When my keen-minded daughter-in-law asked me about the new Richard Gere movie, “The Hoax,” my reply, I’m ashamed to admit, was, “Hey, I just like looking at him.” But, kidding aside, in this film, Gere shows that he is more than a pretty face.He is terrific as the cool and collected author, Clifford Irving, turned conman. “The Hoax” is fast paced, intriguing and fun, with uniformly excellent performances. Clifford Irving – a true figure, still alive today – was an author of minor repute. In 1971, he conceived a scam with lies so bold and preposterous that no one would suspect they could be anything but true. He claimed that he had been asked to write the autobiography of the ultra-reclusive, immensely powerful superstar billionaire Howard Hughes. The plot of “The Hoax” twists and turns, making you question what’s real and what’s spun. Irving’s all consuming love of his own lies include a long, delusional episode that happens only in his head. However, the movie presents it as if it actually happened. If I was asked to rate this film, I’d say that “The Hoax” is two-thirds a really good movie, and one-third a confusing mess. But watching a smarmy, charming, conning, smooth Richard Gere makes it all worthwhile.
When it comes to entertainment, my preferences run to song, dance, music, music, music. Well, here’s the conundrum. I’m addicted to HBO’s serio-comedy, “The Sopranos.” Perhaps at first, I thought the title refers to a gaggle of singers. In the past, I’ve avoided programs about a bunch of criminals, thieves and cold-blooded murderers – especially with the criminals as the main protagonists. That said, why have I found “The Sopranos” addictive?! I’ve watched every episode since 1999. Ouch! Most of the time, I dodge profanity and violence. I go so far – don’t laugh – to leave out the “i” and use the past tense “shat” if I need to curse. I’m sure that by now most of you are aware of Tony Soprano, the powerful mob boss whose illicit and homicidal activities are the theme of the groundbreaking television series. Featuring extraordinary performances it lowered the bar on permissible violence, sex and profanity. At the same time, “The Sopranos” elevated its viewers’ taste, cultivating an appetite for complexity, wit and stylishness on a television drama. Gutter-level blood and gore is leavened with humor. If the hype is to be believed, the valedictory will air on June 3. It’s hard to speculate which regulars will make it to the end. Will Tony’s death or the death of one of his family members be the last dance of the wise guys? I guess I just have to stay tuned – quivering with anxiety (ha!). I’m braced to expect the unexpected. Everything’s winding down, but I don’t trust it. If you, too, are addicted (and perhaps like me, don’t admire yourself for being addicted), you no doubt know that each program re-airs throughout the week, so it’s hard to miss. Is that fortunate or unfortunate?!
It was a mistake and I should know better. As much as I adore the magnificent Metropolitan Museum of Art, I get overwhelmed if I try to visit more than one exhibition. That said, I did see two. The first was “Barcelona and Modernity: Gaudi to Dali.” It features more than 300 works in a variety of media, including paintings, sculpture, drawings, prints, posters, decorative objects, furniture, architectural models and designs. Whew! The late nineteenth and early twentieth century was a remarkable period when Barcelona transformed itself from a provincial city to the primary center of radical intellectual, political and cultural activities is Spain. With its stress on luxury objects, the show mentions, but doesn’t dwell on, the fact that Barcelona back then was also called the “city of bombs” for a reason. There were endless battles among anarchists, Stalinists and republicans and waves of strikes, terrorist attacks (sound familiar?) and reprisals. Between 1910 and the early 1920s, Barcelona was the site of more than 800 terrorist assassinations. But it’s telling that the arts in Barcelona thrived despite and amid all the chaos and mostly no special regard for it. Amazing! If you don’t have the background to bring to this exhibition, reading the wall texts is a must. That made me tired even though, foolishly, I traipsed on to “Venice and The Islamic World 828-1797.” Since “Venice” is on view through July 8, I’ll tell you about it next month. Okay? Okay!
Coming from a family of dentists (father, mother, brother, uncle) and having been headed myself in that direction (no, I didn’t make it!), it’s no wonder I was curious to see a movie starring two leading actors playing – you guessed it – dentists. For me that was the initial attraction. Secondly, I wondered about Adam Sandler handling a dramatic role. In the past, I had somewhat enjoyed his goofy, comical performances in “The Wedding Singer,” “Spanglish” and in “50 First Dates.” In “Reign Over Me,” Mr. Sandler forces us to see a familiar comic performer shouldering a heavy dramatic role – and, surprisingly, he does a fine job. “Rein Over Me” is a buddy-picture pairing. “Alan” (a classy Don Cheadle) plays a Manhattan dentist, and his character is intensely interesting. “Charlie” (Adam Sandler), once a successful dentist like Alan, is in a state far beyond denial, having lost a wife and three daughters in the wake of 9/11. The two actors perform with great ease. All the relationships in “Rein Over Me” are either busted or badly in need of repair (let’s face it -without that, there would be no story). There’s a series of shots of Manhattan streetscapes and it was fun trying to recognize each neighborhood. If you wonder about opening your wallet and shelling out for a movie ticket, I think you’ll find “Reign Over Me” worth your time.