Entertainment
Ed Ruscha shares his most cherished object, and another side of himself
Ed Ruscha loves plants. If you know his art, this fact might come unexpected. He’s not a landscape artist. He’s never wanted to paint a plant. “I’m not sure why,” he says from behind the large desk in his Culver City studio. And yet he’s been gardening for some 50 years.
We’re looking together at two wooden planks with metal tags hammered into them. Each tag once belonged to a plant that has died, the shiny metal carved with the name of the plant, the date of its death and sometimes its cause: “Passed away / Oct. ’87 / Just dried up.”
“They’re like little epitaphs for the departed,” Ruscha says. At the top of one board, he has written: Trees and Plants that Didn’t Make It.
He grows his plants out in the desert, in the Yucca Valley, where he has a cabin. Ruscha “found out the hard way” which plants survive in the arid climate with sand storms and even snow. “I should know better than to plant a palm tree in the high desert.” He looks straight at me with his blue eyes, then smiles, briefly.
Ruscha creates a tag each time he acquires a plant, a label to remember its species, and then pokes it into the ground for as long as the plant will last. He enjoys the process of tending to his plants, protecting them from raccoons with barriers made of wire. He likes the challenge of seeing if he “can make something survive,” especially something “as delicate as a plant.”
For 50 years, Ruscha has been making “little epitaphs” for his plants whenever they die.
I ask Ruscha if it makes him sad when a plant dies. “Yeah, I shed a tear,” he says — earnestly, I think. “A quick tear. And then it gets posted to the board here.” He keeps the boards leaning against the wall in his studio. “I check it out and nod at it every so often to let it know I care about it,” he tells me. “And I’m getting smiles in response” — his eucalyptus, mulberries and bird of paradise appreciating him in the afterlife.
The more I sit with Ruscha’s epitaphs, the less unexpected his love for plants becomes. Time, after all, is the artist’s great subject.
Ruscha’s life-spanning retrospective currently at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art is called “Now Then,” evoking his black-and-white lithograph of the phrase “That was then, this is now” lit up against dark clouds. His pictures declare the way things evolve and age, from a dramatic painting of the words “The End” to images of everyday, discarded things, like a torn mattress or broken pencil.
Ruscha tells me about his blazing red 1983 painting with the words “The Study of Friction and Wear on Mating Surfaces.” He makes the connection: “You could almost say the wind is a mating surface of a plant. And that intrigues me and probably motivates me.”
This idea of motivation comes up, subtly, throughout our conversation. At 86, the drive to keep his plants alive, and his sense of purpose in caring for their death, keeps him going.
I ask Ruscha if he considers himself nostalgic. “I like remembering the past and the way things used to be,” he answers, establishing a gentle, precise distinction. He’s made a ritual of going out in Los Angeles and noticing how the landscape has changed. “I compartmentalize the way the city looked at one time,” he says, which, when he moved here in the 1950s, was like “some kind of antique village.”
Most famously, Ruscha has been photographing every block of Sunset Boulevard since the 1960s, marking the gradual disappearance of buildings, honoring street corners as his tags do for his trees. “I should have been tagging all these buildings too!” he suddenly realizes. “But we’ll let the graffiti artists tag.”
“I like remembering the past and the way things used to be,” says Ruscha.
Ruscha is not against change per se, but he’s found the need to notice it. It’s an act of observation, rather than an indulgence in longing — an exercise in remembering, an effort to place things within a continuum.
Nonetheless, change can be tiring, and Ruscha seeks a break from it by going to the desert. It’s a contrast to his life in L.A.; he doesn’t see people in the desert, and, unlike a city, it’s mostly changeless. Its rocks have been there for thousands of years. It doesn’t feel like a coincidence that it’s in this stubborn landscape where Ruscha has chosen to grow his garden, where plants try to thrive against all odds, their cycle of life and death against a seemingly stable backdrop.
“It’s not just the plants that I like, but it’s the labeling,” Ruscha shares with me about his board. He excitedly explains how he etches the tags with a metal machine. “They’re not going anywhere. … These are permanent.” Like the desert to the city, the tags are the comforting counterpoints to his plants, changeless.
When people think of Ruscha’s art, they think of how iconically L.A. it is — his painted Hollywood signs, sleek gas stations and swimming pools. But it’s also iconically the desert. His art — and I include these humble wooden planks — has the energy of a desert, of those rocks that persist. I think it’s in the sharp light, in the way things get fixed.
