The Cinematic Equivalent of “put a little pep in your step!”

Larry Crowne


$6.22 at Amazon 


Pros: Likable characters.

Cons: Who are all Mary Sue types.

(This Review Originally Appeared On

Tom Hanks “Larry Crowne” is what a meal at Hooters would be like if the waitresses wore regular waitress clothing. It goes down easy, much like the food itself at that chain. But it’s bland as hell and instantly forgettable.

“Crowne” is Hanks’ second effort behind the camera after 1996’s “That Thing You Do”. That movie, while also relatively lightweight as far as movies about musicians go, at least had some ambition and conflict to it. It wasn’t the edgiest movie ever. But it worked.

To the extent that “Crowne” does work, it’s on account of the fact that the movie has heart. The titular character (played by Hanks) is a genuinely likable guy. We begin the film feeling sympathy for him. The problem is, he’s also kind of one dimensional.

As the film begins we see Crowne at work at his job as a manager at a Wal-Mart type retail store. It;s a dead end job. But it pays good, Larry’s good at it and he seems to like it. Then he’s called to the break room for what he thinks will be his fourth consecutive selection as employee of the month. Instead he’s informed that his lack of a college degree renders him unfit for advancement within the company and so Crowne is sent packing.

Crowne maintains his sunny demeanor throughout this even as frustration is hinted from time to time. In some ways that can be endearing. In other ways, it gets annoying after a while. There’s time where we wish for Larry to cut loose, tell us how he really feels at being fired for what is at heart a ridiculous reason. Instead we don’t see it.

That’s one of the movies main problems: the characters are all what are commonly referred to as Mary Sue types. For the uninitiated that means “Completely flawless and perky”. The only character in here who could be considered a jerk in any way is Bryan Crnaston and he’s a total jerk. No depth to these characters at all.

The most interesting character in the film is George Takei as an economics professor. Takei plays up his Star Trek past in a way that doesn’t directly reference it. He’s easily the most fun of all the characters in this movie.

Crowne, based upon a recommendation from his neighbor (Cedric The Entertainer), decides to enroll at the local community classes. The classes he takes include the economics one taught by Takei and a public speaking one taught by Julia Roberts. It’s in the public speaking class where the romantic subplot gets introduced. Of course we know that Hanks and Roberts will end up together. Never a doubt as to that.

Roberts does nothing new in her role as the put upon teacher with a husband (Cranston) who spends his days surfing the web for porn while he claims to be writing.

Hanks direction here is workmanlike. He’s not a show-off when it comes to his work behind the camera. He presents the story in an easy to follow way, which is appropriate for it. No, the direction is not the problem with Larry Crowne. The main problems have to do with the script.

The premise of Larry Crowne isn’t a bad one per se. The main problem is that the premise is used in the service of what is at heart filler. Consider that Hanks co-wrote the aforementioned script with Nia Vardalos. Vardalos, who wrote the much overpraised My Big Fat Greek Wedding, specializes in writing cinematic bubblegum (and acting in it as well). It’s hard to tell whether it’s her or Hanks who’s responsible for the screenplays lack of conflict and one-dimensionality. At heart, the movie is fun. But there’s limited personality and no depth at all. I strongly suspect that a director like Cameron Crowe could have given this movie a lot more depth and more developed personality.

Larry Crowne isn’t a disaster. It’s entertaining enough to serve as an alternative to bottom of the barrel claptrap. But at heart it’s like the boss who constantly says “Come on people. Put a little PEP in your step!”. When a movie gets like that, most people will have little desire to see it more than once.

“Y’all got cocaine eyes”



$4.99 at Amazon 


Pros: Lead performance by Johnny Depp and Ted Demme’s direction

Cons: Penelope Cruz, basic story somewhat familiar.

(This review originally appeared in different form on

Consider this story: a young man comes from a modest background and aspires to make something of himself as most people do. His father tries to teach him about the value of hard work. But his advice goes unheeded. Instead the young man is attracted to the other side of the law. He soon becomes a focal point in his area of criminal expertise. But this will ultimately lead to his downfall.

