The Revenant [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (2 1/2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review  

The Revenant [2015] (directed and screenplay cowritten by Alejandro González Iñárritu [wikip] [IMDb] along with Mark L. Smith [IMDb] based on the novel The Revenant: A Novel of Revenge (2002) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Michael Punke [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is a stark (and IMHO needlessly long) if often beautifully shot film that tells the story of American mountain man Hugh Glass [wikip] [WCat] [IMDb] (played in the film by Leonardo Di Caprio) who in 1823, while leading a band of fur trappers working for the Rocky Mountain Fur Company "back to civilization" at the end of an already ill fated hunting expedition, was mauled by a grizzly bear near the Yellowstone River that he happened-upon and then was left for dead by his colleagues.

'Cept he did not die ...

... instead, despite terrible wounds -- including deep gashes in his back and then others across his ribs and throat -- he used his wilderness skills to progressively patch himself together and travel, often by foot, often BY CRAWLING, HUNDREDS OF MILES back to Ft. Kiowa, then the nearest American settlement located in present day South Dakota on the Missouri River TO FIND THE MEN -- Bridger (played by Will Poulter), John Fitzgerald (played by Tom Hardy) and Capt. Andrew Henry (played by Domhnahl Gleeson) -- who had abandoned him and (at least in the movie) killed his son (played in the film by Forrest Goodluck).

The story becomes a meditation on justice / revenge.  While struggling back to camp / back to civilization, Glass must figure out -- Readers remember that he was unconscious or at best semi-conscious at the time of his abandonment / apparent murder of his son -- WHO was guilty, TO WHAT EXTENT guilty, and then WHAT WOULD CONSTITUTE JUSTICE, for him, in his circumstances.  And at least in the film, he is warned by a Native American who he encounters on his way back to civilization that "Justice belongs to the Creator" (not unlike St. Paul's admonition that vengeance belongs not to us but to God [cf. Rm 12:19]).

What does Glass in the film do?  What did he actually do (look it up, you have the tools, above)?  What would you do?

Not a bad film, but honestly, probably a bit longer than it needed to be, though the scenery in the film was often spectacular, if also very, very cold.


< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

The Forest [2016]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (1 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (C-)  Fr. Dennis (2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Dujsik) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review  

The Forest [2016] (directed by Jason Zada, screenplay by Nick Antosca, Sara Cornwell and Ben Ketai) is rather straight-forward "scary movie" if set largely in a somewhat exotic (for a North American) locale - the Aokigahara Forest at the base of Mount Fuji in Japan. 

The denseness of the often misty Pacific Northwest (think "Twilight")-like rain-forest has made it the locale for "scary story" (tormented / evil spirit ...) type folklore, for ages, in Japan.  More recently, it has gained the reputation in Japan as a common place for suicides.

SOOO ... 20-something, with a fiancé / a good job, super-responsible Sara (played by Natalie Dormer) gets word that her mirror-opposite, far more adventurous / far less responsible twin sister Jess (ALSO played by Natalie Dormer) studying in Japan has become very depressed.  Sensing that "she needs to go ..." ("It's a twins thing ...", she tells her fiancé), Sara drops everything and flies out to Japan to save her sister "before it's too late."

When Sara arrives, she's told that Jess had packed-up her bags in Tokyo a few days earlier and headed over to said Aokigahara Forest which, "could not be good..." So she heads out there as well to "try to find her," again "before it's too ..."

Arriving at the edge of said forest at nightfall, Sara spends the night in a somewhat dour-looking hostel just outside its perimeter (I suppose, the hostel _can't_ look "too cheerful," as most of its clientele would presumably spend the night there before "going out to the forest to ..."  There Sara meets a strapping / smiling 20-something American "adventurous type" named Aiden (played by Taylor Kinney) who tells her he's there "to write a story" about said dour "Forest of Dreadful Things."  He offers to help her find her sister.  He also enlists a local, similarly good looking / smartly dressed, 20-something Japanese guide named Michi (played quite well by Yukuyoshi Ozawa) who IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS _warns them_ "When you go into the forest STAY ON THE PATH or else YOU'LL GET LOST" ...

The three enter the forest.  Sara DOESN'T "stay on the path."  THEY "GET LOST" ... much dour, misty, mystical, and at times "jumpy / scary" ensues ...

ASIDE from the _obvious_ "suicide theme" ... it makes for a "not particularly terrible" teenage angst / "I just want to be there for my friends" jumpy / scary film.  Arguably it's a (small) step up from the typical teenage "troubled mad slasher" fare.

But there is that suicide theme that will trouble quite a few ...


< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Taxi Tehran [2014]

MPAA (UR would be PG-13)  Chicago Tribune (4 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 1/2 Stars)  AVClub  (B+)  Fr. Dennis (4+ Stars)

IMDb listing
Cinando.com listing
Sourehcinema.com listing*

Iranian Film Daily (A. Naderzad) review

AVClub.com (A.A. Dowd) review
Chicago Tribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review 

APUM.com (J.J. Ontiveros) review*
FilmPress.sk (V. Langerová) review*
KunstUndFilm.de (R. De Righi) review*
Sight & Sound (T. Johnson) review

Slant Magazine (J. Cole) review
Variety (S. Foundas) review


Taxi Tehran [2015] [IMDb] [Cin] [SC]* (written and directed by Jafar Panahi [wikip] [IMDb] [Cin] [SC]* [Amzn]) is a _necessarily_ very simple, _necessarily_ "indie" [TM] film that won critical acclaim (and awards) the world-over.  [In Chicago, the film played recently at the Gene Siskel Film Center]. This is because the director, officially banned from making films in Iran for 20 years (talk about "a blacklist" ... ;-) has had to "improvise."

Since being "banned" from film-making, he's made three ;-) -- one made, in part, using an iPhone, entitled This is Not a Film (orig. In Film Nist) [2011] [wikip] [IMDb] [Amzn] at his home in Tehran, another entitled Closed Curtain (orig. Pardé) [2013] [wikip] [IMDb] [Amzn-IV] at his vacation home by the Caspian Sea, and this one, made with a couple of strategically placed dashcams and a pretty good microphone, while driving around a taxicab in Tehran ;-).

The film involves basically video-taping a number of (generally staged) "conversations" that the ever smiling driver / director "has" while driving around his taxi on a random day.  None of the other participants / actors in the film are credited (for more-or-less obvious reasons...).

Can one create a compelling story in this way??  SURE ... The first passenger Panahi picks-up is a generally good-natured Tehrani 30-something "good old boy" who just complains that there's "too much crime in Tehran" these days (and one gets the sense would actually_like_ "someone like Panahi" being banned from making films these days ;-).

Then Panahi picks-up a couple of 40-50 year old women in orange if Islamic garb who are "on a mision":  They're trying to rapidly bring a couple of gold fish -- they have them "packaged" in nice water-laden plastic bags -- over to "Ali's Spring" at the edge of Tehran because it will "bring them good luck" if they do so on that particular day.

He's called then by his sister to pick-up his precocious 10-y/o niece at the end of the school day.  Of course, he's late ... She then, with her $100-little "Fuji style" digital camera in hand, is busily trying to "make her own film" and peppers her uncle with all sorts of questions about Iran's current regulations regarding what would make a "screenable film."  For instance, would filming a boy, basically her age, stealing something (small) at a market or from an unsuspecting passerby be considered "too sordid realism" for a "screen-able movie"?  (Basically, she had caught someone with her camera stealing something ;-). 

He also picks up a somewhat physically challenged person who makes a living selling "bootleg films" including _some of his own_ ;-).  That person is the only non-family/non-friend who actually recognizes him during the whole film ;-).  On one hand, this physically challenged person congratulates Panahi on his work.  On the other hand, he's making a living selling, illegally, said work ;-).  A little awkward, but they part "as friends" ;-).

Soooo ... What a cute little movie, huh? ;-) ... The true sadness, of course, is that Panahi is certainly capable of making _much greater things_.

Still, a story NEED NOT BE "GRAND" to MAKE A POINT.  And certainly in the "making a point" department THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST FASCINATING MOVIE OF THE YEAR ;-).

A very, very good AND VERY FUNNY JOB ;-)


* Foreign language webpages are most easily translated using Google's Chrome Browser. 

< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Anomalisa [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB ()  ChicagoTribune (4 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (1 Star)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller Seitz) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review  

I found Anomalisa [2015] (written and co-directed by Charlie Kaufman [wikip] [IMDb] along with Duke Johnson [IMDb] based on Charlie Kaufman's [wikip] [IMDb] own stage play by the same name) to be very, very, indeed relentlessly, flat / boring.  'Course that was a good part of the point ;-) or :-/.

This (I kid Readers not) appropriately R-rated movie that uses _clay puppets_ to tell its tale, presents then the story of a short (less than 24 hour) "business trip" of Michael Stone (voiced by David Thewlis) to Cincinnati, Ohio.  Now why was he going to this moderately sized if quite random American city?  Well, Stone was something of a "guru" in the field of "customer service."  He's hailed in the story as the author of a seminal book on the matter entitled: "How may I help you help them?" ;-).  And he was scheduled to give a talk at a trade conference assembling there.

The film begins with Stone arriving the evening before said conference at Cincinnati's airport after a thoroughly uneventful commercial flight.  He hails down a taxi to take him to an upscale hotel -- "The Fregoli" -- in the center of town.

The "chit-chat" of the conversation that takes place between the taxi driver and Stone as they travel between the airport and hotel is one that most American adults would have heard before: Here are two people who've never seen each other before and 10-15-20 minutes from now will never see each other again.  Stone has arrived in this random American city (the "third largest in the state of Ohio") that he's apparently "visited once before" (a fair number of years ago) and will probably not visit again for quite some time afterwards.  On the other hand, it's the taxi driver's city, a city that he's proud of.  So in those 10-15-20 minutes he tries to tell Stone "what to see / do" while in this "Great City of Cincinnati" -- "You must go to the Zoo" / "You must try our Chili" ;-).  And indeed through-out the rest of the film, there are references to Cincinnati's "great zoo" / "delicious chili" ;-)

Stone arrives at the hotel, pays the driver, goes over to  the guy the front desk, gets a room, is assigned a bell-hop (to help him with his one small carry-on bag ;-) to get to his room, arrives at said room, orders room service (and is reminded to "try our great chili" ;-).

EVERYTHING / EVERYBODY seems to be so much _the same_ and quite surprisingly / quite unsettlingly IT ALL IS / THEY ALL ARE ...  very much "THE SAME":  (1) All the people (including Stone) are CLAY PUPPETS who are _given the appearance of movement_ through stop motion animation (where between each frame, the clay puppets -- their appendages, eyes, facial expressions -- are moved / changed _ever so slightly_ so as to GIVE THE APPEARANCE of motion when viewed afterwards at a fairly rapid rate - 10 frames, 20 frames / second ;-).  Then (2) EVERYBODY who Stone meets even seems to SOUND THE SAME.  And they do, because _except for Stone himself_, THEY ARE ALL (male / female, young / old) VOICED BY THE SAME PERSON (Tom Noonan ;-).

What's going on here? ;-)

Well Chicago Tribune movie critic Michael Phillips notes in his review (above) that the name of the Hotel "The Fregoli" gives Viewers a big clue.  This is because there is a psychological condition called the Fregoli Delusion [wikip] in which a person comes to hold the "delusional belief that different people are in fact a single person who changes appearance or is in disguise."   So the (fictionalized) "customer service guru" Michael Stone finds himself in a world where EVERYBODY seems to be basically the same person.

What does he do?  Well this is IMHO the problematic aspect of the film: He chooses to "act out."

That is, Stone spends much of the film trying "desperately" to find SOME WOMAN who is "different" from everybody else TO SLEEP WITH HER.  Now, we're shown that he's married and even with a kid.  And he talks to them both on the phone after he arrives at the hotel (with both his wife and kid voiced again by the same Tom Noonan ;-) or ;-/ ).  He even looks up an old flame, who apparently lives in Cincinnati (and who he had probably bedded the last time (the only time...) that he had passed through the city).  She's again voiced by Tom Noonan.  And this time, she doesn't want to go to bed with him. 

Finally, by sheer accident, he finds ONE PERSON, a soft spoken Lisa Hesselmann (voiced by Jennifer Jason Leigh), a customer service rep from Akron, OH (basically just like Cincinnati only smaller, and _perhaps_ "sadder") who's come to Cincinnati with a coworker (voiced again by Tom Noonan) to hear Stone speak at the convention.  And LISA's "somewhat different" ... Indeed, she confesses to Stone that she's always thought of herself as "an anomaly" -- from which the name of the story derives: Anoma(Li)sa ;-)

BUT, (1) how "different" is Lisa really?  After all, she's a well-trained, professional(ized) "customer service rep" from anywhere-ville (Akron, OH) ...  and (2) even if Lisa really is "at least a little different (from the others)" IS "DIFFERENCE" ACTUALLY WHAT STONE "IS LOOKING FOR" ANYWAY?  After all, "difference" can be charming, but it can also be(come) annoying.

In any case, the two -- Stone and Anoma(Li)sa -- share probably the _saddest_ / most pathetic (adulterous) "sex scene" (after all, they are two "clay puppets" ...) in the history of movies.

Honestly, it was awful.  And it makes for a very interesting if very, very sad perspective on adultery.  One at least expects (hopes (!)) adultery to be "Exciting" [TM] ... Here it's presented as a really really sad, even desperate act between _two clay puppets_ filmed in stop-motion-animation _quite literally_ "just going through the motions" ;-) or :-(.

And this feeling of sad emptiness pervades the whole film: Stone seemed to believe that the whole world was filled with people who were pretty much all the same, YET (1) he worked in a field, INDEED WAS AN EXPERT IN A FIELD that HELPS MAKE THEM THAT WAY and (2) he wasn't really sure if he liked "difference" much anyway when he finally seemed to find it.

It becomes rather pathetic / sad ... Yet the film clearly seemed "to speak to" a good part of the rather young, (one guesses) probably "quite liberal" / "hipsterish" audience viewing the film when I saw it recently.  Sigh, again HOW SAD ...

I honestly left QUITE HAPPY that _my world_ "at the Parish" has _never_ been so flat ... If anything, we have "more characters" -- from young to old, from athletic, to "smart", to artistic (and everything in between) of truly a multitude of ethnicities / backgrounds -- than we can handle ;-).   But at least it's NEVER, EVER "BORING."

Sigh, the tragedy of being "too smart" / too jaded for one's own good ...


< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Queen [2014]

MPAA (UR would be R)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
Bollywood.com listing
FilmBeat.com listing

Hindustan Times (S. Kaushal) review
India Today (S. Dwivedi) review
Indian Express (K. Gupta) review
Times of India () review

Variety (D. Chute) review

Queen [2014] [IMDb] [BW] [FBt] (directed and screenplay cowritten by Vikas Bahl [IMDb] [BW] [FBt] along with Chaitally Parmar [IMDb] and Parveez Sheikh [IMDb] dialogue by Anvita Dutt [IMDb] [BW] [FBt] and Kangana Ranaut [IMDb]) is a highly acclaimed six 2015 Indian Filmfare Award winning film (the Filmfare Awards being widely regarded as India's version of the Oscars) which playfully turns a common Bollywood story-line on it head ;-).

The film (English subtitled) is available for streaming for a very reasonable price at Amazon Instant Video.

The story begins with 20-something Dehli girl, Rani (in Hindi meaning "Queen", played wonderfully in the film by Kangana Ranuat [IMDb] [BW] [FBt]) about to get married.  The whole extended family is coming into town for the big day.  All the dancing that one would expect to come _at the end_ of a Bollywood movie is taking place at the beginning, AND ... (really not much of a spoiler here, because there wouldn't be much of a film otherwise ;-) ... JUST AT THE LAST MOMENT, her fiance Vijay (played again impressively with appropriate "nose up, still young / doesn't really know yet what he's doing, arrogance" by Rajkummar Rao [IMDb] [FBt]) BREAKS OFF THE ENGAGEMENT.  Why??  Well, it's unclear, but mostly, apparently, because he's young / stupid / arrogant / spoiled ... basically because "he can" and still _honestly_ "doesn't understand" what this kind of a decision, this late in the preparations was going to do to his fiancee / her family. 

So there's young 20-something Rani, sitting in lovely, red hued, gold embroidered wedding sari amidst all those flower petals ... quietly weeping ... her own family not really knowing what to say or do ... And after several days of this, she decides ... TO GET UP, AND GO ON HER ALREADY PAID FOR HONEYMOON (to Paris / Europe) ON HER OWN ... (and of course, we cheer) and of course the rest of the movie follows ;-)

Of course many adventures await her, out there, "all on her own" for the first time:

Among the people she meets is Vijayalakshmi (played by Lisa Haydon [IMDb] [BW] [FBt]) a 1/2 Indian single mom, never married, her age in Paris, who Rani initially doesn't know how to understand.  And she is, of course, somewhat challenging, even to the film's Viewers, as Vijayalakshmi, even from her very conception (1/2 Indian / 1/2 European after all) seemed to violate "all the rules" that Rani had grown-up with.  And yet, Vijayalakshmi, despite pushing Rani (and the film's Viewers) at times a bit too much (there are a couple of scenes, not involving nudity -- there is none as this is an Indian film -- that are still needlessly, even stupidly, trashy) proves to be a pretty good guide for someone like Rany who's found herself "thrown 'by events' into the world."

And among the others that Rany meets is an Italian cook / restauranteur named Marcello (played by Marco Canadea [IMDb]) a few years older than she, so perhaps in his late 20s-early 30s, with whom she has comes to have some fairly lively discussions about ... food ;-) ... as both Indians and Italians are, how shall one say this, "quite proud" of their cuisines ;-).

All in all, it's a very nice story, about a young Rani / Queen, who perhaps initially had "different plans" for life, but like the "Mary" of the American Mary Tyler Moore Show [1970-77] [wikip] [IMDb], finds that she _can_ "make it on her own."

Very good job! ;-)


< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

The Assassin (orig. Nie yin niang) [2015]

MPAA (UR would be PG-13)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
AsianWiki listing*

Film Comment (R. Liang) interview director / the film's two key stars 

APUM.com (A. Saéz) review*
aVoir-aLire.com (G. Crespo) review*
RogerEbert.com (J. Monji) review
Sight & Sound (G. Andrew) review
Slant Magazine (J. Catalgo) review
South China Morning Post (E. Lee) review

The Assassin (orig. Nie yin niang) [2015] [IMDb] [AW] (directed and cowritten by Hsiao-Hsien Hou [IMDb] [AW] along with Cheng Ah [IMDb] and Hai-Meng Hsieh [IMDb] based on the short story by Yuan Xingpei [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is a top-quality Chinese / Taiwanese "period piece" / "martial arts film" if perhaps with (at least in English) a needlessly / quite unfortunately reductive title.  The film played recently at the 2015 (51st Annual) Chicago International Film Festival and has subsequently returned to Chicago to play week-long runs at the Music Box Theater and the Gene Siskel Film Center.

Set in the closing stages of the Tang Dynasty (618-907 C.E.) in/around the rebellious / already (then) de facto independent Weibo Province [en.wikip] [zh.wikip]* (_perhaps_ "kinda like Taiwan" today ...) the story centers on a 20-something woman named Nie Yianning (played quite excellently by Shu Qi [IMDb] [AW]) -- after whom the film, in Chinese, was named.  As per RogerEbert.com's reviewer Jana Monji (link above), Nie Yianning's name is indeed quite evocative - Yianning means "Secret Daughter" and Nie the surname means "Said in Whispers."

So... Nie Yianning was born and spent much of her early childhood in a tiny, thoroughly inconsequential village in rural Weibo Province and yet had been betrothed (as a child) to a distant (and richer) cousin of a similar age named Tian Ji'an (played by Chang Chen [IMDb] [AW]) back when the Tian family was _merely_ "quite rich."

However, when the Weibo Province made its play to break away from the rest of China, the Tian family became the breakaway Province's  de facto rulers and it became important for young Ji'an to marry someone "appropriate to [his family's] _new_ station."  So poor Yianning was left in the village while Ji'an married and had children with a "better-born" Lady (played by Zhou Yun [IMDb] [AW]) and began to live as "a little Emperor" (of the breakaway Province).

So what happens to girl like Nie Yianning, who was betrothed by her family to someone in childhood, who when the time came, chose to marry someone "richer"?  Well her family handed her over to a strange "princess turned wandering warrior nun" (IMHO played magnificently by Sheu Fang-yi [IMDb]) whose backstory would certainly justify its own film.  Well this "princess turned wandering warrior nun" trains Nie Yianning to be an exceptionally lethal assassin, wreaking "black clothed" (of course...) "dropping in out of the blue" vengeance on all sort of powerful (usually male) potentates in the region.   Nie Yianning silently "drops in" ("like the wind..."), slits the powerful evil man's throat, slips out ... and is done.  Another powerful "Evil Doer" meets his (one hopes ...) "just deserts."

And Nie Yianning is certainly "good" at what she does.  We watch her deflecting swords and arrows launched at her by terrified / awestruck guards of said powerful "Evil doers" as if they were mosquitoes or butterflies.

Well, after a short 5 min, b&w introduction introducing us to the awesomely well-trained / supremely "good at what she does" Nie Yianning, she's given by her "former princess turned wandering warrior nun" mentor her next mission.  Guess who she's asked to kill? ;-) ...

Can she do it?  From a purely "skills" POV, certainly _yes_.  There's NO place that the 20-something, "hurt as a little girl," "secret daughter, spoken of in whispers..." Nie Yianning can not penetrate.  BUT _can_ she do _this_ "job" (even if her assigned target _certainly_ "kinda deserved it")?

The rest of the story follows ... ;-)

 It makes for a quite compelling story, and the cinematography, both indoors and out, is once again simply exquisite.  Anyone who's ever enjoyed traditional chinese paintings with their impossibly steep fog strewn cliffs or beautiful silky interiors will certainly appreciate this film.

So good job folks, very good job.  I just wish that the film's English title didn't simply reduce Nie Yianning to "The Assassin."  Her name was far more evocative than that ...


* Foreign language webpages are most easily translated using Google's Chrome Browser. 

< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

The Hateful Eight [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller Seitz) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  

The Hateful Eight [2015] (written and directed by Quentin Tarantino) is, for better / worse, "a Quentin Tarantino movie" ;-).

Hence it is _needlessly long_ and is punctuated with brief moments of QT's signature (but still needlessly) extreme violence.  Seriously, it's obvious that Tarrentino thinks very highly of himself in forcing his viewers here to sit through this 2hr 45min movie that could have easily been an hour shorter and better for it.  As it is, the only humane way to watch this movie is on a widescreen TV at home.

YET, the characters, dialogues and even outdoor cinematography in this "Agatha Christie meets The Western" mash-up are often exceptional, outstanding even spectacular.  Again, seriously, by the end of the film Jennifer Jason Leigh's Daisy Domerge is _utterly unforgettable_, and Samuel Jackson's former Union soldier turned black bounty hunter Major Marquis Warren, Kurt Russell's more conventional "John Wayne-like" white bounty hunter named "John Ruth" and Walton Goggin's Chris Mannix a former "Confederate Marauder" turned future Sheriff of a "hole in the wall" Wyoming hamlet called "Red Rock", together comprising the first four characters introduced to us in the film, are all extremely well (and with very broad strokes quite amusingly) drawn. 

And the story, which by the end (not much of a spoiler alert here ...) doesn't exactly "leave a lot of people still standing" takes place in the context of a spectacular "Big Sky Wyoming winter blizzard" and then largely at a circa-1880s "Stage Coach Inn" in the middle of nowhere.

To say more would start to spoil the film.  My only advice is wait for it to come out on DVD / Blue Ray, because it's really too long to watch in a theater.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Daddy's Home [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
ChicagoTribune (K. Walsh) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review  


Daddy's Home [2015] (directed by Sean Anders, story by Brian Burns screenplay by Sean Anders, Brian Burns and John Morris) is not exactly a kids movie (though _very_ strictly speaking there's little that would particularly disturb or offend most kids).  However, it seems clear to me that the film's intended audience are the adults perhaps particularly those who find themselves in "blended family situations."

I write this because the film is actually about the insecurities of a step-parent, in the case at hand of Brad Whitaker (played actually quite well by Will Farrell).  He is the super-responsible if inevitably nerdy (seriously, he works for "Radio Panda - Satellite Radio's 24 hour continuous slow jazz" ;-) second husband of Sara (played by Linda Cardellini).  Her _really cool_ if truly never-at-home, doing truly "only God knows what" (again seriously, he seems to have been some sort of a gun-running 'copter pilot for the CIA/DEA) Harley-riding first husband was Dusty Mayron (played by Mark Wahlberg) who had proven, at least as a husband / father, truly _irresponsible_.

And Sara then had two precocious little kids, Dylan (played by Owen Vaccaro) and Megan (played by Scarlett Estevez), with said super-cool if never-ever-around first husband, who in as much as 6 or 4 year olds could "hate" a step-parent (because, well, Brad's not dad ...) ... do.

So ... six months after Sara and Brad got married  ... and after a two year period of having been totally "out of the picture," Dusty, first dad, real / biological dad, rides back into town ... and the rest of the movie ensues ;-).

Again, the film is more far more for adults than for kids and actually treats both Farrell's Brad and Wahlberg's Dusty as well as Sara (Cardellini's character) quite well.  And the film could give both college aged young adults and young married's much to talk about: Do you marry for dependability or for cool?  And yes, there's a choice being made there, and all choices do have consequences (their pluses and minuses).


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Concussion [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (K. Walsh) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review  

Concussion [2015] (screenplay and directed by Peter Landesman by based on the GQ article "Game Brain" [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Jeanne Marie Laskas [wikip] [GR] [GQ.com] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) tells the story of Nigerian-born Dr. Bennet Omalu (played with Oscar Nomination worthy sobriety in the film by Will Smith) who while working as a coroner for the Allegheny County, PA Medical Examiner's office performed autopsies on several former National Football League Players including Pittsburgh Steelers greats Mike Webster (played in the film by David Morse) and Justin_Strzelczyk (played in the film by Matthew Willig) who "died young" often by suicide in the years following their retirement from the NFL and discovered that they were suffering from early onset dementia, which he came to believe was the result of Chronic Traumatic Encelopathy (CTE), caused by "repetitive brain trauma" caused by concussions, and subconcussive hits to the head during the course of their decades long (from childhood, into their 30s) football careers.

Needless to say, Dr. Omalu's findings, which he published though the University of Pittsburgh in the medical journal Neurosurgery, 2005 July; 57(1):128-34, produced a good deal of blowback, as watching football is a beloved American pasttime, and he was finding this condition in retired, though still quite young (in their late 30s-40s) athletes in Pittsburgh (!) where Football has arguably been all-but a religion. 

His boss, then Allegheny County Medical Examiner Dr. Cyril Wecht (played in the film by Albert Brooks) though portrayed as supportive of Dr. Omalu throughout, noted to the puzzled-by-the-reaction Nigerian immigrant that: "You've found yourself taking on a national institution that owns a day of the week, the same day that the Church used to own, but now it [the NFL] does."   Still, as Dr. Omalu (presented as a practicing Catholic, incidentally) noted: "The truth is the truth," and while "Football Management" was certainly "running scared," preferring to just deny or at least minimize everything, Dr. Omalu was shown as getting increasing support from the players families, the players themselves, and even some of their trainers.  Notably former Pittsburgh Steelers' sports doctor / trainer Dr. Julian Bailes (played by Alec Baldwin) who had worked with the former players while they played for the Steelers is shown to take Dr. Omalu's side.

It all makes for a quite sobering film, and just as in the case of the story behind Spotlight [2015], which was largely about how it took a new editor, Jewish, from Miami, to expose the cover-up of pedophilia among Catholic priests in the Archdiocese of Boston, the current film also reminds Viewers of the value of "the Outsider," who can perhaps see more clearly (and act more courageously) than those closer to the situation / problem.

Again, a quite excellent and sobering story and one that one hopes that the NFL will be able to effectively deal with.  American Football is a beautiful game, but it should not have to kill its stars / heroes.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Point Break [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (1 Star)  RogerEbert.com (1 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (D+)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jenson) review
ChiTrib / WashPost  (S. Merry) review
RogerEbert.com (P. Sobczynski) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  

Point Break [2015] (directed by Ericson Core, screenplay by Kurt Wimmer, story by Rick King, W. Peter Iliff and Kurt Wimmer) is INSPIRED BY / A REMAKE OF of the CULT (SURFER) CLASSIC Point Break [1991] (directed by Kathryn Bigelow, screenplay by Peter Iliff, story by Rick King and W. Peter Iliff) only EXPANDED to take into account developments (an arguably AN EXPLOSION OF DEVELOPMENTS) in the realm of EXTREME SPORTS since the making of the original.

AND it is ALSO IMPORTANT / IMPERATIVE TO NOTE that Ericson Core the director of the current film was DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY for the first Fast and Furious [2001] movie.  Otherwise, one simply won't understand the nature / purpose of the current film.

AS IN THE 1991-ORIGINAL, THE PLOT _QUITE NOMINALLY_ FOLLOWS Johnny Utah (played in the original by Keanu Reeves, and in the current film by Luke Bracey) a (former "star college football athlete" in the original, and a former "extreme athlete" in the current film) who's since joined the FBI. He's tasked with infiltrating a group of ["surfers" in the original film, and "extreme athletes" in the current one] whose enjoyment of Nature (or of the "Rush" that comes from participating in Extreme Sports) _may have_ turned them into a particularly dangerous / nihilistic Band of Criminals -- living for the thrill, they appear utterly unafraid of death, hence the (folks at the Bureau) fear that they could become capable of anything...

... 'Cept it's more complicated than that.  The Band of Extreme Surfers (1991) / Extreme Athletes (2015) led by Bodhi (played in the original by Patrick Swayze and in the current film by Édgar Ramírez) are motivated _at least partly_ by an Eastern tinged / radical environmentalist ideology.  Hence they don't really commit random crimes.  Instead, they appear to commit "actions" (remaining at least partly _crimes_ ...) aimed, at least in part, to "restore balance to Nature" / "the Earth" / even "Society."   Hence, they rob Banks (in the first movie), Diamond Dealers, Gold Miners, etc (in the current one) and "restore" the ill-gotten goods of (evil) Corporate Interests "to the Earth" (or "to the Poor") "to whom they belong."

In both films, the young Johnny Utah, who is at least in part seduced by Bodhi's Eastern / "Zen" tinged radical environmentalist idealism, is partnered with an older, no nonsense, curmudgeon of an FBI agent named Pappas (played in the original by Gary Busey and in the current film by Ray Winstone) who finds the aspirational ideology supposedly behind Bodhi's band of criminals' crimes a bunch of nonsense -- "They (criminals) always have an explanation / an excuse for what they are doing" he tells the partly/largely "starry eyed" entranced Utah at one point in the current story.

And so much ensues ... Is Bodhi and his group just a bunch of adrenaline crazed nihilistic criminals?  Or are they actually on a (perhaps quite crazy / stupidly dangerous) path to Nirvana / Enlightenment?   Where will Johnny Utah's (and even the film-makers') loyalties finally go?

BUT HONESTLY FOLKS, ALL OF THIS IS REALLY BESIDE THE POINT.  The story, in as much as it exists, does so to allow the film-makers to offer Viewers of the film one truly spectacular sequence after another of death defying "extreme sports" stunts that could honestly serve as a "Stress Test" for us "mere mortals."  AND IT IS EXHILIRATING ;-).

MY CONCERN -- as a Catholic Priest -- is that it ALL becomes, at times, truly Nihilistic:

EARLY / UNNECESSARILY STUPID Death is shrugged off by Bodhi's band of extreme athletes as perhaps an inevitable passage to "Enlightenment."  Each time one of the group's members die, the others salute him with the phrase: "See you soon..."

I do think I understand "the thrill" of doing something that NO ONE (or VERY FEW) have done -- like SNOWBOARDING down a random rock-strewn cliff-face somewhere in the Alps (after being dropped off there by a helicopter), or WING-SUIT FLYING through a winding, narrow / deep canyon at speeds aproaching 160 mpg, or SURFING insanely high 100 foot waves that appear from time to time in random parts of the globe, or ROCK-CLIMBING (with no rope or gear) 3200 feet up the shear face of a cliff _beside a spectacular waterfall_, that also _randomly spews mist about_ (dampening everything around...).

It's all spectacular.  But then, if someone dies as a result, it just seems so hollow to respond by essentially saying: "Oops..." 

We're more than "Oops."  Our lives are more than "Oops." 

Something to remember.

Still, the film _is_ ONE HECK OF A RIDE ... ;-) ... and definitely worthy of lively discussion afterwards.

ADDENDUM -

A good part of the current film has the extreme athletes seeking to complete a list of challenges called "The Ozaki 8" after a supposed extreme athlete / Zen-ish mystic from Japan named, well..., Ozaki ;-).  The eight challenges were all in some way supposed to highlight one-or-another of the "forces of nature."  In the film, after completing each of these challenges, Bodhi's gang committed one or another of their "actions" (arguably crimes) to "give back to nature" something of what they / humanity was taking from it.

It turns out that there was no renowned extreme athlete named Ozaki, nor (then) his eight challenges until the making of this film (article by Michael R. Powell on the matter).  However, one gets a sense that the Eight Challenges (hopefully minus the crimes ...) will be with us from now on. 

What are The Ozaki Eight Challenges?  Well their names are:

1.Emerging Force
2.Birth of Sky
3.Awakening Earth
4.Life of Water
5.Life of Wind
6.Life of Ice
7.Master of Six Lives
8.Act of Ultimate Trust.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>
 

Carol [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB ()  ChicagoTribune (4 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars w. parental advisement / warning)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review  

Perhaps the most important thing to know about Carol [2015] (directed by Todd Haynes, screenplay by Phyllis Nagy), aside from (1) it being an appropriately R-rated film (there is some nudity in the film and it is a lesbian love story after all, if by now a _quite classic_ even _somewhat dated_ one, so parents of teens would want to know that and have some discretion / control over whether or not / how to let their older teens to see it) and (2) the film being quite good / excellent, is that (3) it is based on a novel, The Price of Salt (1952) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn], by Patricia Highsmith [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb].

Now why should it be significant that the film is based on a novel by this particular novelist?  Well, Patricia Highsmith [wikip] was (1) a fairly significant / compelling American writer of the 1950s with _many_ of her works adapted for the screen, including two iconic films Strangers on a Train [1951] the classic suspense thriller by Alfred Hitchock, and the already homosexually themed The Talented Mr. Ripley [1999] starring Matt Damon in the title role, and (2) while briefly (and quite unhappily) married (to a man), Patricia Highsmith was a Lesbian.

To some extent, that brief and unhappy marriage (to a man) was the inspiration for the story recounted in her novel, The Price of Salt (1952) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] adapted for the screen here under the title Carol [2015] who was the story's central character.  Basically fair is fair.  Various works by Highsmith have been previously adapted to the screen, SO _why not_ the work which MOST CLOSELY EXPRESSED who SHE ACTUALLY WAS?  A Lesbian.

And so it is, set in the early 1950s, this film is about a divorcing late-30 / early 40-something socialite named Carol Aird (played in the film excellently / quite credibly for the time by Cate Blanchett) living in upper middle-class suburban New Jersey, who after a chance exchange in a Manhattan department store with a much younger, still starry-eyed / learning-to-make-her-way-in-the-world early 20-something clerk at the cash register named Therese Belive(t / k) (played quite wonderfully / credibly by Rooney Mara) have an affair together.

Why?  /  How?  Well ... Carol's marriage to Harge Aird (played in the film again quite well by Kyle Chandler) was falling apart _precisely_ because SHE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN HIM.  It was _not_ as if she HASN'T TRIED (they had a young daughter played in the film by Seidy and Kk Heim) But SHE'S A LESBIAN.  And Therese (the confusion about the last letter of her last name stemming from the fact that she was of Czech descent where her last name would have ended with a "k" but American immigration officials presumably first heard it as if the last name were French and thus ended name with a "t" -- Readers note here that _I'm_ of Czech descent ;-) ALSO had a boyfriend, Richard (played by Jack Lacy).  BUT THERESE WAS _ALSO_ FINDING that SHE WAS NOT PARTICULARLY ATTRACTED TO HIM EITHER.  She still didn't really understand WHY she was not particularly attracted to him (or to other men for that matter) but she did find Carol to be interesting / increasingly attractive.

And so there it is, and it so happens that the two Carol and Therese take together one of the _saddest_ roadtrips in American cinematic / folk history -- from New York "west" toward Chicago, ending up in Iowa, "in the winter" / "during Christmas time," during which, obviously "much ensues."

A couple of observations to make here:

(1) No matter what one may think of homosexuality / lesbianism (and let's face it, I'm writing this as a Catholic blog, so a fair number of Readers here will be doing so continuing to believe that as per continuing Church Teaching homosexuality is "an intrinsically disordered condition") THE STORY HERE, originally written by a woman, Patricia Highsmith, who was a lesbian who _even tried to become straight_ (and _failed_ / _gave up_) is about TWO WOMEN WHO JUST _WEREN'T_ INTO MEN.  IT IS WHAT IT IS ... data / experience _do count_ even in theological reflection ...

(2) By today's standards, A BIGGER ISSUE with regards to the relationship between Carol and Therese would not be its homosexual/lesbian nature BUT THE AGE DIFFERENCE.  Let's face it, a story about a significantly older man (in his 40s) "awakening the sexual desires" of a "naive 20 year old woman" WOULD BE ROUNDLY CONDEMNED AS BEING _VERY CREEPY_.  So why would it be somehow "okay" for a 40-ish woman to arguably _groom_ a naivish 20-something woman into a lesbian affair?  Again, I'd think "fair is fair" and if one kind of relationship is to be taken as INHERENTLY CREEPY and arguably ABUSIVE that the other kind would be considered inherently creepy / arguably abusive as well.

And (3) an observation about the "very sad road trip" from New York, past Chicago toward Iowa IN THE WINTER.  This is the THIRD TIME in almost as many years, that I've seen a similar 50s-era road trip being made -- On The Road [2012] (the film adaptation of Jack Karouak's 1950s-era classic); Inside Llewyn Davis [2013] (by today's Coen Brothers) and now the current film (based on a novel written by a Karouak contemporary...).  I would have TO ASK the question, WHY?

In part, no doubt, there's a dramatic consideration, certainly in the case of Inside Llewyn Davis [2013] and the current film, where in both cases, the "road trip" is _intentionally_ presented as "a sad one" (taking place in a _cold, seemingly uncaring / hostile world_).

HOWEVER, I'd also suggest that THIS WAS SIMPLY THE REALITY BEFORE THE 1960s CIVIL RIGHTS ERA.  Northerners, generally DIDN'T LIKE "GOING SOUTH" (or if they went, they went STRAIGHT TO FLORIDA - Miami / Key West and on to Havana) PRECISELY BECAUSE of a NORTHERN DISCOMFORT WITH THE DEEP SOUTH'S THEN ENTRENCHED _RACISM_ / GENERALIZED CLOSED-MINDED BIGOTRY.  Indeed, in the case of the story here, one would suppose that NOTHING (but pain...) _could possibly await_ a 1950s era lesbian couple "heading South" ... so AS (physically and even emotionally) COLD AS IT WAS IN THE NORTH, it was arguably BETTER than "down south." 

Anyway, I found the film fascinating and challenging throughout and one that certainly college aged and above audiences would appreciate and find much, much to talk about afterwards.  Good job!


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Joy [2015]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (4+ Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  


Joy [2015] (directed and screenplay by David O. Russell, story in part by Annie Mumolo) continues a remarkable run of generally quite _excellent_ blue collar-ish / "regular people" oriented films by the writer / director - The Fighter [2010] (4 Stars), Silver Linings Playbook [2012] (2 1/2 Stars), American Hustle [2013] (3 1/2 Stars).  Indeed, I'd put this film as his best yet.

Why do I prefer this one over the others?  I believe that this is still _the least_ "exotic" of Russell's "studies" of the the trials / tribulations of regular people.  The Fighter [2010] was still about boxing and though life is often a fight / challenge, very few people actually box for a living.  The Silver Linings Playbook [2012] may have been about some quite ordinary people but several in the film were struggling with some rather particular (and certainly as presented, rather exotic) psychological conditions.  American Hustle [2013] was about a couple of fairly low key "con artists," and while most people may occasionally "flirt in their minds with the darkside," very few are actual "con artists."

The current film, Joy [2015], is about Joy Mongano (played beautifully by Jennifer Lawrence) a woman from suburban Long Island, who while certainly quite smart (she was the valedictorian of her high school class, but then there are many high schools, all over the country, each with a valedictorian, best student, each year) would have appeared to any of us as an otherwise utterly unremarkable person ... 'CEPT ... she made her mark on the world by ... reinventing _the mop_  ;-).  More precisely, she invented a simple self-wringing "miracle mop" with a "when you're done, just throw it in the wash" mop-head ;-).

Many of the reviewers that I list above expressed the concern: Can a movie about a quite average young woman from a quite unremarkable family who "reinvented _the mop_" POSSIBLY be "compelling"?

 Well folks, IMHO what she went through _in her family_ with her initial business contacts, etc, MADE FOR A SURPRISING yet CERTAINLY COMPELLING STORY ;-)

For honestly, HOW does one "make a mop" -- even a prototype -- and then proceed to make them on a larger, approaching "industrial scale"?  Even the simplest mop would need 3-4 parts -- a pole, a mophead, a means to attach the mop-head to the pole.  Those parts have to be bought / made and assembled. Then Joy's "miracle mop" was a bit more complicated than the "simplest mop."   For this basic mop to become "self wringable" would require additional parts -- at least some kind of spring, some kind of lever as well as attachment devices / fasteners to them (so maybe 10 or as many as 15 parts, some needing to be specially molded / made).  How does one go about getting those parts made / assembled?  Finally, while a "self-wringable miracle mop" may seem like a great idea, "somebody, somewhere" could have come up with the idea already and if not then if the product proved a success, "somebody, somewhere" or perhaps a fair amount of "somebodies, somewhere" would want to steal the idea to make "knockoffs."

Okay Readers, you're a quite average person like Joy from a quite average family with its inevitable "assortment of characters" --  Joy's (divorced) parents Rudy and Terry (played by Robert De Niro and Virginia Madsen); Rudy's new-to-the-scene (and surprisingly moneyed) widowed girlfriend Trudy (played marvelously by Isabella Rossellini); Joy's grandmother Mimi (played by Diane Ladd) who actually narrates good parts of the story; Joy's own ex-husband Tony (played by Édgar Ramírez); her best friend since childhood Jackie (played by Dascha Polanco) and Joy's half-sister Peggy (played by Elizabeth Röhm) -- all trying to be (kinda) helpful, while (some) being naturally _kinda jealous_, and very few actually having a clue, with certainly no one being able to easily articulate what to do.

So the story involves _a lot_ of blind "flailing around" even after Joy gets a "shot in the dark" meeting (thanks to a quite random lead from her still nice guy ex-husband Tony) with QVC cable channel executive Neil Walker (played by Bradley Cooper) who gives her product a shot on his Home Shopping(like) Network.  And even with the moderate success that follows, it becomes clear that almost _everybody_ (and I mean everybody from family (naturally), to seemingly random but both well-hidden / well-placed mob-like characters) wanted a piece of her and her newly earned / hard earned money.

Indeed, Joy becomes the Ulysses of "entrepreneur fables."  It becomes a _compelling_ (you're right there beside her, cheering her on) story about HER and ... _her mop_ ;-)

And one's left honestly wondering: Oh my! if it's THIS HARD to (1) come up with, (2) manufacture, (3) sell and finally (4) DEFEND something as _simple_ as a "self-wringing mop" HOW DOES ANYTHING GET MADE?? ;-)

Beyond that, what makes the story remarkable for a blog like this is that DESPITE "the cast of characters at home" and DESPITE A LOT OF FRUSTRATION / FLAILING AROUND and even SHAKE-DOWNS and (arguably) BETRAYALS Joy _remains_ NICE, yes TOUGH at times but still fundamentally NICE to that "cast of characters at home."

So this is just a LOVELY, LOVELY STORY ... DESERVING _A LOT_ OF PRAISE.

So good job folks!  Very, very good job!


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Bajirao Mastani [2015]

MPAA (UR would be PG-13)  Fr. Dennis (4+ Stars)

IMDb listing
FilmiBeat.com listing

FilmiBeat.com (S. Srivastava) review
Hindustan Times (S. Kaushal) review
India Today (A. Bhattacharya) review
Indian Express (S. Gupta) review
The Hindu (N. Joshi) review
Times of India (S.M. Das) review

Bajirao Mastani [2015] [IMDb] [FBt] (story and directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali [IMDb] [FBt], screenplay by Prakash Kapadia [IMDb]) is a super-crisp / visually SPECTACULAR (both indoors and out) Indian Historical Epic based on the life and TWO GREAT LOVES of the 18th century Indian general Bajirao I (played in the film with appropriate serious awesomeness by Ranveer Singh [IMDb] [FBt]).

Bajirao was the Peshwa (prime minister) to Shahu (played in the film by Mahesh Manjrekar [IMDb]) the fourth Chhatrapati (Emperor) of the Hindu Maratha Empire in central India which existed at the time (from the mid-17th century to the early 19th century) as a rival to the Muslim dominated Mughal Empire to the north.  He was noted / celebrated as having fought _and won_ 40 consecutive battles (!), mostly against the Mughal Empire and its allies.

However, while there are a couple of truly spectacular, LOTR-worthy, battle scenes portrayed in the film, the story is really about Bajirao's complicated (and for a Westerner / Christian outsider like me) INHERENTLY _fascinating_ relationship with his two wives Kashibai (played by Priyanka Chopra [IMDb] [FBt]) and Mastani (played by Deepika Padukone [IMDb] [FBt]).

Now in the East, regardless of religion (Hindu/Buddhist, Parsi/Zoroastran, Muslim even Biblical Jewish) it was never deemed a problem for a powerful man to have multiple wives (assuming that the he could afford to keep them).  However, as becomes Epic Romance/Story-worth(li)y obvious, a "multiple wives" arrangement would almost certainly be "complicated."  And so it was here ...

Kashi(bai) was Bajirao's FIRST wife.  Further, Bajirao was NOT "royalty."   So Kashi was in a sense a "hometown girl" and Bajirao's "first love."  BUT after Bajirao becomes Peshwa (and top general) to his Emperor, _he meets_ Mastani a _warrior-princess_ from a neighboring state, and well, ... SHE WAS AWESOME.  So "out there," "AT WAR," he takes her as his second wife.  And it _even seemed_ "like a good deal" (to him...) for his kingdom, as it helped seal an alliance between Mastani's father's other/lesser state and Maratha Empire. So what could go wrong...?

And, of course, THAT's the rest of the movie... ;-)

Let's just say that even in the best of circumstances, "coming home with a second wife," EVEN IF "she was AWESOME" (and perhaps _particularly_ if SHE WAS AWESOME ;-) would be a rather "delicate" affair.  Add to this (and something that Bajirao may not have been initially fully aware of) Mastani was half Muslim (by her mother's side) AND the Maratha Empire was a _radically_ ANTI-Muslim Hindu state.  Bajirao was nominally Hindu, his whole family was Hindu, Kashi his first wife was Hindu, THE EMPEROR was Hindu, and WHO WERE THEY MOSTLY FIGHTING? ... the Mughal Empire which was RULED BY MUSLIMS.

And yet, here was Mastani who was both AWESOME, _and_ as the story plays out, proving herself to be KIND.

What a remarkable, and thoroughly complicated story and a SPECTACULARLY WELL MADE FILM, _certainly_ one of the best I've seen this year.


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>