Rosamund and Mary in London. Screencap: Me

My sister and I have been gorging ourselves on the second season of Downton Abbey, so this recap may be shorter than the rest simply because I’ve been watching tons of these episodes. I have been taking notes, though. Anyways, let’s get into it.

Synopsis (iTunes): Cora makes a discovery that throws the inheritance issue into chaos, and under pressure from her aunt Lady Rosamund Painswick, Mary is prompted to keep Matthew waiting for an answer to his proposal. Robert arranges for Mrs. Patmore to see an eye specialist, and O’Brien digs up more compromising information about Bates, but the Earl’s response to it comes as a surprise. Thomas leaves the Abbey and Mary exacts vengeance on Edith for her treachery, while the household is rocked by a shocking announcement.

My review: It’s been a few days and a few episodes since I’ve been in the mindset of Episode 7. But, I do have some things to talk about. Both good and bad.

The good is that Mrs. Patmore finds an ally in Mrs. Bird, the cook for Isobel and Matthew. That was fun to see. However, how they decide to become friends is a little rushed. Also Mrs. Patmore gets her much-needed surgery, which is great! I’m glad the issue was resolved without her getting fired, which is what might have happened on another show (no innuendo there–I’m just saying it might happen on another show).

We also find out that Anna is made of a lot more than Bates is. I know I said Bates is one of the saints of the show, but he’s also a very slow worker when it comes to shaking people off, getting rid of dead weight, allowing people to take advantage of him and holding on to shame and insults (some of which he just accepts even though he’s innocent). If Bates had just told Lord Grantham all of this from the beginning, it would have been a lot easier for Bates in the house because Lord Grantham would always be on his side. Heck, Lord Grantham was already on his side! He took him back even after Carson had misgivings about him! All Bates needed to do would be to tell Lord Grantham everything.

Gwen gets the job! That’s great, but that also means we might not see her anymore. I say “might” because I still haven’t watched all of Season 2 yet, and Gwen was one of the best characters on the show. I really want to see her at her new job.

Thomas is a weird character. On the one hand, I feel bad for him because he has bad taste in men and, like so many tragic characters, just wants to be loved. On the other hand, he has callous things, like when he just talks bad about William’s dead mother in front of the guy. This incurs a wrath in William so terrible that he whoops Thomas’ butt old-school style, something I was glad to see.

I think Thomas acts this way because  of what I’ve been saying, which is that he does not like showing vulnerability because he’s not allowed to be his total self. Oddly enough, that show doesn’t really paint that picture well, since everyone seems to know about him being gay. But that’s what we’re supposed to believe. He goes a little above and beyond holding his emotions in when he lashes out at others for no reason, particularly men that are well-liked, like William and Bates, but I think that’s because he wishes he came from a close-knit family like William, were well-liked like both William and Bates, and could basically be the men they are–men who are accepted by society. Now, I already have a huge thing about Draco on this site, and I’m tempted to have a huge essay spot for stuff dedicated to Thomas as well, but while Thomas (and Draco) are very interesting from a mental study point-of-view, would I humor Thomas (or Draco)? NO. I’d probably go AWOL like William. Then I’d probably get fired, but I think, like William, I’d have the backing of Carson and Mrs. Hughes. If we’re speaking simply from the psychological aspects, Thomas is very intriguing.

O’Brien and Mary really learn a lot in this episode through their own mistakes. O’Brien sinks to her depths of depravity when she decides to murder Lady Grantham’s unborn child as a way to get back at her; at the time O’Brien thought that Lady Grantham and the Dowager Countess were trying to replace her, even though Lady Grantham was only trying to help the Dowager Countess find a replacement lady’s maid. Sadly, the baby does die due to O’Brien’s actions, but before the death happens, O’Brien catches herself and tells herself that she’s not this type of person. However, she realizes it too late. Also, the baby was a boy, someone who could have solved all of the Crawleys problems when it comes to finding a male heir. O’Brien has become a lot more sullen and thoughtful after this incident. She also hasn’t told anyone.