That’s the story told in “Blow”, Ted Demme’s 2001 (final) film. It’s an entertaining story. But many experienced moviegoers will note the obvious similarities to works by cinematic masters like Scorsese (Goodfellas), De Palma (Scarface) and Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights).

Similarities to previous masterworks aside, “Blow” is a pretty good film in its own right for a couple reasons. One is superb direction by Demme, The other is a fantastic lead performance by Johnny Depp.

Blow tells the story of George Jung (Depp), who, as the film begins is a teenager living with his parents. His father (Ray Liotta) is a workingman while his mother is very materialistic. Jung sees his father do lots of backbreaking work for little money and does not want to follow in his footsteps. His father tries to tell him that “money doesn’t really matter”. Needless to say, his advice is unheeded.

In 1968, George is a young man who goes to California with his best friend. Out there he takes to lazing on the beach and soon meets some people who introduce him to a new lucrative world, the world of drug dealing.

First off George establishes himself as a mid-level pot dealer. He gets pretty successful at that until 1972 when he gets busted. He attempts to plead innocence with Bob Dylan lyrics and his claim that he “crossed an invisible line with a plant”. His plea fails and he is jailed. It’s in prison where he meets another inmate who introduces him to a more lucrative type of drug dealing, that of cocaine.

After getting out of prison, George attempts to establish himself as a cocaine dealer. And he becomes quite good at it. He has soon built up quite a “respectable” business. This business draws the attention of South American drug lord Pablo Escobar (Cliff Curtis). Escobar and Jung come up with a plan to import cocaine into the US. This is what would gain Jung his infamy, when he helps to establish the cocaine market in the US.

At the time of its release, Blow attracted quite a bit of controversy. Many people, especially those of the social conservative variety, claimed that it was too sympathetic in its portrayal of a drug dealer. I can’t really agree. It shows that Jung did do some bad things. But it never forgot that he was a human being. Plus, let’s not forget that many individual users choose to use the cocaine themselves.

Depp is superb. It’s easy to forget now after all the variations he’s played on Jack Sparrow for the past 12 year or so. But he’s truly an excellent character actor. He plays Jung as neither hero nor villain. But as man with both good and bad points.

Also great in the acting department are Liotta, Cliff Curtis as Pablo Escobar and Paul Reubens as a California drug dealer. However, the film’s weakest link in the acting department is Penelope Cruz. Cruz is pretty to look at. But her character here comes off as shallow and annoying. Maybe that’s how the character was in real life. But her constant screeching grated on my nerves after a while.

Also making the film a cut above is Demme’s direction. Demme, while clearly influenced by Scorsese, manages to make the film his own. He lets the tension in it unfold naturally and the atmosphere perfectly evokes the period it was set in. Also like the Italian American titan, his choice of music selections is well-done.

Blow, while not quite a full-fledged classic on the level of its cinematic forebears, is a well-done cinematic study of a complicated man.

Darkness Coming Down

Taxi Driver


$18.46 at Amazon 


Pros: Scorsese’s direction, Schrader’s screenplay, the acting, the cinematography and atmosphere.

Cons: Will get under your skin big time.

(This review originally appeared in somewhat different form on

It’s a line. It’s one that you’ve doubtlessly heard many times. One that you’ve probably said many times. Sometime when you’re on the phone with a person and they say something and you’re not sure it was directed at you. So what do you say?

You talkin’ to me?

Of course 99% of people will know that line even if they haven’t seen Taxi Driver. That line has joined the likes of “Here’s Looking At You Kid” and “May the force be with you” in cinematic history.

As for the film itself: It would be an understatement to say that it holds up. It did not win any Oscars. Yet it still can be watched and admired (“enjoyed” might be too strong a word to use here) nowadays (I wonder how many people will watch and admire Titanic in 10 years).

Most people familiar with cinematic history will know the background on Taxi Driver. How Paul Schrader wrote the script while going through a time of personal torment living in Los Angeles. How Martin Scorsese ended up with the script after Brian De Palma turned it down. How Taxi Driver became his second collaboration with Robert De Niro after Mean Streets (the movie that put Scorsese on the cinematic map). How the MPAA threatened the film with an X rating for (surprise surprise in this paranoid of sex day and age) graphic violence. How Scorsese desaturated the colors in the scene the MPAA complained about and this made the film even more effective. How Taxi Driver went on to become something of a box office hit (albeit not quite a smash on the level of say Jaws) and a critical favorite. How it got overlooked at the Oscars in favor of a certain boxing movie not named Raging Bull. If not, then that last paragraph was the summary.

De Niro plays Travis Bickle, an insomniac Vietnam vet loner. It’s the insomnia that leads him to apply for a job driving cabs. When we first meet Travis we learn a few minor details about his life. He seems at first like many loners we’ve known, both in the movies and in real life. As the story progresses we see him gradually become unhinged. There have been numerous movies that show the lead character doing just that. Some have done quite well. But few have done it as well as Taxi Driver.

While on one of his runs, Travis sees Betsy (Cybill Shepherd) a campaign worker for Senator Palantine (a senator whose rhetoric mirrors that of then future would be aspirants to public office like Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura). He starts becoming somewhat obsessed with her and starts putting the moves on. At first she rebuffs him. But after a little pushing agrees to accompany him to a movie. Unfortunately, Travis chooses a porno movie and this of course does not go over well. The next woman to figure prominently in Travis’s life is 13-year old prostitute named Iris (Jodie Foster). Travis simultaneously becomes obsessed with rescuing her from her pimp (Harvey Keitel) and taking out Senator Palantine.

Up until the late 1960s, early 1970s, movies had more or less clearly established their heroes and villains. Then with the likes of Bonnie and Clyde in 1968 things began to change. The antihero began to emerge.

Travis Bickle in a way is the perfect big screen antihero. He begins the film as a more or less ordinary guy and gradually goes insane (although the movie does subtly hint there may have been signs of that beforehand). What makes him go crazy? The movie shows how the crime and pollution he witnesses around him is a factor albeit not the sole reason. Part of it is also a desire to leave a mark of some kind on the world. In a way by looking at Travis Bickle we also get a look into the minds of real life disturbed lunatics like John Hinckley and Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.

Scorsese’s direction helps keep the tension in the film at just the right level. He knows when to underplay it and when to let it boil over. This is an instinct that has served him well throughout his career.

The cinematography works well. New York city is portrayed as neither heaven nor hell. But as a sort of purgatory. We see the demons all around be they Keitel’s pimp or a psychotic passenger in Travis’s cab (played by Scorsese himself) who talks openly about brutally murdering his former wife. Scenes of driving through rain or seeing the high amount of trash resulting from a garbage strike that affected NY at the time this was filmed help us join in Travis’ descent into madness. Bernard Herman’s score is another of the elements that make this film so effective.

As far as the acting goes, what more needs to be said? De Niro has given many a great performance over the years and some of the weak jobs he has taken recently cannot erase that. This may be his definitive performance. He shows Travis evolve from paranoid loner to crazy man to would be assassin to wherever he may be after the credits roll. Jodi Foster is just as good as the should be innocent girl who’s got a certain sense of wisdom beyond her years. Keitel, Peter Boyle and Scorsese himself are good in their supporting roles. Shepherd is a little wooden here and there. But this does not damage the film at all.

Taxi Driver, in addition to being a landmark of the cinema of the 70s, also opened the door for many of the films that would come along later. Movies like Joel Schumacher’s Falling Down and Neil Jordan’s The Brave One (also with Foster) owe a debt in both style and content to Scorsese’s masterpiece. So if you’re looking for a film with great acting, a compelling story and one that does not pull punches at all, then Taxi Driver is the film to see.

The Edge of Sleep by David Wiltse – horrid protagonists

The Edge of Sleep by David Wiltse




See it at Amazon 


Pros: intriguing bad guys

Cons: horrid protagonists, slipshod investigative work
A very decent serial killer novel. But one main flaw.

That’s my quickie review of David Wiltse’s The Edge of Sleep.

This book examines a horrible case of serial abuse and murder of young boys. Several young boys have disappeared over the years. They’re gone for a couple months and then, suddenly, their badly beaten bodies turn up in plain view, dead from strangulation.

Becker is an ex-FBI agent, fighting his own demons during his semi-retirement. Karen is his ex-lover, and a current agent. She appeals to Becker for help on this case. Too many boys have met terrible fates and the FBI has scarcely a clue. Karen knows it will hurt Becker to become involved in another terrible case, but she asks, anyway.

Becker and Karen work together to solve the mystery. And, along the way, they renew their old relationship. Meanwhile, Becker grows close to Karen’s young son.

We, the readers, know exactly who’s taking the boys. Half the book is written from the killer’s point of view, so we get to understand what’s driving him. It’s maddening that we are so far ahead of the authorities in the investigation. Especially when they make glaringly wrong assumptions about the case. This was annoying, but not the worst problem in this book.

The worst problem is that Becker isn’t too likeable. But as bad as he is, Karen is ten times worse. She is one of the most unlikeable main characters I’ve ever read. It’s rare that I root for the bad guys to win but in this case, Karen was such a pain in the butt that I found myself hoping for a less than favorable outcome for her.

Not for the boys, of course. I could never root for pain and suffering for the young victims. But as for Karen… she deserves what she gets, frankly. And, put her with Becker, himself unlikeable, and you have a really horrid pair of protagonists.

On the other hand, the bad guys – while they commit horrendous acts – are at least well-developed and, to some extent, likeable. I know that sounds weird – but their evil is, in large part, not their fault. Whereas Karen, she’s just a witch, so I can’t give her a pass.

Still, I enjoyed The Edge of Sleep. Give it a try.

Devoted In Death by J.D. Robb – good old-fashioned investigation

Devoted In Death by J.D. Robb


See it at Amazon 


Pros: solved with good old-fashioned investigative work

Cons: Eve is a bit annoying

Devoted In Death is a 2015 addition to J.D. Robb’s In Death series. Like all books in the series, we’re in the future (mid-2000’s) and watching N.Y. Homicide Lieutenant Eve Dallas as she works with her team to solve murders.

In this book, we meet a couple of killers. Unlike most books in the series, we know exactly who the perps are, we’re introduced to them from the get-to. We know exactly what drove them to the path they’re on, what they’re doing and where they’re doing it. No mystery for us to solve – we just get to watch Eve follow the clues to catch up to us.

Letting us in on the mystery from the very beginning is a different technique. I would say that it worked, it was a refreshing change of pace. However, it comes with one drawback. We are completely privy to the thoughts and actions of the killers. And, in this case, their thoughts and actions are extremely evil. We’re talking a level of violence and depravity and disregard for human life that goes beyond the pale. It takes a lot, sometimes, to read of evil to this degree, and some readers will be put off, for sure.

That aside, if you can stand the violence, Devoted In Death is a very good book. We get very good investigative work. It was refreshing that Eve is helped by a small-town sheriff. And that the sheriff is not a caricature of “small-town folk” but an intelligent man whose help on the case proves invaluable.

I also liked that “the team” solved this difficult case using old-fashioned common sense, logic, and pavement-pounding. Despite the fact that it’s 2061, and there are new-fangled devices, nothing “magic” was used to solve this case. Eve worked it the same as she would in today’s world.

My only complaint is a minor one. Robb likes to infuse Eve with several flaws, and she plays them for comedic relief. In this book, Eve is constantly getting tripped up by time zones, and trying to figure out what time it is in another location, and getting upset when the answers aren’t “logical” to her way of thinking. Things like this are cute, but not when they’re overused. Sadly, by the fourth or fifth time, it was just tiresome. Still, this is a minor complaint.

In general, I enjoy the In Death series, and Devoted In Death is one of the better ones.

Other books in the In Death series

Betrayal In Death
Celebrity In Death
Ceremony In Death
Concealed In Death
Divided In Death
Festive In Death
Glory In Death
Haunted In Death
Immortal In Death
Indulgence In Death
Innocent In Death
Interlude In Death
Judgment In Death
Midnight In Death
Missing In Death
Naked In Death
Obsession In Death
Origin In Death
Rapture In Death
Reunion In Death
Salvation In Death
Strangers In Death
Survivor In Death
Treachery In Death
Vengeance In Death

Cry Wolf by Tami Hoag: some good, some bad

Cry Wolf by Tami Hoag




See it at Amazon 


Pros: intriguing mystery held my interest

Cons: annoying characters who spoke a lot of French

Some very good stuff.  And some very annoying stuff.  That’s my quickie review of Tami Hoag’s Cry Wolf. 



Our heroine, Laurel, comes back home – to the French villages of Louisiana, after facing a humiliating failure in her professional career.   She just wants to reconnect with her family, and enjoy some relaxing time to herself.


But she does not get much of a chance to rest.  Young girls are turning up dead along the Bayou.  At the same time, Laurel finds herself involved with the local ‘bad boy’ – thinking she sees the good man underneath all the bluster.


But when you get involved with someone you barely know, bad things can happen.  Is it possible that Laurel’s new love is somehow involved with the girls’ murders?  Or is someone else setting up an elaborate ruse, one designed to bring harm not only to Laurel but to the rest of her family as well?


That’s the premise of Cry Wolf and I’ll admit, I was pretty well hooked.  I turned those pages mighty fast to find out what was really going on.  I liked Hoag’s style of bringing lots of possible suspects into the mix.  Each time I was pretty sure I had it figured out, she would add a new twist and send me soaring in another direction.


Overall, a fascinating “whodunit” that definitely held my interest.


However, the book is far from perfect.  It suffers from a couple of flaws.  The biggest is that the characters were very hard to care about, and very hard to take seriously.  Each is a one-dimensional caricature.  The good girl.  The bad girl.  The good guy.  The bad guy.  The close-minded one.  The evil one.  You see the point – each character had no more depth than my fingernail.


And then there was the French.  I’m Ok if an otherwise-English book adds a few foreign phrases here and there.  Especially if you can gather most of the meaning from the context.  But this book incorporates French into nearly every conversation.  And even though I could make out most of it, I found it distracting and, frankly, annoying.  Worst of all – it turns out there’s a glossary at the back of the book to help you out.  When did I discover this fact?  After I read the last page of the story, of course.  Had I known all along that the glossary was hiding back there I might have used it.  But I’m not in the habit of checking out the back pages of a book to see if there’s anything of interest!


So – pick up Cry Wolf if you like a good “whodunit” and don’t mind thin characters.  And, if you don’t speak French, at least you’ll have my tip – turn to the back of the book!


Also by Tami Hoag

Deeper Than The Dead
Secrets To The Grave
The 9th Girl

14th Deadly Sin by James Patterson – still holds my interest despite its flaws

14th Deadly Sin by James Patterson




See it at Amazon 


Pros: decent stories, great character development

Cons: main investigation was a bit convoluted

#14 in the Women’s Murder Club series is called 14th Deadly Sin.  James Patterson and Maxine Paetro give us a few different stories as well as some developments is our characters’ lives.



For those who don’t know, the series is about four women who get together and help solves crimes in San Francisco.  Lindsay is the detective.  Claire is the medical examiner.  Cindy is the reporter.  And Yuki is with the DA’s office.  However, in this book, Yuki gets a new job, one that has her looking at things from a whole new perspective.  Cindy has just written a best-seller.  Claire has very little “screen time” but she does utter one sentence which turns a murder investigation on its head.  So she’s vital to the story, even though she’s barely seen.



As for Lindsay, she has her hands full.  She’s a mom and a wife, now.  And she’s still solving the department’s toughest cases.  In this book there have been a series of robberies, some of which have included fatalities.  In all cases, the perps are wearing SFPD jackets.  Are these cop-wannabes? Or is it possible that we’re looking at a group of rogue cops?  Worst, could some of the very cops that Lindsay works with every day – officers in whose hands her life sometimes rests – be playing both sides?



In usual fashion, the story is told from multiple viewpoints.  When it’s Lindsay’s turn, she speaks in first-person.  All of the other stories are told from a third person point of view.  It’s an odd style, but it’s how all the books in the series work.  And, we have Patterson’s trademark short chapters.  Just a couple of pages before we’re off to a different part of the story, and sometimes a different voice.  It can be a bit choppy, but I don’t really mind. 



The main story, about the robbers in cops’ jackets gets a bit convoluted.  And, if I’m being honest, it had so many characters that I had trouble keeping track of them all.  There’s also an extra little subplot that gets tossed in for no reason other than mucking up an already messy investigation. 



On the other hand, Yuki’s story was quite interesting.  She’s taken a new job, and her first case is a real doozy.   It was great watching Yuki set her goals and go after them without looking back.  Best of all is that she stands her ground in a tough situation and comes out with her head held high.  I like this confident Yuki!



Cindy is barely present in this one.  She’s doing great professionally and while she’s been “on-again” and “off-again” with Lindsay’s boss, in this story they get to take things to another level.



Overall, 14th Deadly Sin is a decent book in a series that always holds my attention.  I enjoy watching these women grow and work together.  And, the ending of 14 definitely makes me look forward to 15 !


2nd Chance
3rd Degree
4th Of July
The 5th Horseman
The 6th Target
7th Heaven
The 8th Confession
The 9th Judgment
10th Anniversary
11th Hour
12th of Never
Unlucky 13

Love does not conquer all in rural 1980s Kentucky in Fenton Johnson’s new novel

The Man Who Loved BirdsMan-Who-Loved-Birds-cover

See it at Amazon 


Pros: characterizaton, evocation of place

Cons: ending

Fenton Johnson is an award-winning Kentucky-born writer whose third novel, The Man Who Loves Bird, follows by 22 years his second, Scissors, Paper, Rock (1994) (which appeared three years after his first, Crossing the River). He writes lush prose, somteimes bordering on the overwritten. I was interested in and convinced by his portrayal of charismatic marijuana grower, Johnny Faye, an illiterate veteran of the Vietname misadventure and of two people who become very enamored of him, Cistercians (Trappist) monk Brother Flavian, who has become restive with his increasingly capitalist community, and. Dr. Meena Chatterjee, a Bengali woman whose residence in the US is dependent on service in an underserved area. Her office/residence is in what was a (gas) filling station in what is presumably Bardstown, in the Kentucky Knobs, near the Abbey of Our Lady of Gethsemani.

Johnny Faye, the title character, is comfortable in his own skin and content despite being the target of ambitious local prosecutor Vetch (rhymes with retch) who has failed to secure a conviction from juries of Johnny Faye’s peers. Johnny Faye is more concerned that Officer Smith (the generic violent policeman with the bland family name) is going to kill or do permanent damage to his squirrely son, Matthew Mark.

Dr. Chaterjee (and Brother Flavian who is present and turns the boy over for the doctor) notices the welts on his back and knows that the vicious policeman also beats his wife. Her tentative status makes her afraid to buck local authorities, though she has a legal obligation to report the abuse. Johnny Faye urges her to protect the child, while dating Vetch and contemplating marrying her to cement her legal status. She is a more sympathetic character than I have made it sound, having fled the violence of Bangladesh’s formation, during which her parents were killed.

In that the novel is firmly based on a real case of licensed murder of a Kentucky marijuana grower, there is less suspense than there might be for a novel less tied to real events. The Reagan administration’s war on drugs, with a special focus on seizing the assets (land) of the Kentucky “cornbread mafia” is also firmly based on history, including the impunity of the side warring on drugs (the government). Other than what this reader knew before beginning reading the book, the endings are open (though one can easily plug in the later history of the “lawman” who got away with murder from the same historical records).

(©2016, Stephen O, Murray)

At a San Francisco Books Inc. appearance, Johnson said that he conceived the novel in 1971, when he was a seventeen-year-old Kentuckian looking forward to going to Stanford. He also said that he drew on speeches by Reagan, Cheney, and W for Vetch’s speechifying. He wrote about the 1971 murder in a New Yorker article, spent time (and interviewed monks) in the Abbey of Gethsemani (a basis for his book Keeping the Faith [2004], which also included interviews with Buddhist monks)i, and spent six months in Kolkata (Calcutta) getting the feel for Bengali desperation.

(The University of Kentucky Press has reissued Johnson’s first two novels along with publishing The Man Who Loved Birds.)


©2016, Stephen O. Murray

Satire’s not dead. It just went home. To America that is.

America (The Book): A Citizen’s Guide To Democracy Inaction


$15.28 at Amazon 


Pros: Hilarious, offend-all satire that still holds up 12 years after publication.

Cons: Not designed to be read cover to cover so it doesn’t flow the way a traditional book does.

(Note: This review originally appeared in somewhat different form on

There was a time when I was a regular viewer of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show. In the early 2000s, before it became the cultural institution that it was until fairly recently, it was (along with The Onion) my one-stop shop for satire of current events and American politics. It worked especially well during an era of war, terrorism, idiots in charge, media talking heads focused on entertainment disguised as news, corporate cronyism and so on.

So when I heard in the early fall of 2004, that Jon Stewart and the cast and writers of the show would be releasing a book, I was excited. Having read Stewart’s 1999 collection of comic essays “Naked Pictures Of Famous People” I knew the man could write well and write funny. So I expected to see more of that hilarious Daily Show satire in book form. Upon buying America The Book, I was surprised to discover that in addition to skewering the news, it also skewers sacred cows throughout American history as well as the very concept of high school textbooks itself.

And I do literally mean high school textbooks. From the moment you open the cover of this 228 page tome, you will chuckle with amusement at the precise replication of one of those spaces for you to write your name and the condition of the book (Good fair poor bad) at the time you received it. But right below the conditions we see written: “We are fully aware that Dick Hertz, IP Freely and Haywood Jablome are not real people so please exclude them.” The book doesn’t stop lampooning textbooks there as it includes lots of charts, graphs, photo sections and end of chapter questions throughout.

This structural approach might be off-putting for some readers. It doesn’t quite flow the way a normal book does. But this wasn’t really designed to be read cover to cover.

It would’ve been easy to do a book full of cheap humor and cheap shots. Yet Stewart and his co- writers effectively alternate between biting satire and cheap comedy. For instance, in the president chapter, we see several charts ranking presidents according to various reasons such as fattest and best facial hair (the latter list includes Lincoln, James A Garfield and a Clinton with a beard Photoshopped on). Right below the facial hair chart is a commentary on “our worst president…Warren G Harding”. The blurb purports to go into the reasons why Harding sucked, before explaining that those reasons have been thoroughly documented in the annals of presidential history, thus making a good case for why reading history is important and providing plenty of laughs along the way. (For the record, the piece goes on to explain that Harding’s presidency sucked because it was a taint “the anatomical area between the anus and the testicles”.

A comment a friend made a couple days ago about how the rise of 24-hour news channels may have been the worst thing to ever happen to the American media inspire me to go back to the chapter on the media. The chapter opens with a picture of Peter Finch as Howard Beale in the movie “Network” and on the second one the opening of the chapter titled “The Media: Democracy’s Guardian Angel”. Turn the page and you are immediately confronted by a picture of various famous news people along with network logos and on the ensuing page, the REAL beginning of the chapter, which is actually titled “The Media: Democracy’s Valiant Vulgarians”. Later on in that chapter we see a flow chart shows the course of the American media from its founding to today. This chart shows how Time Magazine begat people which “turned the cause of investigative journalism into the search for the sexiest man alive”. The chart then shows that People begat Us Magazine, which answers any questions unanswered by People. Us begets Instyle which Begets Lucky “a magazine for retards about shopping”.

The prime problem with a lot of topical satire is that it has a sell-by date. Consider movies that specialize in it. There are a good many that do not last over the years (consider how totally out of date the 2006 movie American Dreamz, with it’s satiric shots at George W Bush and American idol, seems only ten years later). Only a select few, most notably Dr. Strangelove and Network, hold up just as well over the years.

Fortunately, America The Book still holds up. In fact, like the aforementioned Network, a lot fo it is even more relevant today in an era where reality TV culture dominates nearly every aspect of American life and a buffoon from one of those shows is the leading candidate for president. So this is one book that can still be read and enjoyed today. While The Daily Show itself may be a shadow of its former greatness, this books works alternately as a reminder of when it truly was the place to go to laugh at an increasingly ridiculous world and a good source of laughter in these harsh times.

Obsession In Death – J.D. Robb – not the best

Obsession In Death – J.D. Robb




See it at Amazon 


Pros: character development

Cons: mystery a bit lame

Obsession in Death is the 40th book of the In Death series by J.D. Robb.  Like all of the books, we follow Lieutenant Eve Dallas of the NY Police force as she catches one case after another. 

By this point, it’s the early 2060’s, and Eve is looking forward to a little vacation.  Until a couple homicides occur with a very personal connection to Eve.  The killer has left Eve a note.  These kills are a favor to Eve – their purpose: to take out someone who has betrayed Eve (in the killer’s mind).  Yes, the killer considers it their mission to take out Eve’s enemies and to prove their undying love/respect/admiration for Eve.

In general, I enjoy the In Death series.  Normally the mysteries are pretty intriguing, and the futuristic setting allows us to read about some fun technology advances.  Further, the series includes a host of characters who have truly grown on me – and have grown, themselves, throughout the series.  Overall, the series is a real pleasure to read.

That said, Obsession in Death is not the best of the bunch.

Frankly, I was bored.  The mystery is a bit weak.  Even the “big reveal” at the end was more of a whimper than a bang.  And worst of all, it’s solved more through a giant coincidence than any real detecting.  Sure, the team does what it can to try to figure out “who done it” but it’s a chance encounter on a street that really turns the case.  I find this lazy and just dull.

There is one good part of the story, though.  At one point, it seems likely that the killer might turn her rage to one of Eve’s loved ones in order to garner more attention.  As Eve starts naming who might be endanger she is amazed at the sheer size of the list.  The Eve from 30 books ago would have had a much shorter list of those to whom she feels close.  But this Eve has quite a few people she genuinely cares about.  Even naming several people who only appeared in one previous book.  It was nice to have this “walk down memory lane” of Eve’s past cases, and to have Eve recognize just how many lives she’s touched in a positive way.

So, good job, on the character-development.  But the overall story was still a bit lame.  I don’t think anything will get me to abandon the series, but Obsession was just not the best.


Other books in the In Death series

Born In Death
Celebrity In Death
Ceremony In Death
Concealed In Death
Devoted In Death
Divided In Death
Festive In Death
Glory In Death
Haunted In Death
Immortal In Death
Indulgence In Death
Innocent In Death
Interlude In Death
Judgment In Death
Midnight In Death
Missing In Death
Naked In Death
Origin In Death
Rapture In Death
Reunion In Death
Salvation In Death
Strangers In Death
Survivor In Death
Treachery In Death
Vengeance In Death