BBC One Show “Renaissance: The Blood and The Beauty” ✎

Decent docudrama.

I quite enjoyed the historical contexts to the political violence that propelled and fuelled the flourishing of art in 15th century Italy.

Charles Dance plays an elderly Michelangelo and he’s an engaging actor full of the theatrical relish.

I thought there was too much “expert” commentary over amateurish re-enactments. The experts were a bit disappointing.

I had forgotten just how turbulent the high renaissance was. The different warring kingdoms of Italy and invasion by France culminating in the Sack of Rome and the Savararolla episode of Florentine history. I had also forgotten just how rotten this Popes were (esp. Julius II).

I had also forgotten that Michelangelo’s “David” had a fig-leaf drilled into it to cover David’s genitalia. How insulting!

The funniest story was Michelangelo, as an apprentice, in the Brancacci Chapel getting into an argument with a fellow artist and getting punched in the face, breaking his nose.

Then, there’s the subject of Michelangelo’s purported homosexuality. Who knows? Well, Florence had a “religious police” (Officers of the Night) to find and punish gay men. Allusions are made of Michelangelo playing a dangerous game.

All-in-all, a fun docudrama. Not a whole lot of new information, just entertainment. 

Score = 3/5 ★★★☆☆

Planet Earth III, BBC 1 – amazing nature documentary ✎

One of my favourite hobbies (especially when I am not feeling well) is to watch nature documentaries.

On Sunday, I watched David Attenborough's latest installation of his breathtaking nature series 'Planet Earth'. This first episode was on coasts.

The wildlife photography is incredible. As Attenborough explained, Planet Earth III focuses – not merely on nature's majesty but – on how it has adapted to the world because of human activity.

It's full of dazzling Hollywood-style visuals, with overhead shots of beautiful flapping flamingos and their hatchlings that struggle to survive in the freezing rains. 

Highly recommended.

9/10.

Below are some amazing print-screens I took while watching.  Enjoy.

✲✲✲

Hungry lions on Namibia's Skeleton Coast (hunting birds at night)

✲✲✲

Caribbean flamingos living in Mexico (and the fragile lives of their young)

✲✲✲

Seals chasing a Great White away

✲✲✲

A young Attenborough visiting Raine Island when he was 31

Review: Reframed: Marilyn Monroe BBC2 – a fascinating life ✎

Just watched the BBC2 docuseries "Reframed: Marilyn Monroe", and it was a fascinating window into her life. I thoroughly enjoyed it. 

The documentary tries to give us an insight into Marilyn Monroe as an iconic hero. But, it is worth asking whether Marilyn merits her cultural icon status or whether she has been misjudged and a bit overrated in our cult of the personality. On the one hand, although she is idolised; she only appeared in very few films, and was pretty good (perhaps not incredible?), and then her infidelity and drug use etc. On the other hand, we cannot deny her incredible accomplishments (at a time when women were generally confined). Dealing with sexual abuse, trauma & abandonment from her schizophrenic mother. Then, getting hitched at 16 to avoid the orphanage, and struggling with addiction and depression, failed marriages and the public shaming in her personal love life.

Part of her mystic is that she never grew old. She never aged – either gracefully or embarrassingly - like Madonna. When mega-famous celebrities die young, their deaths echo a supreme note of tragedy and adoration. Some examples: Kurt Cobain, Princess Diana, JKF. They tend to be judged by the standards of their day. For Norma Jeane Baker, she never had any unsightly photographs - she was always magnetic, captivating and beautiful. No trashy Instagram, no photoshop. The real deal. 

At any rate, this documentary only has woman commentators. I assume this is due to the current philosophy of intersectionality which holds that men are either unworthy or unqualified to proffer any perspective or even an opinion. As such, this made me feel like I wasn't really the documentary's intended audience. Even so, most of the commentators are academics – and only one lady actually knew Marilyn: Amy Greene-Andrews. It's not clear to me what the various professors and academics have to offer over-and-above the actual people who knew her. And this is precisely the problem with the documentary. 

It tries to frame Marilyn as some kind of postmodern superhero of feminism. Indeed, there is much to rebuke in the general perception of her as a 'conventional' blonde. It's interesting that 20th Century Fox tried, at first, to promote her as an innocent babysitter spotted by a talent agent with his youngsters. It must be due to some quaint cultural discomfort, in that bygone, of perceiving women as being purposeful, ambitious and resolute and so on. She was determined and ambitious; and I really loved that part of her. For example, she was fierce when it came to her wages in a film opposite Frank Sinatra. I also liked her line "I can be smart when it's important, but most men don't like it" especially when it was revealed that she adlibbed that line in a film. This is was very interesting, and a much more authentic insight than the academics curating some abstract meta narrative about her. Also, really loved her self-defence of her 1952 nude photographs. She said: "nothing to be ashamed of, did nothing wrong." Today's culture centres around apologising for everything. Love her authenticity and her owning it.

However, this perception of Marilyn as a great heroine can feel a bit forced because it goes too far in the documentary. She is often pitted as the architect of her own fame, but it's her radiant natural beauty which is probably closer to the mark than her own exertions (not to suggest that her hard-work didn't matter). For example, there is a ridiculous comment by an academic about Norma Jean picking her last name (Monroe) as her mother's maiden name. Academic says: "Marilyn challenges what it means to have agency as a woman, and what it means to be a feminist" ... but this overlooks the fact that her first name, Marilyn, was picked for her by a Hollywood bigshot! All the documentary commentators are united in their belief that 'Marilyn' was simply perfect, and thereby vindicating the Hollywood man imposing it on her. Indeed, the whole logic has an ex post facto rationalisation to it. For me, I think I rather prefer "Norma Jean", it seems more beautiful. Unfortunately, that would tarnish this image of Marilyn as commanding her own agency and controlling her own image, so they have to pretend it was the right course.

Then, the documentary turns to discuss her marriage aged 16. Another academic suggests Marilyn is thus a "pragmatist" because she had to pick between marriage or orphanage. I think this is quite distasteful. She had no choice, and we shouldn't embellish her marrying at that age as some virtue. 

There are some very lovely tender moments. For example, her romance and sweetness with the fashion photographer André de Dienes. He captured some fabulous photos of Marilyn, and it was clear that they had some happy memories together. Then, there was the sweetness with her friend Natasha Lytess who gave Marilyn serious education on acting and theatre. It makes me want to watch her films properly; especially the one with Bette Davis.

However, this is counterposed by the awkward reality of Marilyn having to be unprincipled to advance in the Hollywood studios. It's hard to frame Marilyn positively when she was "dating" Joseph Schenck. He was the boss, and she had to "date" him to get ahead. He seems repulsive and it makes for an awkward viewing. At least she rebuffed Harry Cohn of Columbia Pictures who was a sexual predator. If we accept that this kind of thing is exploitation, then Marilyn should not have given into it. Don't mistake me though; I don't want to judge someone I don't know. Who can say what was right or wrong. My point is that if we begin (as this documentary does) of elevating Marilyn to a hero-like figure, then moments like this rather diminish her stature, and may even set a wrong example. 

Finally, there is the interesting subject of Marilyn's sensuality and sexiness. The Hollywood studios are constructed as having reduce Marilyn to a commodity. Well, maybe so; but I am not sure it can be simplified to that. I think there is something beautiful in celebrating sexiness, legs and arms, sexual attraction, poise, elegance, the exaggerated femineity and campness, charm, and beauty. Was she type casted? Probably, like most actors. I have a few upcoming episodes to conclude the series, so we shall find out.

All-in-all, I quite enjoyed the documentary. She is pretty amazing; but the documentary goes awry in trying to force an undue exaltation.

Review: BBC documentary – Elizabeth: The Unseen Queen ✎

On Friday, on BBC One, I watched Elizabeth: The Unseen Queen.

It’s a montage narrated by the late Queen that meanders through her personal film and photo archive about her life. It’s a beautiful, moving and intimate documentary. It explores her life as Queen through her own eyes and the personal snaps of her family. She seems quite 'normal' - but also very elegant and beautiful.

The background score is exquisite. The composer is David Schweitze.

I have uploaded a few stills from the documentary.

Prince Charles.

Review: BBC drama Four Lives – serial killer Stephen Port ✎

I finally got to watch BBC drama Four Lives which was the story surrounding the serial killer Stephen Port and the lives of four gay men that he ended. 

I really must recommend it. Not sure if I can say I "enjoyed" it — but I found Stephen Merchant's performance really very interesting and quite absorbing.

Stephen Port is shown to be a somewhat emotionally-inert human being, lacking social awareness and graces, and an exceptionally monotonous and banal person. He spends most of his day in house and hardly does anything. It's interesting that he has only one friend; and when they meet-up at their local cafe for a chat, Port talks about his collection of Transformers (which he trades?) whilst sipping a glass of Fanta. I noticed the Fanta on two separate occasions which made me ask myself how often I've seen a grown adult drink Fanta. There is something tragic about Port. (I wonder if Stephen Merchant subjected his eyes to something to give them that red sanguinary look). 

Moreover, he isn't intelligent or perceptive. It was not as if Port eluded or dodged the police. He used his smartphone to dial 999 to report the first dead body which (in my view) easily confirms his numb and/or dormant intelligence. In court, he appeared not to have considered his version of events sufficiently or deeply to withstand cross-examination. At times, he could not properly answer simple questions put to him. 

Much has been made in the press about the latent homophobia of the Met (for example, the late Deborah Orr of The Guardian). I suspect the Stephen Lawrence case has calcified a perception about the police as being prejudicial. In Four Lives, there was nothing to suggest why the officers were incompetent — or even discourteous (especially to Sarah Sak).

My hunch is that it may come down to a lack of resources to do old-school police work. In the BBC drama, the two officers appear to have spent most of their time hunched at the tables filling out forms.

✲✲✲

BBC News Update: The way Metropolitan Police initially handled the deaths of four men murdered by serial killer Stephen Port is to be reinvestigated by the police watchdog. A solicitor representing the families said they believed the police's actions were "driven by homophobia".