Ruscha, who grew up in Oklahoma, moved to L.A. when he was 18 years old and hasn’t left since. He’s found himself having to explain why he didn’t move to a bigger art center like New York City and chose, instead, to stay. It’s “the feeling of California,” he tells me — “including its vegetation.” In describing the cactuses and the palm trees, he notes “the laciness of it all. … It has a magic to it that attracted me.”
While at his studio, he walks me back to his second garden, the concrete backyard that once upon a time was an orange grove. He shows me a row of Joshua trees sprouting in pots, which he plans to take with him to the desert. Holding on to his two wooden planks, he sits among kumquat and lime trees. With his all-blue outfit and bright white hair and eyebrows, he has his own magic laciness about him.
With his all-blue outfit and bright white hair and eyebrows, Ruscha has his own magic laciness about him.
“You know, I think I get emotional progress, emotional propulsion, from plants,” he tells me. By the end of our time together, I’m getting used to how he casually utters such profound statements. I’m with the softer side of an artist known for having the cool, edgy swagger of his art, the side that propels him to paint large canvases of cracks in the sidewalk and that declare “The End” of things. It’s the side of him that picks up a basket of kumquats and limes and distributes them, one by one, into a paper bag for me to take home. It’s his nature-loving side, seemingly behind the scenes, driving how he creates and lives.
“I feel powerfully connected to that board,” Ruscha concludes. “[A] lot of plants have died, but they all are sort of reminders to me — once with me and now departed. So that’s OK.”
Photo Assistant Cody Rogers
Movie Reviews
‘Scream 7’ Review: Ghostface Trades His Metallic Knife for Plastic in Bloody Embarrassing Slasher Sequel
It’s funny how this film is marketed as the first Scream movie in IMAX, yet it’s their sloppiest work to date. Williamson accomplishes two decent kills. My praise goes to the prosthetic team and gore above anything else. The filmmaking is amateurish, lacking any of the tension build and innovation in set pieces like the Radio Silence or Craven entries. Many slasher sequences consist of terribly spliced editing and incomprehensible camera movement. There was a person at my screening asking if one of the Ghostfaces was killed. I responded, “Yeah, they were shot in the head; you just couldn’t see it because the filmmaking is so damn unintelligible.”
Really, Spyglass? This is the best you can do to “damage control” your series that was perfectly fine?
I’m getting comments from morons right now telling me that I’m biased for speaking “politically” about this movie. Fuck you! This poorly made, bland, and franchise-worst entry is a byproduct of political cowardice.
The production company was so adamant about silencing their outspoken star, who simply stated that she’s against the killing of Palestinian people by an evil totalitarian regime, that they deliberately fired her, conflating her comments to “anti-semintism,” when, and if you read what she said exactly, it wasn’t. Only to reconstruct the buildup made in her arc and settle on a nonsensical, manufactured, nostalgia-based slop fest to appeal to fans who lack genuine film taste in big 2026. To add insult to injury, this movie actively takes potshots at those predecessors, perhaps out of pettiness that Williamson didn’t pen them or a mean-spirited middle finger to the star the studio fired. Truly, fuck you. Take the Barrera aspect out of this, which is still impossible, and Scream 7 is a lazy, sloppy, ill-conceived, no-vision, enshittification of Scream and a bloody embarrassment to the franchise. It took a real, morally upright actress to make Ghostface’s knife go from metal to plastic.
FINAL STATEMENT
You either die a Scream or live long enough to see yourself become a Stab.
Entertainment
Neil Sedaka, songwriter and hitmaker over multiple generations, dies at 86
Neil Sedaka, an irrepressible songsmith who parlayed his compositional skills into pop stardom during the height of the Brill Building era in the 1960s and later staged an easy-listening comeback in the 1970s, has died at age 86. No cause of death was immediately available.
“Our family is devastated by the sudden passing of our beloved husband, father and grandfather, Neil Sedaka,” the songwriter’s family wrote in a statement to The Times. “A true rock and roll legend, an inspiration to millions, but most importantly, at least to those of us who were lucky enough to know him, an incredible human being who will be deeply missed.”
A chipper melodicist who never attempted to disguise his sentimental streak, Sedaka emerged at the moment rock ’n’ roll’s initial big bang started to fizzle. As a songwriter and performer, Sedaka treated rock ’n’ roll as another fad to be exploited, crafting cheerful, vivacious tunes targeted at teens who’d bop along to “Stupid Cupid” and swoon to “Where the Boys Are,” to name two songs he and lyricist Howard Greenfield wrote for early-’60s pop idol Connie Francis. Sedaka himself became a star through such bright confections as “Calendar Girl,” “Happy Birthday, Sweet Sixteen” and “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do,” the 1962 chart-topper that became his signature song.