Mary is really odd. On the one hand, she can be rather mature. But on the other hand, it’s like she forgets everything she’s been thinking and becomes childish and immature. Her immaturity–trying to get back at Edith for telling the Terrible Awful–along with Aunt Rosamund’s (Samantha Bond) meddling, causes her to lose out on marrying Matthew. He gets fed up with her games and decides to just cut out of Downton altogether. Mary finally realizes the result of her childishness and, frankly, stupidity. All that needs to come out now is that Pamuk died in her bed. Hopefully that comes out sometime later in Season 2. (Sorry for calling her Rosalind in another recap!)

WORLD WAR ONE BEGINS. And this is how we end Season 1. Stay tuned for Season 2 recaps! I’m now caught up with everyone else!

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/4080b  Tweet:

Gay pride 2011 in Toulouse, France. Credit: Guillaume Paumier (Flickr Creative Commons)

I’m a day late with the news, but I’m finally getting around to posting something on Tuesday’s big news concerning marriage rights. I did tweet out the news that California’s Proposition 8, the ban on gays and lesbians marrying, has been overturned by a federal appeals court.

Hooray! Even though the battle is long from over, people can finally see a light at the end of the tunnel. To celebrate the overturn of Prop 8, several sites have made posts about how this affects the entertainment industry and the beloved characters we have gotten to know through television shows and movies. The links to those pages are below.

Prop 8 Ruled Unconstitutional: Let’s Celebrate With Our Favorite Gay TV Couples (PHOTOS)

Ellen DeGeneres addresses Prop 8 and J.C. Penney controversy — VIDEO

Court strikes down Prop 8, celebs head to Twitter to celebrate

Prop 8 Overturned: Celebs React to Historic Ruling

Prop. 8 Overturned! Celebrities Take To Twitter

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/0e899  Tweet:

Daniel Radcliffe walking through the haunted house. Picture accompanies article at the Kaleidoscope. Credit: CBS Films

This review is written by my friend and former Kaleidoscope colleague, Mark Trammell. Make sure to check out the rest of his movie reviews at the Kaleidoscope’s online site.

It’s a tricky business, segueing from a successful franchise to a bona fide film career. Many have tried with varying degrees of success, but in the end, it all comes down to money. No matter how beloved the character may be, in Hollywood, you’re only as good as your last movie.

Daniel Radcliffe is a perfect example of an actor trying to make that transition. Smartly honing his chops on Broadway in productions like “Equus” and “How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying,” Radcliffe has thus far steadfastly avoided precisely the sort of project that made him a star. In other words, to his credit, he’s not doing bombastic, big-budget Hollywood productions like the “Harry Potter” saga. Yet.

To date, aside from “Potter,” his resume is mostly made up of TV-movies and an indie film called “December Boys.” His next film is another indie, this one a drama in which Radcliffe will play famed Beat poet Allen Ginsberg. Factor in “The Woman in Black,” an old-school Gothic horror movie, and Radcliffe is clearly looking to take a much more low-key approach, post-Potter.

Lucky for him, “Woman” isn’t half-bad, and the timing couldn’t be more perfect. This film season has already been a bit off-kilter from the start, with horror films taking advantage of the lag.

“The Devil Inside,” a critically-reviled, found-footage take on demonic possession, cost about a million to make and made a whopping $52 million at the box office. More recently, the latest installment of the ongoing “Underworld” franchise has cleaned up at theaters, despite a budget that would make that of “The Devil Inside” look like catering costs.

Horror is clearly in, big time, particularly if one includes such horror-adjacent fare like “The Grey” and “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.” “Woman in Black” fills another horror void: that of the haunted house flick, and the film rises to the occasion nicely.

Set in the 1900s, the movie revolves around Arthur Kipps (Radcliffe), who is given the task of going through the personal effects of a recently deceased client’s home in search of relevant information for her lawyers. On dire financial straits and still reeling from the death of his wife during childbirth, Kipps needs the work and the money and is clearly on thin ice with his employers, so he’s determined.

No sooner than he arrives to the village in which the client’s house is located is it readily apparent that something is horribly awry. Cue the nervous villagers, wary of the outsider in their town — even more so when they discover where he’s going. They do everything they can to warn Kipps off, but of course, if he left, we wouldn’t have a movie.

Once the film hits the location of the house, the creeps begin in earnest. Spectacularly positioned on its own island, the house on the beach is only accessible by land during low tide. Once the tide comes in, so goes the way in…or out. Unless one has a boat handy — and then there’s the never-ending fog and rain to deal with — anyone left in the house isn’t going anywhere.

Now under normal circumstances, that might be pretty cool, but this being a horror movie, you know what that means. At some point, Kipps is going to be stuck in the house with whomever — or whatever — is haunting it. As it turns out, it’s not just the titular “Woman in Black” that Kipps has to deal with, but creepy kids as well, not to mention their freaky belongings. Where does one go to buy all these creepy dolls and wind-up toys? The Creepy Dolls and Wind-Up Toy Emporium, perhaps? Either way, things are not good at Spooky Manor, to be sure.

“Woman in Black” is nothing horror fans haven’t seen before, but it is impeccably executed. It was so nice to see that the recently-resurrected Hammer Films was involved, having done so well a few years ago with their reinterpretation of “Let the Right One In” entitled “Let Me In.” It was precisely this sort of Gothic Horror that was their bread and butter back in the 60s and 70s, in films like their resurrections of “Frankenstein” and “Dracula” (with Christopher Lee as the Count).

It doesn’t hurt to have Jane Goldman, the screenwriter behind “Kick-Ass” and “X-Men: First Class” involved. This film is much more restrained than her previous work, as befits the source material, the novel by Susan Hill. Director James Watkins also makes good on the promise he showed in the indie horror flick “Eden Lake.”

But this is primarily Radcliffe’s show, and he does well with his first truly adult role. It’s a bit jarring at first to see him playing someone old enough to have a young child — much less a deceased wife — but since the film primarily revolves around Radcliffe alone in the house, it’s easy to get past. Also helping matters is that a ghost story isn’t too terribly far removed from the occult themes of the “Potter” series, making it an easy enough transition overall.

While the effects and camerawork are occasionally a bit too modern for their own good (no doubt a direct result of CGI tinkering), “Woman” maintains a nicely retro vibe that is refreshing to see in horror again. After all those years of torture porn and the like, it’s nice to see a proudly Gothic thriller unafraid to be old-fashioned. “The Woman in Black” may not be anything you haven’t seen before, but it’s done well, and that works just fine by me.

Grade: B+

Mark Trammell
Staff Writer
ripmrgordo@hotmail.com

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/0feed  Tweet:

Credit: Indican Pictures

Thanks to Indican Pictures, I’ve learned about the indie film Ranchero, starring Danny Trejo, Ruth Livier and Christina Woods.  The official synopsis for the film is:

After the death of his parents Jesse Torres leaves his childhood cattle ranch for the Bright Lights of the Big City. Reconnecting with his childhood friend Tom, Jesse finds himself in a squalid neighborhood of drugs, gangs and broken dreams. Tom’s become a drug addict and is in deep to the local gangs which strains their friendship. Struggling with his new life, Jesse finds solace in a local girl, Lil’ Bit, but as the romance blossoms Jesse finds himself confronted by the neighborhood mobster, Capone (Danny Trejo) who owns her. Now faced with a drug addicted best friend, an angry mobster and his girlfriend’s freedom, Jesse must make some hard choices with dangerous consequences.

To quote writer/producer of the film, Brian Eric Johnson, “Ranchero is a film that deals subtly with African-American and Mexican-American relations as well as cultural legacies. I like to say that anybody could play these characters, but their ethnicities lend context and texture to the story.”

I’m very intrigued to learn more about the film, and, if all goes well, more coverage concerning the film will be up on Moniqueblog (stay tuned!).

In any case, the reviews for the film have been stellar and the film has already won awards such as:

Best of Festival – Indie Fest USA
Audience Award for Best Feature – SENE Film, Arts, and Music Festival
Best Screenplay – SENE Film, Arts, and Music Festival
Best Actor for Roger – SENE Film, Arts, and Music Festival

If you are interested in seeing this film that deals with the subtleties of African-American and Mexican-American race relations and you’re in the L.A. area, the film will be released March 2. The film will open later in March in Phoenix, Yuma, Austin and Dallas. Ranchero is currently already showing  in Buffalo, Providence and Houston. You can learn more about the film at it’s official page.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/08d40  Tweet:

(L-R) Topher Grace and Richard Gere. Picture accompanies ShockYa interview.

Malaise and tiredness can be tough, especially when you’re running a website. I intend to be out the tiredness by tomorrow, since I’ve got to get caught up on my Downton Abbey posts and actually write a review/recap of Smash, which I did really like as a grown-up antidote to Glee.

Until then, please take a look at another one of the interviews I do for my job at ShockYa.com. This time, I interviewed Michael Brandt, co-writer and director of The Double, starring Richard Gere and Topher Grace. Here’s a snippet:

“The Double” is Brandt’s first time directing a film. “It was important to find actors that wouldn’t take advantage of the fact that it was my first time directing, that would treat it as a power play” said Brandt. “Luckily, I did.”

The actors the team attracted to the roles, Topher Grace and Richard Gere, were fantastic in their roles, said Brandt. “They were very collaborative, easy to work with,” he said. “Richard is such a pro. He never makes a mistake. He knows his marks, he knows when he’s out of shot, if he’s out of focus–he knows the technical aspects of filmmaking so well, and it’s very helpful for someone who is a first-time director because with an actor who is knowledgeable, it decreases the amount of technical mistakes you’re going to make.”

One great thing Brandt did was help validate my interviewing style. I’ve always made it a point to come to an interview as the person that’s respectful of the talent’s time. I’m just myself. I realize how taxing it is to be interviewed for hours on end, so I try to make it as easy as possible. When I asked Brandt if he had any final thoughts he wanted to share, he said that I was the best interviewer he’s had to work with. Success! Thanks for the ego-boost!

You can read my full interview here at ShockYa.com.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/e8c9c  Tweet:

Bates before revealing his past. Screencap: Me

The one thing that threw me off with this episode is that it’s suddenly two years since Bates has been working there, when nothing in the scripts leading up to Episode 6 have indicated any really big shift forward in time. I think this leap was done in order to “show” us that Bates and Anna’s relationship is more far along than we originally assumed it was. Anyway, this is really the only clumsy thing about this episode, so I thought I’d get it out of the way first.

Well, I guess there’s another clumsy thing that I forgot to mention. This happened a few episodes ago, but what made Matthew like Mary? What about her, aside from being (excuse my English) a bitch, wanted to make Matthew ask for her hand in marriage in Episode 6?  Also, it’s a little funny to wonder why these two like each other and if Edith could have had  a chance with Matthew when watching the show from a 21st century perspective–from today’s perspective, it’s uncouth to marry your cousin, no matter how removed they are from the family. (I read that Matthew is their third cousin, twice removed.)

Anyway, this episode is centered around one of the women’s rights rallies/riots happening in town. Sybil and Branson are attending, but it soon gets to be too much for a Lady to be out in, and Branson whisks her away for fear of her safety. (Isobel, who also happens to be at the rally, wants Sybil to be safe as well.) When Sybil’s father finds out, though, he’s mad, especially when he finds out that all of the women (save for his mother) were in on it. Lord Grantham basically forbids Sybil from going back to the rallies because of the politics involved. He might be open-minded, but he’s not really a liberal. Women’s rights threatens the aristocracy because if women’s rights gets passed, then other things, like limiting the gap between the haves and have-nots, might be put up for a vote. Then, what prominence or importance would Downton Abbey have?

Needless to say, Sybil goes back to the rallies by tricking Branson into thinking she has some other business to attend to. The rally turns nasty, and thankfully Matthew was at his practice. He meets up with Branson and Sybil right as the riot starts –and when Sybil gets knocked out cold. They take her to Matthew’s house where his mother can patch her up. Mary is also taken to the Crawley House in order to see her sister and take her home. However, Mary is once again given the cold shoulder by Matthew when he puts all his attention toward Sybil and not her (again, she’s being a spoiled brat. Her sister was hurt, for goodness’ sake!). In any case, Branson is barely hanging onto his job; Sybil has threatened to run away if her father fires Branson for something that was her doing.

Sybil at the rally. Screencap: Me

This episode is pretty much “Mary’s not hot stuff anymore,” because Edith manages to charm Sir Antony away from Mary, proving to Mary that she’s got competition when it comes to entertaining possible suitors. Good for Edith. However, that Sir Antony’s a little old for her. He should be thinking about that all of the time. I would, if I were him, but I guess he’s not since he did ask her out on a date.

Edith and Sir Antony. Screencap: Me

We learn more of William. In fact, we see Mary bonding with him on a certain level. I guess since she’s got nothing better to do–all of the men in her life are occupied–she decides to talk to him. We later find out that William not only comes from a good home, but his mother’s also near death. His mother doesn’t want him to know she’s ill, but Mary thinks it’s best for him to go be with her. She arranges some time off for him, out of the kindness of her heart.

O’Brien and Thomas rope poor Daisy into their scheme of getting Bates sacked. They pin Thomas’ theft of the wine on Bates and gets Daisy to tell a fake story to Carson about seeing Bates with the wine. Thanks to William (“There are no lies in our [his parents'] house,”) Daisy comes to her senses and tells Carson the real truth. O’Brien and Thomas are on the ropes now, but Bates tells Carson, Anna, and Mrs. Hughes in private that his past might get him fired anyway; in the past, he was a drunkard and was arrested for theft. He hasn’t touched a drop of wine because of his former alcoholism. He puts forward his resignation, and Carson says he’ll mull it over after conferring with Lord Grantham.

Meanwhile, we’ve learned that Mrs. Patmore does have cataracts, but she probably won’t want to get any treatment in order to save the eyesight she does have. Also, Gwen gives Sybil a lesson in the social hierarchy of England, saying that the haves can expect to get what they want because they expect it. The have-nots, however, never expect anything to happen to them. However, Sybil promises that she will find Gwen a secretarial job.

Finally, the Dowager Countess finds out about the, to quote The Help‘s Minny Jackson, “Terrible Awful” that Mary has been a part of. At first, the Dowager Countess is horrified, but Lady Grantham says that she couldn’t turn her back on Mary, even with the Terrible Awful. Eventually the Dowager Countess decides not to turn her back on family, either.

The Dowager Countess’ reaction to the Terrible Awful. Screencap: Me

One last thing that I noticed–Branson is basically Harry Spargo (Neil Jackson) from the 2010 revival of Upstairs Downstairs . They both are political radicals, they both form attachments to one of the ladies of the house, and they both are a part of rallies,  giving out pamphlets, and the like. I’m not saying it’s a good or bad thing, but there are a few characters who are basically counterparts to other characters on either incarnation of Upstairs Downstairs. Like, for instance, Mrs. Patmore is like Mrs. Bridges from the original 1971 version of Upstairs Downstairs.

Anyway, another good episode. I’m almost to the climax of the first series, Episode 7!

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/c9efe  Tweet:

Baron Cohen As General Aladeen. Picture accompanies ShockYa post.

If you love Sacha Baron Cohen films, you are probably ready to learn more about his latest film The Dictator. The film will have a Super Bowl spot, but you can watch the spot right now! You can either scroll below or go to ShockYa to watch the spot, and make sure to go to the official site for the film, Republic of Wadiya.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/c9fec  Tweet:

Bray in The Grey. Picture accompanies interview on ShockYa.

Recently, I was able to interview stunt coordinator and actor Ben Bray, who plays Hernandez in The Grey. In the interview, he talks about how he got started in acting through his boxing career, working with Liam Neeson, and the weather in Smithers, Canada, the place where The Grey was shot. Here’s a snippet of the interview.

In “The Grey,” Bray plays Hernandez, a character that has an interesting dichotomy. “I think what’s interesting about the Hernandez character is that he’s a bad guy with a good heart,” he said, saying that Hernandez is essentially a good guy who was tainted by being around the wrong people, leading him to make bad decisions. “He’s got a soft heart. A soft side, I should say,” he said.

Working with Liam Neeson was a great experience for Bray, even though his nerves got in the way at first. “It was nervewracking in the beginning,” he said. “It was like being in the ring with one of the great fighters, like Muhammad Ali. Liam is the total opposite from the ‘alpha male’. He’s very generous as an actor, very generous as a human being.”

Check out the full interview at ShockYa.com!

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/94c09  Tweet:

Molesley’s father’s fabulous roses. Screencap: Me

This episode, centered around the Downton flower show, had two big storylines: Mary being a spoiled brat and the tag team of Thomas and O’Brien trying once again to get Bates, the easy target, out of Downton.

Mary is used to being thought of as The Chosen One. Because she’s the oldest, she’s basically grown up with the idea that she’s going to keep the image and heritage of Downton going. She’s basically in line to be the next Dowager Countess. Luckily, she was born with looks. Unluckily, she boasts it, as well as her ability to entertain men, in middle sister Edith’s face. As Elle Woods would say, Edith’s “not completely unfortunate looking.” Edith isn’t what one could call “classically beautiful” like her sister, but she’s not ugly in the least. She’s not that ugly that Mary should rub her own looks in Edith’s face, because Mary’s a bit ugly in the personality department. However, her ugliness in character causes Edith to divulge in her own store of ugliness when, after getting the truth of the Pamuk incident from Daisy (thanks to the scheming of O’Brien),  she decides to tell the Turkish Embassy about what happened to Pamuk.What does O’Brien have to gain from this? Not much, in the long run. She wanted to know what Daisy knows, and she’s always up for mess. She lives for mess, so it would be in character for her to start discord with anyone.

Edith’s letter to the Turkish Embassy. Screencap: Me

A developing storyline with Edith, however, is that she is intent on stealing Sir Antony Stralland away from Mary. Stralland is being thrown at Mary as a possible suitor, and just to spite Edith, she starts entertaining him. However, Mary, being flighty, throws away Matthew’s advances in the process. As her own father said, she can be such a child. It does seem like she wrestles with being responsible and being a brat, because after Matthew leaves in a huff, she mentally kicks herself. And when he quickly speaks and walks away from her at the flower show, she feels what it’s like to not be wanted. She finally gets a bit of the bad karma she’s put out directed back at her, and it’s going to get even worse when the rumors about her and Pamuk start coming.

Mary mentally scolding herself. Screencap: Me

Meanwhile, Thomas is in trouble. He’s been nicking the wine–something that’s been going on ever since the first or second episodes–and now the one person he told about the Pamuk situation–a valet to another highfalutin–blabbed about it all over London. In order to get the heat off him, O’Brien tells him to frame someone else for stealing. Of course, the scapegoat being used is Bates.  They decide to steal one of the prize snuff boxes from the study, and when Anna tells Bates that they must have put it in his room, they decide to turn the tables on them and hide it in one of their rooms. It works–in order to keep their jobs, Thomas and O’Brien put the snuff box back in the study before Carson sees them. They’ve been outwitted for now.

The minor subplot for this episode is another battle of wills between Isobel and the Dowager Countess. While the Dowager Countess thought she won the prize for “the best bloom in the village” because of her gardener’s skill, Isobel–as well as most of her family–inform her that she wins because she’s who she is. She “wins” it out of fear, even when someone else is better. This year, Molesley’s father’s roses are up for contention, and Isobel weighs on the Dowager Countess’ conscience about letting Molesley’s father win. She eventually does the right thing and lets the man win, even though her name was written down as the winner. Isobel wins this round.

The Dowager Countess being gracious in her self-appointed defeat. Screencap: Me

Mrs. Patmore’s eyesight issues finally come to light when she sends out a salty pudding. She’s losing her sight to cataracts. She’s also told by Carson that she owes Daisy an apology for how she treats her. Mrs. Patmore’s fear is real–if she doesn’t have a job as a cook, what can she do?

Bates and Anna’s relationship is finally getting out in the open in the sense that the two are actually discussing their feelings. However, Bates says that he can’t be with her because of something in his past. Anna–as well as the rest of us–are led to believe that he’s married, but he states that’s not it. The development of their relationship is good, however, I will say that for the lines to make it seem as if they have discussed the feelings toward one another before is a little weird. Anna starts out saying that it seems like he won’t accept her feelings for him when, in fact, we’ve never seen him do that before, not until this episode.

Gwen and Sybil go to town to see about Gwen’s next secretarial interview. They have a lot of trouble coming back, but they eventually make it back to Downton Abbey (I’m glad there was no O’Brien finding out), but Gwen doesn’t get the job.

We are also introduced to Aunt Rosalind, Lord Grantham’s cousin in London, through letters. We’ll meet her soon, I’m sure.

Something I’ve been thinking of–what if O’Brien is a lesbian? I mean, I’m not trying to make everyone gay in this show, but it would answer a lot of questions about her. She seems to enjoy her job as a lady’s maid a little too much. Doesn’t she give a weird look to or about Lady Grantham in the first episode? And why else would she be so comfortable about all aspects of Thomas? She never questions him about how he knows what he knows about Pamuk, which obviously involved getting a little closer than a first footman should be. She knows that he made advances on him, though. She’s got to know, she’s O’Brien. She knows everything there is to know about gossip. And the fact that she’s a schemer goes back to my “women in prison” theory I’ve been using on Thomas. Again, I don’t know if this true, and I’m not trying to make every messy person gay, but she fits the “warden of a women’s prison” stereotype.

Also, I keep forgetting to mention that Isobel belongs in the pantheon of saint-like characters in this show.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/948be  Tweet:

Headshots of Spencer and Song (Song’s headshot found on Asian Media Wiki)

The accolades from The Help are certainly going a long way for Octavia Spencer. According to The Hollywood Reporter, the actress is set to star in high profile sci-fi indie film Snow Piercer.

The film, written and directed by Bong Joon-ho, will also star Tilda Swinton, John Hurt, Chris Evans and Korean star Song Kang-ho. Kang starred in the film that made Bong an international name, The Host. Seeing Song in this film along with Spencer makes me excited; an international, multi-cultural cast is always exciting.

The film is set in the future in which a failed experiment to stop global warming and an Ice Age ensues, killing off everything on the planet except for the people aboard the Snow Piercer, a train that travels around the world and is powered by a, according to The Hollywood Reporter, “sacred perpetual-motion engine.” A class system develops and a revolt threatens to break out. Spencer’s role will be of a woman who joins the train revolt in order to save her son.

You can read more about the film at The Hollywood Reporter.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/b8000  Tweet: