Connect with us

Entertainment

'The White Lotus' Season 3, Episode 7 recap: Rick has his showdown

Published

on

'The White Lotus' Season 3, Episode 7 recap: Rick has his showdown

“The White Lotus,” Mike White’s black comedy anthology series, is back on HBO for a third season. Times staffers love an escape, but since we can’t take a trip to Thailand to stay at a luxury resort, the next best thing is to immerse ourselves in the new season. Follow along with us for each episode as we discuss theories, observations and our favorite moments leading up to the finale. (Read our recaps: Episode 1, Episode 2, Episode 3, Episode 4, Episode 5, and Episode 6.)

The knockout blows and roundhouse kicks of Muay Thai fighting hit “The White Lotus” this week — with flashes of a fight spliced throughout the episode — but the more intense combat was happening outside of the ring for our gaggle of rattled characters.

The episode picks up with Rick (Walton Goggins) and Frank’s (Sam Rockwell) arrival at the Bangkok home Sritala (Lek Patravadi) shares with her husband Jim (Scott Glenn) — Rick’s target in the plan to avenge his father’s death. And it’s as hilariously unplanned as you’d expect from two dudes who can make a catch-up session between friends feel like a fever dream. Wearing a baseball cap with the Lowe’s logo, Steven (Frank’s alias as the fictional director in this Hollywood movie scheme) is totally winging this meeting. What has he directed? Uh … “What haven’t I directed? Mostly action films. ‘The Enforcer.’ ‘The Executor.’ ‘The Notary’ — that was a trilogy.” What’s the role in this so-called movie that he wants Sritala to portray? “She is a former prostitute, now a madam, and she owns a popular bordello.” Wait, isn’t the role supposed to be based on her? And has he seen any of her past work? Name ‘em!

It’s no wonder Frank quickly ditches the herbal tea and requests whiskey for the improv work he has to do. But was giving up his sobriety worth it? Then, when Chelsea’s 50-year-old child Rick does get Jim alone, he doesn’t make use of the gun he swore he wouldn’t bring. But closure can take many forms. An affected Rick carries out his revenge by simply knocking back a seated Jim to the floor. With that out of the way, Rick and Frank, who is ditching his performative Buddhist mindset for the evening, party. Chelsea’s calls, meanwhile, go unanswered.

Back in the hills of Thailand, Greg/Gary’s (Jon Gries) bash is unfolding. With some encouragement from her curious son, Belinda (Natasha Rothwell) makes the most insane decision ever and willingly places herself inside the home of the man she believes may be responsible for Tanya McQuoid’s death. Greg/Gary asks to speak to her in private, where he insists he isn’t involved in Tanya’s death. Really! To prove how much of a non-murderer he is, he offers Belinda $100,000 — because Tanya would have wanted that — to help fulfill her dream of opening a spa and in exchange, she’d honor “his peace.” Belinda tells him she’ll think about it. (To quote the great Oda Mae Brown: “You in danger, girl.”)

Advertisement

Belinda (Natasha Rothwell) gets an offer from Greg/Gary for $100,000 to honor “his peace.”

(Fabio Lovino / HBO)

Other party-goers were experiencing their own internal conflicts. Saxon (Patrick Schwarzenegger), flying solo while his siblings are spending the night at the Buddhist center, is there with his parents. After receiving a reality check from Chelsea (Aimee Lou Wood) about his future as a loser back home, Saxon pulls his dad aside to figure out why he’s been acting strange. Saxon asks whether things are OK at work, emphasizing that he has nothing else going for him because he doesn’t have any interests or hobbies — sorry you had to hear it from us, blender — a medicated Tim, knowing his wife would rather be dead than poor, says everything is fine. Meanwhile, Victoria (Parker Posey) tries to rescue a woman dating an LBH (loser back home) at the party, inviting her to North Carolina.

Things aren’t any more relaxing at the resort — no matter how much Fabian’s vocal cords worked to soothe guests. Our favorite trio couldn’t smile through another dinner, and a passive-aggressive showdown, reminiscent of the recent season finale of “The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City,” begins. The conversation is particularly tense between Jaclyn (Michelle Monaghan) and Laurie (Carrie Coon). Laurie storms off, determined to go to the Muay Thai fight Valentin invited them to. While there, she cozies up to one of Valentin’s friends and goes home with him, only to be propositioned for $10,000 post-coitus — to pay off the debts of his sick mom, you see.

Advertisement

At the same fight, Gaitok (Tayme Thapthimthong) — finally on his date with Mook (Lalisa Manobal), who expresses her disappointment at his indifference to ambition and power over dinner — has a light-bulb moment when he spots Valentin and his friends. He recognizes their features and tattoos as those of the masked men who raided the resort. Is this his shot to muster some courage and impress Mook?

Now it’s time for Greg Braxton, Mary McNamara and Yvonne Villarreal, platinum-status members of “The White Lotus” frequent guest program, to break it all down.

A man in a dark shirt seated at a table with takeout cups near him as he chats with a woman, seen from the back.

Gaitok (Tayme Thapthimthong) finally goes on a date with Mook.

(Fabio Lovino / HBO)

Who do we think is the corpse this week? Will Tim’s realization that the gun is missing be more foreboding than Gaitok possibly leveling up as a security guard?

Advertisement

McNamara: The corpse is me because I am done trying to pretend that it makes any sense at all that the Ratliffs are all still without their cellphones. I mean Chelsea is on her phone constantly so it’s clearly not a resort rule and there is NO WAY that Tim and Saxon, who clearly knows something is up at work, would not have retrieved theirs. But I am now very worried that the corpse is Rick because there is no way Jim is going to take being shoved over lying down. I mean, did you see all those bodyguards? Still, I‘m sticking with Gaitok, particularly after his recognition of the wily Russians as the robbers and Mook’s goading him toward violence. (Red flag, Gaitok. Big red flag.)

Braxton: I’ve been kind of non-committal for a while on the corpse question, but I will throw out a few theories. I think it’s a pretty safe bet that Jim is going to return with Sritala to the White Lotus and track down Rick. He is not the type to take his wife being humiliated and deceived lying down, pardon the pun. When you pull a gun on a guy like him, you better freaking use it, or there will be payback. Also you don’t hire Scott Glenn for one episode. Although he will want to kill Rick, he also might kill Chelsea, bringing to fruition her “bad things come in threes” prophecy.

Villarreal: This week’s episode also has me thinking Gaitok is surely the corpse. His desire to impress Mook is going to have a tragic outcome — or as our Greg loves to say, “it will all end in tears.” But how? I’m not sure. I know there are a lot of questionable characters this season, but there’s something about Fabian I just can’t shake. And it’s not just that he’s a terrible hotel manager or that I’d rather hear the sounds of Saxon’s blender than be serenaded by him. The man seems destined to do something shady or stupid or both.

Let’s talk about the Rick and Frank show. What did you think about their meeting at the Hollingers’ home and what followed afterward?

McNamara: Again, Rockwell steals the show (I am dying for a cinematic trilogy of “The Enforcer,” “The Executioner” and “The Notary.”) Again, I am struck by the lack of believability — I get that Sritala is supposed to be starstruck by Power of Hollywood etc., but when it becomes clear that Frank didn’t even bother to do a quick Google, her lack of suspicion is very much at odds with all those bodyguards. As is Rick and Frank’s lack of concern after they left — I mean, isn’t Rick a little worried that he has to go back to Sritala’s hotel? Maybe she shoots him. I’m also very sad that Frank lost his sobriety.

Advertisement

Braxton: So Rick has been obsessed with getting his revenge on the man who murdered his father. It’s the defining core of his grief and pain. The big moment is finally here, but instead of being prepared with a solid plan, he wings it, not even taking time to give Frank some advice or background on Sritala so he can play his filmmaker ruse convincingly. What did they talk about on the boat over? It makes no sense. Sritala and her husband seem smart enough to spot an impostor, but they do nothing. And what was the trigger behind Frank tossing aside his sobriety and Buddhist devotion so fast and diving back into depravity? I call it another case of Emmy bait.

Villarreal: First of all, the Lowe’s baseball cap that adorned Frank’s head had my full attention — that small detail left me wanting an entire backstory on how it came into his possession. But on to important matters: The lack of planning to carry out Rick’s grand plan was so hilariously perfect to me. I don’t know why I expected these dudes to deliver anything less than a terribly executed plan — Rick’s meeting with Sritala to set the home visit in the first place proved he was terrible at lying. Maybe his catch-up session with Frank left him too dazed to remember the need for a very basic Plan 101 conversation? Frank at least tried his best to improvise, but to see his sobriety quickly dissipate at the stress of it all was indeed bittersweet. Their ensuing escapade will surely reach doom levels. Am I as delusional as Chelsea to believe Rick will come to his senses before he gets in too deep?

A man in a blue shirt and khakis sits across a woman seated on a couch with her phone.

Saxon (Patrick Schwarzenegger) has a heart to heart with Chelsea (Aimee Lou Wood). Could he be her next sad-boy soulmate?

(Fabio Lovino / HBO)

Chelsea made another sweet (or sad?) declaration of her love for Rick. But will he be her doom? Also, she and Saxon share some interesting moments in this episode. What’s going on there?

Advertisement

McNamara: Chelsea clearly likes her men damaged and brooding and Rick has become, quite frankly, a bore. So if tragedy strikes the Ratliff family, Saxon could become her next sad-boy soulmate. Or Tim, for that matter.

Braxton: Chelsea + Saxon = yawn. Chelsea’s constant whining and pining for Rick was getting old a few episodes ago. Now it just seems pathetic and doomed. She needs therapy.

Villarreal: I dunno. The parallels between Rick and Chelsea‘s reactions in last week’s episode — Rick in hearing Frank’s monologue; Chelsea in processing Saxon’s lack of memory over the activities he engaged in with his brother — has me believing they are soulmates. I know her declaration about wanting to heal Rick and her being the hope to his pain is the sort of thing that would cause a friend to tell her to run for the hills, but I hope they make it out alive and live happily ever after. And I hope Saxon reads the books and finds his soul.

Chloe’s wild story about Greg/Gary’s weird fetish — what is Mike White trying to say about sex with all these moments?

McNamara: Well, I didn’t believe Chloe’s story for one minute. I have no idea if or why Greg/Gary wanted them to have sex, but all of Saxon’s jaded alpha-maleness certainly fell away in this episode. Still, with the exception of Belinda (and by extension, her son), I don’t have much of an emotional connection with any of this season’s characters, so I have no idea what White is trying to say about anything. I am, however, very curious to see how he’s going to pull any of these threads together in the finale.

Advertisement

Braxton: The way she told the fetish story was so creepy. And Chelsea seemed to be approving of it. Once again, I feel there’s a lot of effort to be provocative this season without any real texture or meaning. I hope there’s something by the finale that will make it all make sense. But I’m losing hope.

Villarreal: The storytelling from some of these characters has me flashing back to “Are you Afraid of the Dark?” I love how Chelsea took it all in like it was a moderate level of crazy but not completely bonkers. I feel like Chloe is trying to set up a scenario that would set Greg/Gary off, but I don’t know why.

Three women in dresses seated at a round dinner table.

Jaclyn (Michelle Monaghan), left, Kate (Leslie Bibb) and Laurie (Carrie Coon) have a nice, uncomfortable dinner.

(Fabio Lovino / HBO)

The volcano of tension between the three frenemies finally erupted. But will it actually end their friendship?

Advertisement

McNamara: Well, I’m quite worried about Laurie at the moment — I’m not trusting that cab she jumped into. And should she survive the journey, I am wondering if Jaclyn will just stick her with the White Lotus bill.

Braxton: It’s really hard to root for a kumbaya moment with these three. And none of them seem to be having a good time.

Villarreal: If ever there was a moment to call a truce among friends, it’s to share the WTF moment of a guy asking for $10,000 after sex — and suggesting she can PayPal or Zelle it for ease, no less! If they all make it out of this trip alive, I don’t think this unpleasant excursion will end anything. It’ll just be another blip they’ll gloss over when recounting their stay and continue on like passive-aggressive besties until the next one. I, however, would like to know what happened with Dave!

And what did you think of Aleksei’s request for $10,000?

McNamara: I need to know if he asked Jaclyn for same and if she gave it to him.

Advertisement

Villarreal: Yes, I also wondered if this is a scheme with this guy group! How long before Tim considers this approach to rebuilding his fortune?

What did you think of the exchange between Greg/Gary and Belinda? Should she take the deal?

McNamara: Please call the police, Belinda. Like, now.

Braxton: First of all, Belinda should have played it much smarter: “First of all, make it $300,000, throw in that yacht and have your lawyer call my lawyer so we can get all this on paper. And if anything ever happens to me, my son will send all the dirt on you to the New York Times.” Not sure why she’s so concerned about what happened to Tanya, who was a neurotic mess, heartlessly crushing her dreams of owning a business.

Villarreal: I thought it was insane he was only offering her $100,000 in the year 2025. Like, hello? Maybe he went to the same University of Grand Planning that Rick attended. I did enjoy the way Natasha played that scene, clutching the purse and processing with eye blinks as he spoke. Belinda should definitely not take the deal — unless some more zeros are added to it. But, Greg B., if Belinda did accept Greg/Gary’s bid for her silence, and uses that money to open her spa, in a dark way, Tanya did help finance her dreams.

Advertisement

Lochy tells Piper he wants to join her in moving to Thailand — surprised? And, more importantly, what’s your take on Piper’s reaction to his decision?

McNamara: Piper wants to get away from her family and for Buddhism to be her thing. That was the most believable thing in the whole episode.

Braxton: Piper loves her brother, but she wants a break from her whole family. That is more important than the Buddhism thing.

Villarreal: This whole family needs distance from each other. I do find it a little weird how quickly Piper was set off by his proposal, considering how much she welcomes his company anytime else.

Who gets your Best Facial Expression award this week?

Advertisement

McNamara: Victoria, when the young woman protests that she actually loves her LBH husband. That incredulous double flinch/blink. Priceless.

Braxton: Gaitok’s “eureka” moment when he recognizes the thugs.

Villarreal: To avoid repeats, I’ll go with Frank’s reaction to watching a young Sritala perform. When he sincerely offers his thoughts on it — “I mean, it’s like MC Hammer, Peter Pan. It’s got a little Pippin.” — is pretty great, but it’s the way he tilts his head back with his sigh of “ahhh” as she says, “It’s the folk music and the rap music,” that’s gold.

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

‘Hoppers’ review: Who can argue with hilarious talking animals?

Published

on

‘Hoppers’ review: Who can argue with hilarious talking animals?

Just when you think Pixar’s petting-zoo cute new movie “Hoppers” is flagrantly ripping off James Cameron, the characters come clean.


movie review

HOPPERS

Advertisement

Running time: 105 minutes. Rated PG (action/peril, some scary images and mild language). In theaters March 6.

Advertisement

“You guys, this is like ‘Avatar’!,” squeals 19-year-old Mabel (Piper Curda), the studio’s rare college-age heroine. 

Shoots back her nutty professor, Dr. Fairfax (Kathy Kajimy): “This is nothing like ‘Avatar!’”

Sorry, Doc, it definitely is. And that’s fine. Placing the smart sci-fi story atop an animated family film feels right for Pixar, which has long fused the technological, the fantastical and the natural into a warm signature blend. Also, come on, “Avatar” is “Dances With Wolves” via “E.T.”

What separates “Hoppers” from the pack of recent Pix flix, which have been wholesome as a church bake sale, is its comic irreverence. 

Director Daniel Chong’s original movie is terribly funny, and often in an unfamiliar, warped way for the cerebral and mushy studio. For example, I’ve never witnessed so many speaking characters be killed off in a Pixar movie — and laughed heartily at their offings to boot.

What’s the parallel to Pandora? Mabel, a budding environmental activist, has stumbled on a secret laboratory where her kooky teachers can beam their minds into realistic robot animals in order to study them. They call the devices “hoppers.”  

In Pixar’s “Hoppers,” a teen girl discovers a secret device that can turn her into a talking beaver. AP

Bold and fiery Mabel — PETA, but palatable — sees an opportunity. 

The mayor of Beaverton, Jerry (Jon Hamm), plans to destroy her beloved local pond that’s teeming with wildlife to build an expressway. And the only thing stopping the egomaniacal pol — a more upbeat version of President Business from “The Lego Movie” — is the water’s critters, who have all mysteriously disappeared. 

So, Mabel avatars into beaver-bot, and sets off in search of the lost creatures to discover why they’ve left.

Advertisement

From there, the movie written by Jesse Andrews (“Luca”) toys with “Toy Story.” Here’s what mischief fuzzy mammals, birds, reptiles and insects get up to when humans aren’t snooping around. Dance aerobics, it turns out. 

Mabel (Piper Curda) meets King George (Bobby Moynihan). AP

Per the usual, “Hoppers” goes deep inside their intricate society. The beasts have a formal political system of antagonistic “Game of Thrones”-like royal houses. The most menacing are the Insect Queen (Meryl Streep — I’d call her a chameleon, but she’s playing a bug), a staunch monarch butterfly and her conniving caterpillar kid (Dave Franco). They’re scheming for power. 

Perfectly content with his station is Mabel’s new best furry friend King George (Bobby Moynihan), a gullible beaver who ascended to the throne unexpectedly. He happily enforces “pond rules,” such as, “When you gotta eat, eat.”   

That means predators have free rein to nosh on prey, and everybody’s cool with it. Because of bone-dry deliveries, like exhausted office drones, the four-legged cast members are hilarious as they go about their Animal Planet activities. 

Mayor Jerry (Jon Hamm) plans to destroy a local pond to build an expressway. AP

No surprise — talking lizards, sharks, bears, geese and frogs are the real stars here. They far outshine Mabel, even when she dons beaver attire. Much like a 19-year-old in a job interview, she doesn’t leave much of an impression. 

Advertisement

Yes, the teen has a heartfelt motivation: The embattled pond was her late grandma’s favorite place. Mabel promised her that she’d protect it. 

But in personality she doesn’t rank as one of Pixar’s most engaging leads, perhaps because she’s past voting age. Mabel is nestled in a nebulous phase between teenage rebellion and adulthood that’s pretty blasé, even if a touch of tension comes from her hiding her Homo sapien identity from her new diminutive pals. When animated, kids make better adventurers, plain and simple.

AP

“Hoppers” continues Pixar’s run of humble, charming originals (“Luca,” “Elio”) in between billion-dollar-grossing, idea-starved sequels (“Inside Out 2,” probably “Toy Story 5”). The Disney-owned studio’s days of irrepressible innovation and unmatched imagination are well behind it. No one’s awed by anything anymore. “Coco,” almost 10 years ago, was their last new property to wow on the scale of peak Pixar.

Look, the new movie is likable and has a brain, heart and ample laughs. That’s more than I can say for most family fare. “A Minecraft Movie” made me wanna hop right out of the theater.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Entertainment

Ulysses Jenkins, Los Angeles artist and pioneer of Black experimental video, dies at 79

Published

on

Ulysses Jenkins, Los Angeles artist and pioneer of Black experimental video, dies at 79

Ulysses Jenkins, the pioneering Los Angeles-born video artist whose avant-garde compositions embodied Black experimentalism, has died. He was 79.

Jenkins’ death was confirmed by his alma mater Otis College, where he studied under renowned painter and printmaker Charles White in the late 1970s and returned as an instructor years later. The Los Angeles art and design school shared a statement from the Charles White Archive, which said, “Jenkins had a profound impact on contemporary art and media practices.”

“A trailblazing figure in Black experimental video, he was widely recognized for works that used image, sound, and cultural iconography to examine representation, race, gender, ritual, history, and power,” the statement said.

A self-proclaimed “griot,” Jenkins throughout his decades-spanning career maintained an art practice grounded in the tradition of those West African oral historians who came before him. Through archival documentaries like “The Nomadics” and surrealist murals like “1848: Bandaide,” he leveraged alternative media to challenge Eurocentric representations of Black Americans in popular culture.

Advertisement

He was both an artist and a storyteller who sought to “reassert the history and the culture,” he told The Times in 2022. That year, the Hammer Museum presented Jenkins’ first major retrospective, “Ulysses Jenkins: Without Your Interpretation.”

“Early video art was about the problems with the media that we are still having today: the notions of truth,” Jenkins said. “To that extent, early video art was a construct that was anti-media … a critical analysis of the media that we were viewing every night.”

Born in 1946 to Los Angeles transplants from the South, Jenkins was ambivalent about the city, which offered his parents some refuge from the blatant systemic racism they encountered in their hometowns, but housed an entertainment industry that had long perpetuated anti-Black sentiment.

“What Hollywood represents, especially in my work, is the classic plantation mentality,” Jenkins told The Times in 1986. “Although people aren’t necessarily enslaved by it, people enslave themselves to it because they’re told how fantastic it is to help manifest these illusions for a corporate sponsor.”

Jenkins, who participated in a group of artists committed to spontaneous action called Studio Z, was naturally drawn to video art over Hollywood filmmaking. “I can address any issue and I don’t have to wait for [the studios’] big OK. I thought this was a land of freedom, and video allows me that freedom and opportunity that I can create for myself and at least feel that part of being an American,” he said.

Advertisement

Jenkins went on to deconstruct Hollywood’s vision of the Black diaspora in experimental video compositions including “Mass of Images,” which incorporates clips from D.W. Griffith’s notoriously racist “The Birth of a Nation,” and “Two-Tone Transfer,” which depicts, in Jenkins’ words, a “dreamscape in which the dreamer awakens to a visitation of three minstrels who tell the story of the development of African American stereotypes in the American entertainment industry.”

Jenkins’ legacy is not only artistic but institutional, with the luminary having held teaching appointments at UCSD and UCI, where he co-founded the digital filmmaking minor with fellow Southern California-based artists Bruce Yonemoto and Bryan Jackson.

As artist and educator Suzanne Lacy penned in her social media tribute to Jenkins, which showed him speaking to students at REDCAT in L.A., “he has been an important part of our histories here in Southern California as video and performance artists evolved their practices.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Review | Hoppers: Pixar’s new animation is a hilarious, heartfelt animal Avatar

Published

on

Review | Hoppers: Pixar’s new animation is a hilarious, heartfelt animal Avatar

4/5 stars

Bounding into cinemas just in time for spring, the latest Pixar animation is a pleasingly charming tale of man vs nature, with a bit of crazy robot tech thrown in.

The star of Hoppers is Mabel Tanaka (voiced by Piper Curda), a young animal-lover leading a one-girl protest over a freeway being built through the tranquil countryside near her hometown of Beaverton.

Because the freeway is the pet project of the town’s popular mayor, Jerry (Jon Hamm), who is vying for re-election, Mabel’s protests fall on deaf ears.

Everything changes when she stumbles upon top-secret research by her biology professor, Dr Sam Fairfax (Kathy Najimy), that allows for the human consciousness to be linked to robotic animals. This lets users get up close and personal with other species.

Advertisement
“This is like Avatar,” Mabel coos, and, in truth, it is. Plugged into a headset, Mabel is reborn inside a robotic beaver. She plans to recruit a real beaver to help populate the glade, which is set to be destroyed by Jerry’s proposed road.
Continue Reading

Trending