Already falling out of fashion by the time the Beatles arrived in the United States, Sedaka didn’t weather the rise of the British Invasion: By the end of the 1960s, his lack of a record label caused him to leave the States for England. Unlike his Brill Building peer Carole King — he wrote “Oh! Carol,” his first big hit, about her — Sedaka wasn’t able to refashion himself as a hip singer-songwriter. Instead, he relied on showbiz hustle and savvy commercial instincts, teaming up with the musicians that became the iconoclastic hitmakers 10cc on records that positioned Sedaka squarely in the soft-rock mainstream. Elton John signed the veteran vocalist to his fledgling label Rocket and Sedaka immediately had two No. 1 hits with “Laughter in the Rain” and “Bad Blood,” a success compounded by Captain & Tennille taking “Love Will Keep Us Together,” a tune from one of Sedaka’s albums with 10cc, to No. 1 in 1975.
Sedaka’s second stint in the spotlight didn’t last much longer than his first flush of stardom — by 1980, he was no longer a Top 40 artist — but his ’70s comeback cemented his status as a showbiz fixture, allowing him to carve out a career onstage and, at times, onscreen. Occasionally, the world would turn and place Sedaka back in the mainstream, as when he appeared on “American Idol” in the early 2000s or when his 1971 composition “(Is This the Way to) Amarillo?” was rejiggered into the World Cup novelty anthem “(Is This the Way to) The World Cup” in 2006.
Neil Sedaka in 1960.
(Bettmann Archive/Getty Images)
A descendant of Turkish and Ashkenazi Jews, Neil Sedaka was born in Brooklyn, N.Y., on March 13, 1939. Growing up in Brighton Beach, Sedaka exhibited a musical proclivity at an early age, earning a piano scholarship to Juilliard’s children’s division when he was 8 years old. He studied classical piano for the next few years, his ears being drawn to pop music all the while. At the age of 13, he happened to meet a neighbor when they were both vacationing at a Catskills resort. She brought him to meet her son, an aspiring lyricist named Howard Greenfield, and the pair quickly became a songwriting team, with Greenfield writing the words and Sedaka handling the music.
As Sedaka and Greenfield developed their creative partnership, Sedaka sang in the Linc-Tones, a vocal group that evolved into the Tokens just prior to his departure; he left them prior to their hit single “The Lion Sleeps Tonight.” Although he didn’t abandon his dreams of performing, Sedaka concentrated on songwriting with Greenfield. Attempting to gain a foothold in the Brill Building, the pair first caught the attention of Jerry Wexler, who had Clyde McPhatter and LaVern Baker cut a couple of their tunes. Mort Shuman and Doc Pomus suggested to Sedaka and Greenfield that they would have better luck at 1650 Broadway, where Al Nevins and Don Kirshner had just opened their publishing company Aldon Music.
Aldon signed Sedaka and Greenfield to a publishing deal — still a minor, Sedaka needed his mother to sign in his stead — and the pair had their first big hit when Connie Francis took “Stupid Cupid” into the Top 20 in 1958. Not long after, Sedaka signed with RCA Records as a performer. “The Diary,” inspired by Francis refusing Sedaka and Greenfield access to her diary, became Sedaka’s first hit single in 1958 after the doo-wop group Little Anthony and the Imperials passed on the chance to record it first. Sedaka had difficulty delivering a successful sequel to his initial hit for RCA, so he constructed “Oh! Carol” to mimic the lovelorn yet sweet sounds filling the charts in 1959. Sedaka’s gambit paid off: “Oh! Carol” was a Top 10 hit, popular enough to generate an answer record — King’s husband, Gerry Goffin, wrote “Oh! Neil,” which failed to be a hit for King.
With many of rock ’n’ roll’s initial stars waylaid — Elvis Presley was in the Army, Chuck Berry was embroiled in legal problems, Little Richard left the music behind for church, Jerry Lee Lewis’ career imploded — Sedaka stepped into the breach, offering well-scrubbed, buoyant tunes designed to mirror teenage concerns. “Stairway to Heaven,” “Calendar Girl,” “Happy Birthday, Sweet Sixteen,” “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do” and “Next Door to an Angel” all bounced to a bright beat and boasted ornate arrangements that highlighted Sedaka’s youthful cheer.
While he was ensconced in the Top 10, Sedaka continued to write hits for other artists, remaining a regular composer for Francis but also reaching the charts with Jimmy Clanton. He’d occasionally moonlight in the studio too: He plays piano on “Dream Lover,” one of Bobby Darin‘s biggest hits.
By the time the Beatles and the British Invasion took over teen bedrooms and the pop charts in 1964, Sedaka’s hit-making streak had run dry. Panicked, he recorded “It Hurts to Be in Love,” an operatic pop song co-written by Greenfield and Helen Miller. Rushing into a nearby demo studio, Sedaka cut a version that was ready for radio, but RCA refused to release it, on the grounds that it only released records made in its studios. Gene Pitney took the track, subbed his vocals for Sedaka’s and wound up with a Top 10 hit at a time Sedaka couldn’t break the Top 40. Sedaka later claimed, “It was horrible. That would have been my No. 1 song, my comeback song.”
After his deal with RCA expired in 1966, Sedaka started playing hotels in the Catskills and clubs on the East Coast, venues that grew progressively smaller with each passing year. He continued to get work as a songwriter, penning songs for the Monkees (“The Girl I Left Behind Me,” “When Love Comes Knockin’ at Your Door”) with lyricist Carole Bayer, and the 5th Dimension (“Workin’ on a Groovy Thing”) with Roger Atkins.
Faced with dwindling prospects in the United States, Sedaka began to regularly tour England and Australia in the late 1960s. By the dawn of the ’70s, he realized that the times had changed around him: “The era of the singer-songwriter had begun and I was being left behind. I needed to be part of it. I wanted to be a part of it. I wanted it with a vengeance!” He returned to RCA with “Emergence,” a mellow record designed to follow King’s “Tapestry” onto the radio, but that airplay never materialized: Sedaka was still seen as a relic of the early ’60s.
Olivia Newton-John and Neil Sedaka performing in a BBC television studio in 1971.
(Warwick Bedford / Radio Times via Getty Images)
Frustrated with the disinterest in “Emergence,” Sedaka decamped to the U.K., working its club circuit until he was introduced to Eric Stewart, Graham Gouldman, Lol Creme and Kevin Godley, a group of British pop veterans who soon would form the art-pop outfit 10cc. The quartet brought Sedaka into their Strawberry Studios — a place where they recorded a number of bizarre bubble-gum hits under such pseudonyms as Crazy Elephant and Hotlegs — and backed him on 1972’s “Solitaire” album, whose title track was his first collaboration with lyricist Phil Cody; it’d later be covered by Elvis Presley.
“Solitaire” gave Sedaka his first U.K. hit in nearly a decade with “That’s When the Music Takes Me.” Encouraged, the singer-songwriter reunited with 10cc in 1973 for “The Tra-La-La Days are Over,” an album that featured the bubbly “Love Will Keep Us Together.” By the time Sedaka released “Laughter in the Rain” in 1974, he had severed ties with 10cc and found a new benefactor in Elton John.
Then at the height of his phenomenal 1970s popularity, John signed Sedaka to his recently launched American imprint Rocket Records. Rocket repackaged highlights from the 10cc records as “Sedaka’s Back,” adding “Laughter in the Rain” for good measure. The lush number slowly worked its way up the charts, eventually reaching No. 1 on Billboard in 1975. “Bad Blood,” a lively duet with an uncredited Elton John, followed “Laughter in the Rain” to the top of the pop charts later in ’75, arriving just after Captain & Tennille had a No. 1 with “Love Will Keep Us Together.”
Elton John and Neil Sedaka in 1975.
(Richard E. Aaron / Redferns via Getty Images)
Sedaka’s comeback cooled as quickly as it had ignited. He reached the lower rungs of the Top 40 a couple of times in 1976, parted ways with Rocket, then signed to Elektra in 1977, releasing a series of records that found him countering his satiny easy listening with a louche streak on such songs as “Sleazy Love,” “One Night Stand” and “Junkie for Your Love.”
“Should’ve Never Let You Go,” a duet with his daughter, Dara, became his last charting hit in 1980. He published a memoir, “Laughter in the Rain: My Own Story,” in 1982 and was inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame in 1983. By the mid-’80s, he had drifted toward the oldies circuit, revisiting his hits in the studio and onstage, turning his songbook into stage productions: The jukebox musical “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do” arrived in 2005, and the musical biography “Laughter in the Rain” followed five years later. He returned to classical music for 1995’s “Classically Sedaka.” He recorded a collection of Yiddish songs, “Brighton Beach Memories,” in 2003, and a children’s album, “Waking Up Is Hard to Do,” in 2009.
Neil Sedaka performing in 2014.
(Robin Little / Redferns via Getty Images)
Occasionally, Sedaka would reemerge on a bigger stage. In 2003, he showed up as a guest judge on the second season of “American Idol,” declaring its runner-up Clay Aiken was “ear delicious.” “(Is This the Way to) Amarillo?,” a bubble-gum song Sedaka wrote and Tony Christie recorded in 1971, was revived in 2006, when it was used as the basis for the novelty “(Is This the Way to) The World Cup?”
On Oct. 26, 2007, Lincoln Center honored Sedaka’s 50 years in showbiz with a gala concert featuring Natalie Cole, David Foster and Clay Aiken. He continued to work steadily over the next two decades, releasing a handful of new records but focusing on concerts. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020, he took his show online, holding mini-concerts on social media.
Sedaka is survived by his wife, Leba, daughter Dara and son Marc, and three grandchildren.
Movie Reviews
Movie review: Ballet-themed erotic drama ‘Dreams’ dissipates in finale
Mexican writer/director Michel Franco explores the dynamics of money, class and the border through the spiky, unsettling erotic drama “Dreams,” starring Jessica Chastain and Isaac Hernández, a Mexican ballet dancer and actor.
In the languidly paced “Dreams,” Franco presents two individuals in love (or lust?) who experiment with wielding the power at their fingertips against their lover, the violence either state or sexual in nature. The film examines the push-pull of attraction and rejection on a scope both intimate and global, finding the uneasy space where the two meet.
Chastain stars as Jennifer McCarthy, a wealthy San Francisco philanthropist and socialite who runs a foundation that supports a ballet school in Mexico City. But Franco does not center her experience, but that of Fernando (Hernández), whom we meet first, escaping from the back of a box truck filled with migrants crossing the U.S./Mexico border, abandoned in San Antonio on a 100-degree day.
His journey is one of extreme survival, but his destination is the lap of luxury, a modernist San Francisco mansion where he makes himself at home, and where he’s clearly been at home before. A talented ballet dancer who has already once been deported, he’s risked everything to be with his lover, Jennifer, though as a high-profile figure who works with her father and brother (Rupert Friend), she’d rather keep her affair with Fernando under wraps. He’s her dirty little secret, but he’s also a human being who refuses to be kept in the shadows.
As Jennifer and Fernando attempt to navigate what it looks like for them to be together, it seems that larger forces will shatter their connection. In reality, the only real danger is each other.
The storytelling logic of “Dreams” is predicated on watching these characters move through space, the way we watch dancers do. Franco offers some fascinating parallels to juxtapose the wildly varying experiences of Fernando and Jennifer — he enters the States in a box truck, almost dying of thirst and heat stroke; she arrives in Mexico on a private plane, but they both enter empty homes alone, melancholy. During a rift in their relationship, Fernando retreats to a motel while working at a bar, drinking red wine out of plastic cups with a friend in his humble room, ignoring Jennifer’s calls, while she eats alone in her darkened dining room, drinking red wine out of crystal.
These comparisons aren’t exactly nuanced, but they are stark, and for most of the film, Franco just asks us to watch them move together, and apart, in a strange, avoidant pas de deux. Often dwarfed by architecture, their distinctive bodies in space are more important than the sparse dialogue that only serves to fill in crucial gaps in storytelling.
Cinematographer Yves Cape captures it all in crisp, saturated images. The lack of musical score (beyond diegetic music in the ballet scenes) contributes to the dry, flat affect and tone, as these characters enact increasing cruelties — both emotional and physical — upon each other as a means of trying to contain their lover, until it escalates into something truly dark and disturbing.
Franco, frankly, loses the plot of “Dreams” in the third act. What is a rather staid drama about the weight of social expectations on a relationship becomes a dramatically unexpected game of vengeance as Jennifer and Fernando grasp at any power they have over the other. She fetishizes him and he returns the favor, violently.
Ultimately, Franco jettisons his characters for the sake of unearned plot twists that leave the viewer feeling only icky. These events aren’t illuminating, and feel instead like a bleak betrayal. The circumstances of the story might be “timely,” but “Dreams” doesn’t help us understand the situation better, leaving us in the dark about what we’re supposed to take away from this story of sex, violence, money and the state. Anything it suggests we already know.
‘Dreams’
(In English and Spanish with English subtitles)
1.5 stars (out of 4)
No MPA rating (some nudity, sex scenes, swearing, sexual violence)
Running time: 1:35
How to watch: In theaters Feb. 27
-
World3 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts4 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana6 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO3 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT