christmas tree farm i believe) but her family was well off as well i believe. I respect her remaking her albums and the reason behind it but i do not respect her carbon emissions and i believe annabeth wouldnt either. She wouldn't give her monetary support. I also believe even if she liked taylor swift she wouldnt be a huge swiftie, who practically worships her or even someone who views her as a lyrical genius,. Again maybe self projecting. Maybe a few quotes here and there. But every time any mentions not liking taylor swift they are called a pick me. I literally saw a video on tik tok with every agreeing with that statement. They bring up the taylor swift or Shakespeare thing like idc and i dont think annabeth would either mainly for the fact i think annabeth would for sure get it right. Any way i don't want to ramble on that however second topic i do think annabeth is very crane wives coded and would listen to them and her favorite song of theirs is hand that feeds, but the moon will sing is a song she likes to listen that reminds her of both luke and her dad in different ways in the fact that their relationship was very complicated and she fits the lyrics in a different depending on how she is feeling. And can not explain but keep you safe feels exactly like annabeth but not at the same time. Anyway my opinion please don't leave hate or anything just block if you disagree.

[andiatas]

Royal(ish) Reads: Jul-Sep 2024

Note: Some of the following links are affiliate links, which means I earn a commission on every purchase. This does not affect the price you pay. Also note that all titles mentioned are written by historians, researchers, or scholars. Only in rare cases are featured titles not written by someone with training in historical research.

For more book recommendations like in this post, you can follow my blog & Instagram

The Tragic Life of Lady Jane Grey by Beverley Adams (published Aug. 30, 2024) // All His Spies: The Secret World of Robert Cecil by Stephen Alford (published Jul. 4, 2024) // Dancing With Diana: A Memoir by Anne Allan (published Sep. 10, 2024)

Son of Prophecy: The Rise of Henry Tudor by Nathen Amin (published Jul. 15, 2024) // Planning the Murder of Anne Boleyn by Caroline Angus (published Aug. 30, 2024) // The Last Days of Richard III and the fate of his DNA by John Ashdown-Hill (new paperback version published Sep. 26, 2024)

The Fall of Egypt and the Rise of Rome: A History of the Ptolemies by Guy de la Bedoyere (published Sep. 10, 2024) // Richard Beauchamp: Medieval England's Greatest Knight by David Brindley (new paperback version published Aug. 29, 2024) // A Voyage Around the Queen by Craig Brown (published Aug. 29, 2024)

Henry III: Reform, Rebellion, Civil War, Settlement, 1258-1272 by David Carpenter (new paperback version published Sep. 24, 2024) // Stuart Spouses: A Compendium of Consorts from James I of Scotland to Queen Anne of Great Britain by Heather R. Darsie (published Sep. 30, 2024) // Prince Eugene of Savoy: A Genius for War Against Louis XIV and the Ottoman Empire by James Falkner (published Aug. 30, 2024)

Normal Women: From the Number One Bestselling Author Comes 900 Years of Women Making History by Philippa Gregory (new paperback version published Sep. 26, 2024) // The Romanovs: Imperial Russia and Ruling the Empire, 1613-1917 by Professor Lindsey Hughes, Professor Erika Monahan (2nd edition published Sep. 19, 2024) // Lady Pamela: My Mother's Extraordinary Years as Daughter to the Viceroy of India, Lady-in-Waiting to the Queen, and Wife of David Hicks by India Hicks (published Sep. 3, 2024)

Hannibal and Scipio: Parallel Lives by Simon Hornblower (published Sep. 26, 2024) // Oliver Cromwell: Commander in Chief by Ronald Hutton (published Aug. 27, 2024) // Catherine, the Princess of Wales: The Biography by Robert Jobson (published Aug. 1, 2024)

Henry V: The Astonishing Rise of England's Greatest Warrior King by Dan Jones (published Sep. 12, 2024) // Courtiers: Intrigue, Ambition, and the Power Players Behind the House of Windsor by Valentine Low (new paperback version published Sep. 17, 2024) // Kings & Queens: The Real Lives of the English Monarchs by Ann MacMillan, Peter Snow (new paperback version published Sep. 12, 2024)

The Romanovs Under House Arrest: The Russian Revolution and A Royal Family’s Imprisonment in their Palace by Mickey Mayhew (published Aug. 30, 2024) // Queen Victoria's Favourite Granddaughter: Princess Victoria of Hesse and by Rhine, the Most Consequential Royal You Never Knew by Ilana D. Miller (published Aug. 19, 2024) // Cooking and the Crown: Royal recipes from Queen Victoria to King Charles III by Tom Parker Bowles (published Sep. 26, 2024)

Pure Wit: The Revolutionary Life of Margaret Cavendish by Francesca Peacock (new paperback version published Sep. 12, 2024) // Henry VIII and the Plantagenet Poles: The Rise and Fall of a Dynasty by Adam Pennington (Sep. 30, 2024) // Everyday Life in Tudor London: Life in the City of Thomas Cromwell, William Shakespeare & Anne Boleyn by Stephen Porter (new paperback version published Aug. 15, 2024)

Kingmaker: Pamela Churchill Harriman's Astonishing Life of Seduction, Intrigue and Power by Sonia Purnell (published Sep. 19, 2024) // The Secret Diary of Queen Camilla by Hilary Rose (published Sep. 26, 2024) // Adventures in Time: Heroes: The Box Set by Dominic Sandbrook (published Aug. 29, 2024)

Adventures in Time: Heroines: The Box Set by Dominic Sandbrook (published Aug. 29, 2024) // Justinian: Emperor, Soldier, Saint by Professor Peter Sarris (new paperback version published Sep. 12, 2024) // Women in the Valley of the Kings: The Untold Story of Women Egyptologists in the Gilded Age by Kathleen Sheppard (published Aug. 19, 2024)

Marriage, Tudor Style: Love, Hate & Scandal by Sylvia Barbara Soberton (published Jul. 29, 2024) // A History of the Roman Empire in 21 Women by Emma Southon (new paperback version published Jul. 4, 2024) // A Rome of One's Own: The Forgotten Women of the Roman Empire by Emma Southon (new paperback version published Sep. 17, 2024)

Cleopatra: The Woman Behind the Stories by Alexandra Stewart and Hannah Peck (published Aug. 15, 2024) // The Wisest Fool: The Lavish Life of James VI and I by Steven Veerapen (new paperback version published Sep. 5, 2024) // The King's Loot: The Greatest Royal Jewellery Heist in History by Richard Wallace (published Aug. 8, 2024)

The Beaumonts: Kings of Jerusalem by Kathryn Warner (published Sep. 30, 2024) // Emperor of the Seas: Kublai Khan and the Making of China by Jack Weatherford (published Sep. 26, 2024) // Ravenous: A Life of Barbara Villiers, Charles II's Most Infamous Mistress by Andrea Zuvich (published Jul. 30, 2024)

[tavtiers]

could you analyze a Prince of Mind with a potential planet? thanks

The Prince of Mind [symbols: crown, neuron]

The Prince class has its basis in Machiavelli's The Prince. An example would be Prince Hamlet from the Shakespeare play.

The Mind aspect’s main theme is intuition. You can find its official description here.

A Prince of Mind is among those who alter the individual’s impact. This is the “classpect group” they belong to. Members include: the Sylph, Maid, Bard, and Prince of Heart/Mind. These classes are all opposites or inverses of each other that alter the Heart/Mind dichotomy (the individual’s impact). A description of classpect groupings can be found here.

The Prince of Mind actively destroys the Mind aspect. Active classes tell themselves what to do and do so for their own benefit. They are more likely to stand up for themselves, but more likely to be cruel. Princes and Bards destroy their aspect and everything it symbolizes, while using that same aspect as a weapon. In doing so, they leave their opposite aspect in their wake. Due to their actions, they come across as their opposite aspect. Simplified, the Prince of Mind is motivated by themselves to destroy intuition. In personality, they come across as the Heart aspect, seemingly defined by instinct.

On the subject of personality, the Prince of Mind wants to have control over things and enjoys challenges. Personality descriptions can be found here.

Their archetype is the Promised Genius, defined by control and intuition. Archetypes are explained here.

Their opposite is the Bard of Heart, who passively destroys instinct.

Their inverse is the Sylph of Heart, who passively assists instinct.

A classpect or “god tier” is an individual’s best self. All classpects go through a journey from unrealized, to struggle, to realized. When a character is unrealized, they neutrally exist as their inverse. On their struggle, they will wildly flip back and forth between their inverse and true classpect. In their worst moments they will act as their inverse, in their best their true classpect. When realized, they will stabilize as their true classpect. They will still have room to grow, but will become happier, more successful people.

This means that the Prince of Mind begins life motivated by others to assist instinct. When their struggle arrives and they are at their worst, they will continue this behavior in negative extremes. However, when at their best, they will find purpose in instead destroying intuition for themselves. When realized, they will stabilize and continue to destroy the Mind aspect actively, in a positive way.

They share their archetype with the Mage of Blood, the Genius Promised.

The Prince of Mind would quest on a planet similar to the Land of Heart [Opposite Aspect] and Mind [Aspect]. An example would be the Land of Clones and Chess. An explanation of planet naming conventions can be found here.

Two possible gods, or denizens, to reign over their planet would be Athena (Goddess of Justice) or the Sphinx (the legendary creature who posed riddles to travelers). Other Mind aspect denizens can be found here.

When the Prince of Mind completes their planet quests and dies on their quest bed, they would rise to ascension on the wings of dragonflies (symbols of mental maturity). A list of soul animals can be found here.

The characters that I have currently classpected as Princes of Mind are: Steve Dayton from Doom Patrol, Vislor Turlough from Doctor Who, Noiz from DRAMAtical Murder, Riddler from Batman, Imshael from Dragon Age, Napoleon Bonaparte from Night at the Museum, Dr. Bubby from HLVRAI, and Windom Earle from Twin Peaks.

If any of the links not connected to my blog break, the content can be found on my Google Drive.

Official Aspect Descriptions

Personality Descriptions

Aspect Denizens

[heyho-simonrussellbeale]

At the heart of the initiative is the three-part documentary series for BBC Two and iPlayer titled Shakespeare: Rise of a Genius, featuring contributions from Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, Brian Cox, Adrian Lester, Lolita Chakrabarti, Martin Freeman��and Jessie Buckley, alongside academics and writers including James Shapiro, Jeanette Winterson, Lucy Jago, Jeremy O’Harris and Ewan Fernie.

The documentary series will be made available from 8 November at 9pm.

A whole host of archived productions and Shakespeare-based films will be released across October and November to celebrate the contributions made by the First Folio.

There will also be specially created new introductions for many of these, featuring David Tennant on Hamlet, Richard Eyre on King Lear, Janet Suzman on Wars of the Roses, Gregory Doran on the Shakespeare Gala from the RSC, Russell T Davies on A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Mirren on As You Like It, Hugh Quarshie on Othello, Steven Berkoff on Hamlet at Elsinore, Simon Russell Beale on The Hollow Crown, and Ian McKellen on All is True.

[helmstone]

BBC to mark the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's First Folio

BBC to mark the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare's First Folio

The BBC has revealed a host of programmes across TV and radio to mark the 400th anniversary of the publication of Shakespeare’s First Folio. Published seven years after his death, it’s the reason his name and works are still so well known so long after his passing. Highlights from the BBC include: Major three part boxset for BBC Two and iPlayer – Shakespeare: Rise of a Genius with an A-list…

[safedistancefrombeingsmart]

A trailer for the BBC Shakespeare documentary has been a released and we can see a short glimpse of Martin. He is clearly trying to kill me. I mean, look at him!!

[martinfreemanspotter]

November was a very. quiet. month. Very quiet. But it ended with a bang: an International Emmy Award!

November 8th

Martin had a few things to say about William Shakespeare in the BBC documentary Shakespeare: Rise of a Genius.

November 10th

Martin was seen in Liverpool again, taking photos with fans while filming the 2nd season of The Responder.

November 11th

Martin and Breeders have been nominated for the I Talk Telly Awards 2023.

November 16th

Martin was spotted once again in Liverpool.

November 17th

Madness released a new album and Martin supplied a special prologue running through the entire album.

November 19th

You can bid on a pair of Martin's shoes - for charity.

November 21st

🥳🥳🥳 Martin wins the International Emmy Award 2023 for Best Performance by an Actor for The Responder. 🥳🥳🥳

Hopefully, December will be a bit more generous with new content.

[judi-daily]

Shakespeare: Rise of a Genius, 2023 Photo credit: 72 Films/BBC

[denimbex1986]

'We are on the verge of a "Hartnettaissance."

Josh Hartnett recently had impressive performances on TV ("Black Mirror") and in movies ("Oppenheimer").

Since he's known best for his work on the big screen, we're highlighting Hartnett's top movie roles.

14. John Tate in "Halloween H20: 20 Years Later" (1998)

In his big screen debut, Hartnett played John, the son of Jamie Lee Curtis' character, Laurie.

It's what you'd expect — he runs for his life from Michael Myers. It's not the most memorable performance, but landing the role did help catapult him into the "next big thing" conversation in Hollywood.

13. Hugo Goulding in "O" (2001)

In this modern-day retelling of Shakespeare's "Othello," Harnett plays the evil Hugo (essentially an adaptation of the Iago character in the classic play), who plots against his supposed friend Odin (Mekhi Phifer) to get the attention of Desi (Julia Stiles) and ruin Odin's life.

Released at a time when Hartnett's star was rising fast, the movie helped show that Hartnett was more than just a pretty face.

12. Dwight "Bucky" Bleichert in "The Black Dahlia" (2006)

Though this Brian DePalma-directed adaptation of James Ellroy's classic pulpy noir didn't get the acclaim you'd expect with such legends attached, Hartnett still shined as a detective investigating one of Los Angeles' most notorious murders.

In a cast that also featured stars like Aaron Eckhart, Scarlett Johansson, and Hilary Swank, Hartnett proves here that his dramatic acting chops are on par with those of genuine movie stars.

11. The Drifter in "Bunraku" (2010)

A rare impressive performance from the decade or so where Hartnett found himself in B-movies that often went straight-to-video or On Demand, Hartnett has a blast in "Bunraku" playing the movie's lead, The Drifter, who stumbles upon some interesting characters — and a lot of blood.

10. Matt Sullivan in "40 Days and 40 Nights" (2002)

Hartnett leans heavily on his heartthrob status in this rom-com, in which he plays a guy who gives up any sexual contact for Lent.

Playing up his character's wide eyes and penchant for hyperventilating as his hormones gradually get out of control, Hartnett delivers big on the laughs and the charm here.

9. K.C. Calden in "Hollywood Homicide" (2003)

A year after doing the rom-com thing, Hartnett teamed up with Harrison Ford for this studio action comedy.

Harnett holds his own across from Ford, delivering a playfulness he doesn't often give us in his filmography.

8. Ernest Lawrence in "Oppenheimer" (2023)

In Christopher Nolan's biopic of J. Robert Oppenheimer, Hartnett stars as one of the real-life physicists who joined the Manhattan Project to create the atom bomb alongside Oppenheimer.

Hartnett plays Ernest Lawrence as a man who is not just friendly with Oppenheimer, but who tries to make the genius understand that his actions, especially his favoritism towards Communist thinking, can lead to problems.

7. Trip Fontaine in "The Virgin Suicides" (1999)

In Sofia Coppola's feature directorial debut about the tragic lives of five teenage sisters, Hartnett plays Trip, the movie's heartthrob who dates the most rebellious sister, Lux (Kirsten Dunst).

Hartnett plays his role perfectly, and Coppola frames him as a high school God on screen, complete with a flowing 1970s-style haircut and stylish outfits.

6. Dave "Boy Sweat" Hancock in "Wrath of Man" (2021)

The recent "Hartnettaissance" can be traced back to this Guy Ritchie action thriller.

This revenge movie set in the world of armored truck guards finds Hartnett playing one of the guards who befriends Jason Statham's character.

It won't be the last time Ritchie calls on Hartnett to bring one of his characters to life.

5. The Salesman in "Sin City" (2005)

As the slick assassin in the Robert Rodriguez adaptation of Frank Miller's iconic comic series, Hartnett's character plays a key role in bookending the movie.

His voiceover narrates his target at the start of the movie at a party. Then, dressed as a doctor at the end of the movie, he encounters a woman in an elevator. She knows from the sight of him that her fate is set.

Though Harnett doesn't get a lot of screen time, his presence in both scenes is thrilling and chilling.

4. Matt Eversmann in "Black Hawk Down" (2001)

Hartnett is front and center in Ridley Scott's acclaimed war movie, which follows the aftermath of a Black Hawk helicopter crashing in enemy territory in Mogadishu in 1993 during the Somali Civil War.

The role was a breakthrough in positioning Hartnett as not just a heartthrob, but a good actor in his own right.

3. Danny Francesco in "Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre" (2023)

Teaming again with Guy Ritchie, Hartnett delivers one of his best performances in recent memory. In this Ritchie action movie, Jason Statham plays a spy who must track down a device before an arms dealer (Hugh Grant) sells it to the highest bidder.

Hartnett plays the dealer's favorite actor, whom Statham's character uses to infiltrate the dealer's world.

Here, Hartnett gets to flex his comedic chops, as his egotistical actor character suddenly has to be as tough as the characters he plays on screen.

2. Danny Walker in "Pearl Harbor" (2001)

Michael Bay's blockbuster fictional epic about the attack on Pearl Harbor was slaughtered by critics and became a punching bag for audiences throughout the summer of 2001. But despite all of that, it features one of Hartnett's best performances.

Starring alongside Ben Affleck as two best friends who survive the attack, the role marks the biggest studio job Hartnett has had to date. Not only does Hartnett deliver an impressive dramatic performance, but he also carries the movie's main love story, alongside Kate Beckinsale.

1. Zeke Tyler in "The Faculty" (1998)

The same year Hartnett made his big-screen debut in "Halloween H20," he also starred in Robert Rodriguez's sci-fi horror "The Faculty."

As the rebellious, drug-dealing student at an Ohio high school who is repeating his senior year, Hartnett delivers all the qualities that would go on to make him famous: His boyish good looks, his brooding intensity, his signature deep voice, and that late-1990s look where you wear a long-sleeved shirt under a T-shirt.'

[stillswearing]

Kendall Roy? Not like other girls.

Actual title: Beyond Shakespeare, a dive into the American white male antihero archetype 

[Edited and reposted]

As Succession comes to a close, comparisons between Kendall Roy and other iconic onscreen antiheroes have been thrown around online. And as a lover of white boy media over the years, I got into thinking about my favorite 40-year-old nepobaby media mogul.

The way I see it: What sets Kendall apart from typical antihero protagonists, like Walter White or Michael Corleone, is that he starts as a cringe fail loser. And I kinda wish all white boy corruption arcs in the future be as pathetic and hilarious and upsetting and sharply written as Kendall Roy’s.

CORRUPTION ARCS

We know corruption arcs or negative arcs. It’s one of the ways a protagonist becomes the antihero. Walter White and Michael Corleone begin as competent, fairly nice guys living decent lives. And the thrill of their story is watching them reluctantly (and then not reluctantly) apply their skills to increasingly morally grey situations until they're fully consumed by power and they lose everything.

Whereas characters like White and Corleone are introduced as men who already had the makings for greatness (Walter, a genius chemist, and Michael, an intelligent marine), Kendall is introduced as a 39-year-old child who can’t close the Vaulter deal. And while Walter's and Michael's disillusionment and corruption began reluctantly as a result of a sudden disruption in their lives (Walter with cancer, and Michael with his dad’s assassination), Ken's path to becoming Logan is the baseline - not a disruption - for his character.

This is cool because corruption arcs don't typically work like this. A protagonist's competence isn’t usually doubted in corruption arcs. And how can you even bring a character down if they're already a disillusioned loser hungry for power at the very beginning? 

While White and Corleone have a slow descent towards unscrupulousness, there’s no reluctance on Kendall's part in hurtling towards, well, evil. He's always wanted to be his dad. Even after going to great lengths to act out against Logan, as a result of trauma and abuse, Kendall was always meant to revert back to his baseline - his desire to be king no matter the cost. The typical corruption arc doesn't really apply to him because he's already corrupted from the start. So how did they make his story compelling? 

By laying it out as a hero’s journey. A really fucked up one.

A HERO’S JOURNEY

In overly simplistic terms, a hero's journey is one where the character goes on a quest and comes back a changed person. Think: Hiccup from How To Train Your Dragon. The protagonist starts from the bottom and rises to the top, learning valuable life-altering lessons along the way. Hiccup starts out as a weak child sidelined by his dad & peers but grows up to be Berk's chief like he always dreamed of. A zero to hero.

And that’s literally Kendall Roy; he's the Hiccup of Wall Street. He goes from being a bitch ass failure who can't close Vaulter to being Waystar's CEO like he always dreamed of. The key difference is that Hiccup has altruistic goals & values (because he's a character in a wonderfully scored children’s animated adventure series) and Kendall doesn't (because he is in the wonderfully scored HBO show Succession). But regardless of their different morals & end goals, the journey they go through is the same. 

Kendall’s story cannot be framed as a descent to wickedness, unlike in a typical corruption arc. His is an ascent from loserville to winner…ville. It’s about becoming the man he was always destined to be. 

A bad zero to a bad hero. 

ANTIHEROES

As a result of this distinction from other white male antiheroes, Kendall Roy as a character achieves something his predecessors have had a difficult time doing well: Be an obvious, glaring, clear condemnation of the patriarchy and its many forms of violence.

Ok, stay with me.

See, characters like Michael Corleone, Walter White, Tony Soprano, and Don Draper are all widely considered well-written, compelling antiheroes. (No, I will not be putting Tommy Shelby on the list because Peaky Blinders truly deeply sucked - fight me. And full disclosure: I haven’t seen The Sopranos and Mad Men, but I think my point still stands.) Audiences know they’re bad people, but we understand them and even root for them. Or at the very least, we understand why people would root for them within the logic of the series they’re in. This is the power of storytelling, of framing, of choosing who’s at the center of the narrative.

Things get messy when audiences (and even creators) empathize with these men’s corruption so much that they sometimes lose sight that the antihero archetype is a critique as much as it is an understanding of this specific white man who does violent things. After all, how can we critique something we do not understand? 

Moreover, stories usually draw the audience’s sympathy for antiheroes by putting them in conflict with a way more malevolent character. That way, the protagonist's morally grey decisions look less destructive in comparison. As a result of being the center of the narrative, these problematic asshole fathers can be easily interpreted as “simply misunderstood”, or worse as “justified and enlightened and aspirational and cool. fuck yeah.” Along the way, people forget that these antihero stories were meant to be a commentary on the patriarchy.

It’s also why many female characters around these antiheroes suffer undue vitriol from viewers. We empathize with these bad boys so much, that the women are seen as nuisance, as hysterical creatures in the way of the antihero's destiny and goals. When really most of the time, women in these stories are the voice of reason, stopping these douchebags from exercising monstrous violence. (Skylar White, I will always love you.)

KENDALL ROY

Not our Kenny though. Unlike the intelligent, suave, and capable antiheroes that came before him, our man was Uncool and Cringe since Day 1. As said, being a failure and inept is key in a hero’s journey, especially at the beginning. That’s why I understand why so many viewers actively dislike Ken. (He is my most favorite character though, no one comes close.)

Sure, we deeply empathize with Kendall over the course of four seasons. He is a victim and a perpetrator of abuse. But at no point does the show hold back in portraying his violence as the actions of a truly pathetic, emotionally stunted, insecure man-child.

I have to mention my awe for Jeremy Strong at this point because, in lesser actors’ hands, it would have been nearly impossible for anyone to empathize with, root for, and even cry for, Ken. He did not have the luxury of playing an antihero that starts out as competent and likable before things turned sour (as in a traditional corruption arc). All of Kendall’s weaknesses and ugliness were right there at the very beginning of the show and they were continually highlighted throughout all four seasons. His actions are rarely portrayed as justified, let alone aspirational. He fails and makes the wrong call all the time.

And yet Strong plays Kendall so masterfully, that we always see Kendall as both the abusive man and the abused child whenever he’s onscreen. It's a genius move on Armstrong's and Strong's part to create Kendall Roy in this manner. By placing Kendall as a hero on his way to becoming whom he was always destined to be, instead of a character who turns to a dark path as a result of a disruption in their worldview, we the audience are able to hold both the evilness of Ken and his kindness, as well as his incompetence and his strength, in our minds simultaneously every time.

We really understand Kendall, and it's why we can deeply hate him. He is an empathetic explanation AND clear condemnation of white male patriarchs in society. Antiheroes before him may have been as complex as Kendall Roy, but they could only wish that they had his clarity as well.

CONCLUSION

Rooting for Ken means differently for various people. Rooting for him can mean hoping he fails to be Logan and breaks out of the cycle. But it can also mean hoping that he finally gets what he wants and succeeds Logan.

I’m mostly in the latter camp. 

There is catharsis there, in watching a shitty human being achieve his ultimate empty dream of being the shittiest human being. This is a hero’s journey after all.

A bad zero to a bad hero.

[allthathistory]

The Shakespeare Authorship Question: Snobbery and Wishful Thinking

Shakespeare was a genius. His plots may have been stolen, his knowledge of the worlds about which he wrote flawed and incomplete, but his poetry and his genius as a weaver of narrative threads is unsurpassed, even four hundred years later.

How was it that a provincial glover’s son born in the early years of the reign of Queen Elizabeth I could rise to such staggering ability and translate his ambition into treasure for all time? How indeed.

This is not a puzzle which has gone unnoticed, and questions swirl around this jobbing actor with a second-rate education. How did he manage, amidst his fellows, to produce such masterpieces again and again?

There are plenty who believe his plays were not actually his, and we have no record that Shakespeare ever himself took credit for their writing in his lifetime, nor does it appear he ever received compensation for their composition, merely for his acting. Fingers have been pointed at other individuals, with more or less plausibility.

The Cadaver Synod, when a Dead Pope Stood Trial

21 Grams, Artificial Intelligence, and the Path to Robot Suffrage

Christopher Marlowe is sometimes suggested as the true author of Shakespeare’s plays, and Marlowe was certainly possessed of a similar genius. The early Shakespeare plays borrow heavily from Marlowe’s plays of the 1580s, and there is much else in common between the two bodies of work.

Of course Marlowe himself was murdered in Deptford in 1593, and Shakespeare would continue to write for fifteen years after his death. For Marlowe to be the true author he would have to have left behind a staggering body of unpublished work for Shakespeare to churn out regularly, including references to current events which had not even happened in Marlowe’s lifetime. Not really likely.

Various other brilliant men of the time, such as Francis Bacon, are routinely proposed as the “real” Shakespeare, for little reason other than their cleverness in other spheres. But there is one other major contender who is perhaps not so easily dismissed.

Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford, is the leading candidate for those who refuse to credit Shakespeare himself with his body of work. He was a court poet, a sponsor of acting troupes, and even wrote plays under his own name.

Could he be the real genius behind Shakespeare?

Read more