Friday, August 24, 2018

Papillon [2018]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
Los Angeles Times (M. Rechtshaffen) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub () review


Papillon [2018] (directed by Michael Noer, screenplay by Aaron Guzikowski based on 1973 screenplay [wikip] [IMDb] by Dalton Trumbo [2015 film] [wikip] [IMDb] and Lorenzo Semple, Jr based on the books Papillon [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] and Banco [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Henri Charrière [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is another remake, here of an already dark (if largely true) French "Devil's Island" prison tale, that no one was really clamoring for.

I suppose prison and prison break-out films, probably the best of which in the United States in my lifetime was the Stephen King based film The Shawshank Redemption [1994], like other "genre films" speak to us on a deeper subconscious level.  If we feel trapped, in need of breaking free from something, but to do so would be very "complicated," then I suspect these kind of stories would be appealing.  And if we feel that we live in a time that feels more oppressive than others that we've lived through, then the metaphor of "Prison" and its attendant "Darkness" would again "speak to us" in a way that in happier times it would not.

And this film as well as its 1973 antecedent is _plenty dark_.   The current film begins by reminding us that its chief protagonist Henri 'PapillonCharrière (played in the current film by Charlie Hunnam) was no saint.  Indeed, he was safe-cracking hoodlum tied-up in the Paris underworld of the early 1930s. 

But like perhaps the Marvel Comics "Deadpool," he wasn't all bad.  He too had a girlfriend who loved him.  But when one "plays tag with the Devil" one can get burned.  And so it was, perhaps out of petty spite, perhaps because of simple convenience, his immediate (mob) boss had him framed for the murder of an annoying henchman he had to dispose of.  So said boss had the henchman killed and ... then had the police pick up Charrière for the crime.

'Cept this was France of the 1930s, a France that couldn't agree on much of anything except ... if you turned out to be a criminal you _really_ deserved to be punished: Convicted felons were put on prison ships and transported across the Atlantic to ... penal colonies along the alligator / malaria infested jungle coast of French Guiana ... basically to die.  Even after finishing their _pointless_ but extremely _hard labor_ sentences, former inmates were expected _to stay_ there in French Guiana for a term as long as their original sentence, doing ... exactly what?  Most inmates apparently didn't live that long to find out.  Apparently 40% of the inmates sent to French Guiana died in their first year.

So ... as I was saying, this was _not_ a cheerful story.  And one immediately could understand why inmates would really, really want to escape, and go to extra-ordinary lengths to keep hidden the few valuables that they had.  The current version of the film was more explicit about this than the 1973 version was (though for its time, the 1973 version, was plenty dark as well).

Repeatedly, I was saying to myself "Okay, this is probably where I'd just hang myself, or plunge myself in front of an alligator hoping to quickly die." 

And then I remembered that actually the Old Testament Joseph had found HIMSELF in prison, betrayed first by his brothers and sold into slavery, then denounced falsely by his Egyptian slave-owner's wife and ... found himself at his lowest point in the Darkness of an ancient Egyptian Dungeon with ONLY "his dreams" to keep him company AND ... it turned out that it was through his (there in the Dungeon) _learned ability_ to "interpret dreams" that eventually got him out of that Dungeon, all the way up to Pharoah's court and into a position where he could actually save his brothers [Genesis 37, 39-].  And both the nation of Israel and Christianity exist today because this man, who NO ONE would have blamed if he "just gave up," _chose to continue to live / try_ anyway.

So I reminded myself that while we're "here" in this life we really should never give up, that despite everything God has a purpose for what happens (and that all will ultimately turn out okay, if not in this life then in the next).  Indeed, there's a _far happier_ passage in the Book of Acts, in which Saints Paul and Barnabas were locked-up in a Dungeon as well, but with the presence of the Holy Spirit in their hearts, even in the Darkness of Midnight there, they literally "Could not Keep from Singing" [Acts 16:16-40] ;-).

In any case, the story of Henri Charrière aka Papillon (Butterfly) is a dark if compelling one.  And I suppose the Viewer is reminded that through the French would consider themselves along with us in the United States to be the paragons of freedom-loving democrats -- we with our "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness," they with their "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité" -- the French, like us (think Guantanamo or how we treat the homeless people in our country), could also be brutally cruel to people they decided not to like or respect.  Still Henri Charrière aka Papillon (Butterfly) chose not to give up.

I'm glad that the prison system of Devil's Island is itself now ... dead, lying on the ash-heap of history.


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! :-) >>

Sunday, August 5, 2018

Christopher Robin [2018]

MPAA (PG)  CNS/USCCB (A-II)  RogerEbert.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (O. Henderson) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review


Christopher Robin [2018] (directed by Marc Forster, screenplay by Alex Ross Perry, Tom McCarthy and Allison Schroeder, story by Greg Brooker and Mark Steven Johnson based on the characters from the Winnie the Pooh books [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by A.A. Milne [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb] and Ernest Shepard [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is a lovely family oriented film that offers parents and children the opportunity to discover / rediscover these characters that like the once a boy (in the original stories) now, in the current film, an adult Christopher Robin (played by an excellently casted Ewan McGregor), many of us may have "left behind" for years.

For at the beginning of the current story the 8 year old Christopher Robin leaves the magical "Hundred Acre Wood" behind his family's cottage in Sussex, England, to (1) go off to boarding school, (2) grow-up, (3) go to War, (4) settle down after the War,  (5) get married to a lovely and kind woman named Evelyn (played by Hayley Atwell) with whom (6) he had a lovely 8 year old daughter named Maddie (played by Bronte Carmichael), and (7) get a really boring job as an accountant "in the efficiency department" of a luggage (baggage...) company to support this grown-up and, let's face it, really really boring life.  What happened?

Well it turns out that Winnie the Pooh (voiced by Jim Cummings), the once imaginative 8 year old Christopher Robin's talking teddy bear, ALSO "woke-up" one dreary morning in that once magical "Hundred Acre Wood" to find that all of his friends Eeyore (voiced by Brad Garrett), Piglet (voiced by Nick Mohammed), Tigger (voiced by Jim Cummings), Kanga (voiced by Sophie Okonedo), etc, had disappeared.  So ... in his disarming simple mindedness, he, Winnie the Pooh, decides that he's going to look for Christopher Robin because, "Christopher Robin would know what to do..."

Call it honestly a children's, a "Winnie the Pooh" version of the Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, Matt Damon WW II classic Saving Private Ryan [1998], because _so lost_ had Christopher Robin become in life that he didn't even know how lost he was: When the adult, thoroughly responsible but by now all but soul-dead, Christopher Robin first encountered Winnie the "teddy bear" of his childhood after all those years, he honestly didn't know what to do.  And he didn't understand why this talking teddy bear, who came back for him at this point in his life would, passing by a vendor of helium balloons, would _so want_ a balloon: "Why do you want that balloon so much?" the approaching middle age Christopher Robin growls at his childhood teddy bear.  And Winnie the Pooh answers him, "Because it makes me happy."

OMG ... the rest of the movie unspools from there.

We don't need 10 balloons, much less a 100 balloons.  But an _occasional_ simple / cheerful "balloon" can indeed ... help make us feel _happy_ ;-)

Excellent point / story!


<< 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! :-) >>

Sunday, July 29, 2018

Won't You Be My Neighbor? [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
Los Angeles Times (K. Turan) review
RogerEbert.com (O. Henderson) review
AVClub (N. Murray) review


Won't You Be My Neighbor? [2018] (directed by Morgan Neville) is a perhaps tragically timely, nostalgic documentery about a man, Fred Rogers [wikip] [IMDb], a 1950s-70s era Presbyterian Minister who was the creator and host of the iconic (and supremely _gentle_) PBS television program Mister Rogers' Neighborhood [1968-2001] [wikip] [IMDB].

Yet the film _could be more_ than just said "tragically timely nostalgic remembrance of a man" who in the context of the extraordinary harshness of contemporary American culture could seem like an extraterrestrial.

We could, for instance, choose to remember -- as this film noted -- that as gentle as Fred Rogers was in his demeanor (and yes, his family and friends emphatically insisted that he was exactly the same in his gentleness in his private life as in his public persona) he was no wilting flower or doormat:

Readers, consider simply that his program WHICH SOUGHT TO HELP _CHILDREN_ better comprehend the world around them BEGAN in EXACTLY THE SAME YEAR and DURING EXACTLY THE SAME MONTHS as the MLK and RFK assassinations.  One of the archival clips presented in this documentary showed one of Mr. Roger's puppet characters asking him: "What's an assassination?"  OMG, how poignantly sad.

Then, at a time when MILLIONS OF (WHITE) AMERICAN FAMILIES were still _sincerely_ if _utterly misguidedly_ asking themselves whether people of different races should share public spaces -- and more to the point, whether their kids should share public swimming pools with other kids of other races -- GENTLE MISTER ROGERS put this question UTTERLY TO BED with a remarkable scene:

One of the perennial characters on his program (about a neighborhood after all) was an African American beat cop named Officer Clemons (played by Francois Clemons).  So on one supposedly "very hot summer day" GENTLE MISTER ROGERS told the children of his audience that since it was so hot, he was just going sit down in his chair on the front lawn of his house and put his feet into a nice pool of cool water.  Officer Clemons came by and GENTLE MISTER ROGER asked him: "Hey Officer Clemons, it's such a hot day and you've spent so much time walking around all day.  Would you like to take off your shoes and socks and rest your tired feet with me in my nice little pool of water?"  Officer Clemons took off his shoes and socks, AND THERE ON NATIONAL TV, the feet of GENTLE MISTER ROGERS (White) and Francois Clemons (African American) shared the comfort of a nice little cool pool of water TOGETHER.  How could segregation of public swimming pools possibly continue thereafter?

What a lovely gentle example of kindness and universal community for a time -- today -- when Latin American children are being ripped from their parents at our border and (overwhelmingly white) panels are then judging whether the parents are "worthy" of getting their children back.

And yet GENTLE MISTER ROGERS lived at a time when "uppity black families" could still stand to have crosses burned in their front yards as well.

Honestly, in the best of Catholic traditions, "Gentle Mister Rogers, pray for us."


<< 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! :-) >>

Saturday, July 28, 2018

Mission Impossible: Fallout [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  RogerEbert.com (4 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDB listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (K. Turan) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review


Mission Impossible: Fallout [2018] (written and directed by Christopher McQuarrie based on the Television Series [Wikip] [IMDB] by Bruce Geller) delivers, IN SPADES, what it promises -- a simultaneously likable / engaging "buddy movie" (about a team of super-super-deep-deep-cover spies ;-) yet also a thoroughly heart-pounding, _often_ literally _cliff hanging_, spectacularly convoluted thriller that keeps one guessing _on multiple levels_ until the very end. 

Indeed, the combination of the "buddy movie" with a "conspiracy movie" -- a story about trust in the midst of so many reasons to mistrust -- is fascinating even on the conceptual level.  Yet, these ideas are fleshed out in the characters and the plot of this story / film series.

Near the beginning of the story, super-secret spy Ethan Hunt (played by Tom Cruise) is given "the Mission should [he] choose to accept it" of recovering plutonium, enough for three nuclear bombs, that had gone missing (from some Russian base somewhere near Kamchatka), that, we're told, is being coveted by a Norwegian unibomber-like nuclear scientist named Nils Debruuk (played by Kristoffer Joner) who had just written a radically anti-religious manifesto and in league with jailed, anarcho-terrorist -- Solomon Lane (played by Sean Harris) the principle super-villain from a previous installment in the MI film series -- organized a shadowy group of "18 Apostles" dedicated to inflict massive, nuclear, harm on humanity "to bring about peace." 

"Choose to accept this mission?"  Of course Ethan's gonna accept this mission.  This is _exactly_ why he and his super-secret agent unit (the IMF or Impossible Missions Force) exists.  And it initially seemed easy.  Ethan and his team -- Benji Dunn (played by Simon Pegg) and Luther Stickwell (played by Ving Rhames) -- set-up a "sting operation" in Berlin to _buy_ the plutonium.  Well "the exchange" goes south and Ethan finds himself with the choice of EITHER sacrificing his team members OR recovering the three balls of plutonium in essentially a carry-on bag-sized suitcase.  He _chooses_ to save the lives of his team members and the nuclear arms traders are able to flee with their plutonium to try to sell it to someone else -- perhaps Debruuk/Lane and their "Apostles.

Needless to say, CIA Chief Erica Sloan (played wonderfully with icy seriousness by Angela Bassett) -- the IMF is but one, if super-secret, group operating under the overall umbrella of the CIA -- is quite appalled at Ethan's somewhat surprising humanity.   IMF head Alan Huntley (played by Alec Baldwin) tries to defend Hunt's actions to Sloan: "But Hunt's two other agents would have been lost."  She replies: "But recovering the plutonium was the job.  In saving his two friends he put millions at risk."  But Alan Huntley is so impressed by Hunt's choice that he tells him, "Precisely because you weren't willing to sacrifice even one person to save those millions, you are the best possible person to send out to recover that plutonium."

The rest of the story -- which of course involves coming up with a new plan to recover that plutonium -- ensues...  And it becomes, of course, ONE WILD RIDE, taking us to Paris, to London, and finally to the mountains of the Indian controlled part Kashmir. 

The closing sequence which is 40 HEART-THUMPING MINUTES LONG is spectacularly complex and leaves the Viewer gasping: "Well they don't call these stories 'Mission Impossible' for nothing" ;-)

And yet we witness a super-secret agent who ... cares.

AWESOME FILM !


<< 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! :-) >>


Sunday, July 22, 2018

Sorry to Bother You [2018]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review


Sorry to Bother You [2018] (written and directed by Boots Riley) is a fun African-American centric Kafkaesque near-future dystopian scifi flick in which Cassius Green (played wonderfully in mildly grifter - hey, I'm just trying to stay afloat / eke-out a living - fashion by Lakeith Stanfield) finds himself in a way, way, way more bizarre "this is how the world works" conspiracy than he could imagine.

The story begins with Cassius at a job interview in which he gets busted in an awfully embarrassing way for padding his resume -- "Cassius, do you know WHY I know that you never ever got 'employee of the month' nor even worked as a bank teller at that Oakland branch that you put in your resume?  BECAUSE I WAS THE MANAGER THERE at the time ;-) -- "HS, am I horribly busted!" -- But before you get a cardiac here son, as many lies as you've put on that resume of yours, you've taught me the only two things I know to give you this (entry level telemarketing) job; (1) You show initiative ;-), and (2) you can read.  THAT'S ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW to be a telemarketer: STAY ON-SCRIPT and FIND A WAY to make it sell.  That's all you need to know."

Yea!  Cassius is now on his way to finally be able to pay rent to his uncle for the two car garage which he and his ever big-earring-always-with-a-message-wearing girlfriend named Detroit (played by Tessa Thompson) have called "home" ;-).

Ah yes, but how to you sell stuff -- on the phone -- that people don't really need and at times can't really afford?  Well after a few days of - "OMG I'm going to lose this job again" - he's told by an older / more experienced coworker (played by Danny Glover) "Cassius, you're going to have to find your 'white voice.'"  "WT... does that mean?"  "No, not a white, white voice, but the voice that tells the person on the other end of the line 'You know, I don't need to make this sale, after I finish talking to you, I'm taking the rest of the day off to take my Ferrari for some detailing again.  I'm not calling you because I need you, I'm calling you today because you need me, and you need this product that I'm offering you.'"  

Cassius figures it out ... and ... soon he's becomes one of the company's best sellers, indeed being "bumped up" to its "Diamond Sellers" level.  Those who "make this level: get special perks -- a special gold plated elevator, activated by an insanely long "security code," that literally takes him to said "new level."

But it's there of course, that he finds that things are _far, far, far weirder_ than he even would have imagined.  But does he "play the game?"  Or say something?  And who would actually even believe him if he did?

A FUN and GREAT MOVIE that would have made Kafka of "The Castle" fame proud ;-)



<< 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! :-) >>

Eighth Grade [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB ()  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B+)  Fr. Dennis (4+ Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review


Eighth Grade [2018] (screenplay and directed by Bo Burnham) is one of those small summer, often enough teenage / young adult angst filled, indie films that like Safety Not Guaranteed [2012], The Way, Way Back [2013], the "Before" series (Before Sunrise [1995], Before Sunset [2004] and Before Midnight [2013]) and Boyhood [2014] reminds a film lover like me _why_ I love films so much.

Yes, thanks to Terry Gross of NPR's Fresh AirI already knew a little about this film before I went to see it here at the Landmark Theater in Los Angeles, but I WAS COMPLETELY SOLD in the film's first thirty seconds, as one of the most jaw-droppingly sincere -- OMG this _couldn't possibly_ have been simply "read from a script" -- scenes that I've ever witnessed played.  It featured Kayla (played with dead-on sincerity throughout by Elsie Fisher), a thoroughly average, stumbling, a smattering of pimples and all, eighth grader video-recording herself for her little Vlog (with all of five subscribers ;-) on her entry's decided theme of the day -- "Confidence."   Once again, OMG, one just wanted to give her a hug.

And so the story went ... Kayla's just a thoroughly _normal_ middle school kid just about to finish eighth grade, young -- again, only in eight grade -- but already realizing that her life's not going to be what younger self (when she was in 6th grade (!) ...) thought it was going to be.  And yet, of course, that wasn't necessarily awful: there was always someone who'd drop into her life, even if for a moment, including not the least her single parent dad (played also with appropriate "OMG this parenting is sooo much, much harder / more complicated than I ever could have imagined but I've got keep smiling" honesty by Josh Hamilton) that helps her make it through.

The performances here are simply remarkable and the film's destined to be one of the best "teen age angst films" since The Breakfast Club [1985].  Indeed it may make that previous film (that I grew up on) feel positively like kitsch.

A simply outstanding 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! :-) >>

Friday, July 20, 2018

Mamma Mia! Here We go Again [2018]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (C. Lemire) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review


Mamma Mia! Here We go Again [2018] (directed and screenplay by Ol Parker, story by Richard Curtis, Ol Parker and Catherine Johnson, originally conceived by Judy Craymer, based on the original musical by Catherine Johnson) continues the fun if certainly on-one-level morally questionable ABBA-based [wikip] [Amzn] story of "Donna" (played here wonderfully in her youth by Lily James and then in her middle-to-older age by Meryl Streep) who, back the late-1970s, had found herself pregnant with a daughter she later named "Sophie" (played in the near present by Amanda Seyfried, hence about 30) with the father being as many as three different men "Sam, Bill and Harry" (played in the current film in their youth by Jeremy Irvine, Josh Dylan and Hugh Skinner respectively and in their middle-to-older age by Pierce BrosnanStellan Skarsgård and Colin Firth). 

Yes, it's all kinda scandalous, and yet, for better-or-for-worse kinda possible as it "all happened" back in the hedonistic late 1970s.

That said, as I would say about the Meryl Streep starring first film (made in 2008 and based on the already decade-long popular ABBA based musical) HOW GOOD IT IS TO SEE SWEDES  _smiling_ perhaps "messing around sexually" BUT SMILING rather than wondering if they should be "goose stepping" like their previously similarly sexually repressed German cousins to the south.  Yes, it's a false choice, but "free love" IS SO MUCH BETTER (and literally more LIFE GIVING) than OPPRESSION and WAR.

For as nominally immoral as this story is IT'S SO MUCH BETTER (and again LIFE-GIVING) than ANYTHING that Franco, Pinochet or Milosevic could offer or for that matter what Putin / Trump would offer today -- though Putin / Trump and Berlusconi before them (Italy's always seemed to be a "trend-setter" when it comes to Fascism...) have now proven that one CAN be _both_ RANDY and FASCIST at the same time.   Sigh ...

Still I will definitely say that FASCISM -- ripping children by the thousands from their shocked and sobbing moms -- IS INFINITELY WORSE than any strictly lustful transgression.  And even Dante would bear me out on this.  His levels of Hell for the Incontinent were near the top of the Pit while the levels Below were reserved for Violent and at the Bottom for the Treacherous. 

So please folks, if you don't already understand, then please do ... it's _not_ supposed to be "normal" for someone to not be sure which of three possible men could be the father of one's child.   That said, while not exactly "for the little ones" for the rest of us, please if you go see it, _enjoy the film_ FOR WE'RE WITNESSING FAR GREATER AND MORE VIOLENT CRIMES IN OUR TIMES TODAY than this.


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! :-) >>

Friday, June 15, 2018

The Incredibles 2 [2018]

MPAA (PG)  CNS/USCCB (A-II)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B+)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Satrs)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
Los Angeles Times (K. Turan) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review


The Incredibles 2 [2018] (screenplay and directed by Brad Bird) is a fun Disney-Pixar animinated family-oriented superhero film, IMHO even better than the original, about said "Incredibles" a family -- mom Helen (voiced by Holly Hunter), pop Bob (voiced by Craig T. Nelson), teenage daughter Violet (voiced by Sarah Vowell), tweenage son Dasheill (voiced by Huck Milner) and baby Jack-Jack (voiced by Eli Fucile) -- with superpowers, that as in the first film finds itself shackled and arguably made "illegal" by a world / society afraid of their superpowers. 

Thus even though in the opening sequence of the film, the family foils the evil plot of a simultaneously family-friendly but FIENDISHLY GOOFY mole-like super-villain calling himself The Underminer (voiced by John Ratzenberger) "Haha, I'm ALWAYS beneath you, but NOTHING is beneath me ..." who tries using ridiculously HUGE tunneling machines to burrow-under, collapse, and break-into Municiberg's (the city in which the Incredibles live) banks, the city shows its "gratitude" by actually arresting The Incredibles for using their super-powers (to save them) and forcing them to leave to the outskirts / margins of town: "You mean, you wanted us to just leave The Underminer alone when we could do good and stop him?"  "Yes, we had everything under control" is the response of the hapless police official arresting them.

Well fortunately for The Incredibles / the world, there were people, including a billionaire named Winston Deaver (voiced by Bob Odenkirk) and his sister Evelyn (voiced by Catherine Keener), who appear to be on their side and accept the occasional wanton collateral destruction that super-heroes cause often in the defense of the rest of society.  But said wanton destruction caused by super-heroes leads Winston to ask that Helen aka "Elastigirl" be the face of his "Bring back the Super Heroes" campaign instead of Bob aka "Mr Incredible" who was, well, known to be far more destructive.

Well much ensues and Helen and later the whole family along with fam BFF / fellow superhero Lucius Best aka Frozone (voiced wonderfully by Samuel L. Jackson) get into a battle with a new and again amusingly super-villain known as The Screenslaver (voiced by Bill Wise) who hypnotizes people into doing fiendish things through the various screens that they'd be looking at.

All in all, it makes for a FUN family oriented film -- emerging super-baby "Jack Jack" steals the show every time he's on the screen ;-) -- with messages of (1) being allowed to become who one's destined to be, (2) using one's gifts in the service of others, and (3) the benefits of working together as a family and/or team.   Good job!  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! :-) >>

Friday, June 1, 2018

Adrift [2018]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review


Adrift [2018] (directed by Baltasar Kormákur, screenplay by Aaron Kandell, Jordan Kandell and David Branson Smith based on the memoir [GW] [GW2] [WCat] [Amzn] of Tami Oldham Ashcraft [GW] [WCat] [Amzn]) tells the true story of Tami Oldam Ashcraft (played in the film by Shailene Woodley) who (it was 1983) had been sailing a yacht with her fiancé Richard Sharp (played in the film by Sam Claflin) from Tahiti to San Diego when they got themselves caught in a Hurricane Raymond (they were unable to outrun the storm).

The 40+ foot waves severely damaged the ship and threw Richard overboard.  The story that followed was about getting that ship, again severely damaged, with only a make-shift sail, from the middle of nowhere in the Central Pacific over to Hawaii (without missing the islands ...) to safety.  It took 41 days.

As compelling as these stories always are [1] [2] -- "alone on the sea" -- the current film IMHO did have a somewhat CREEPY DIMENSiON in its filming.  Yes, the film involved a young attractive actress portraying who would have been a young attractive woman first sailing and then adrift for over a month in circumstances where keeping clothes clean, dry and not covered with salt, would be really hard + one would have had _a lot more to worry about_ than about what one was wearing (largely alone) and how.  But one got the sense that the film makers took the approach of "trying to show as much of" the actress, here Shailene Woodley, as she as the contract with her would allow.

So ... while there actually wasn't a lot of actual nudity -- indeed there was EXACTLY ONE VERY SHORT SCENE that could have been _easily_ cut from the film WITHOUT LOSING ANY OF ITS CONTENT ("But Shailene, you're contractually obligated to "give us" at least one scene like this no matter how stupid or pointless to the story it may be...") -- there were _a lot of shots_ with her in tight, wet, form-fitting clothes (get the picture...) that after a while made one roll one's eyes thinking "Oh come on ..."

Seriously, it was silly ... but I do hope that in the post-Weinstein / #MeToo Era this would be one of the last Hollywood films that oozed such creepiness.

Those who would read my blog regularly would know that I rarely complain about either sex or violence portrayed in film SO LONG AS IT LEGITIMATELY FURTHERS THE STORY.  But when it is gratuitous (even of a "glass shattering" variety) or exploitative as it felt here, I make mention of it.


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! :-) >>

Saturday, May 26, 2018

The Seagull [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB ()  RogerEbert.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)


IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
Los Angeles Times (M. Philips) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Cheshire) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review


 The Seagull [2018] (directed by Michael Mayer screenplay by Stephen Karam based on the stage play [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Anton Chekhov [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is a "small indie, arguably chamber piece" that, small though it is, DESERVES TO BE SEEN.

As in Chekhov's original, it's a spectacularly poignant story about the awkwardness of growing'up -- WHAT WOULD YOU DO if someone infatuated in you GAVE YOU the dead carcass of a once beautiful white seagull THAT HE SHOT FOR YOU ... as a token of his affection? "Well, thanks (help!) ... I guess" ;-) -- and of recognizing when one's "passed their prime" / growing old.

So the story involves a brooding young early 20-something wannabe playwright named Konstantin (played by Billy Howle) who's trying _really_ hard to create a name for himself, hence _really_ into "symbolism" (words, are not enough for him, they have to really MEAN something ;-).  So he's the one who shoots that seagull for the girl he's trying to impress, WT ... did he _mean_ by doing so? ;-) or :-|.

That young girl, Nina (played by Saoirse Ronan) doesn't mind Konstantin, but SHE's really trying to _find her own way_ and hence looking for someone she considered _more experienced_ to lead her there (hence DEFINITELY NOT the still growing, still really not knowing what the heck he's doing,  Konstantin).

Who impresses her more is Boris Trigonin (played by Corey Stoll) a 30 perhaps early 40-something already somewhat established playwright and yet still somewhat of a "boy-toy" (younger-than-her) lover of Konstantin's "successful actress" late 40-early 50 something mother Irina (played wonderfully by Annette Bening) who DEFINITELY doesn't know how/when to "get off the stage" (it must have been A JOY to play her role ;-).

These four, come together at the "outside of Moscow" summer home (dacha) of Irina's older brother Sorin (played by Brian Dennehy) where the story, often awkward, often funny in its painful awkwardness plays out.  Sorin, for instance, unlike his younger sister Irina, knows well that he's getting older, but HE takes it to the other extreme ... basically "waiting to die" when, it's +pretty clear_ that it's "probably going to be some time" before the Lord takes him away ;-).

Then add _the priceless_ eye-rolling "help" -- Elizabeth Moss steals the show every time she's onscreen as "Masha" the _bitter_ but probably _dead-on right_ (about her place in that world at that time) daughter of the Sorin's head housekeeper Polina (played also wonderfully by Mare Winningham).

So it's an excrutiatingly painful but also often quite funny look on "growing up" / "growing old" and why SIMPLY EVERYBODY -- YOUNG, OLD, IN BETWEEN -- NEED TO KNOW CHEKHOV.  Written a hundred years ago, ALL the characters in this story are relateable today.


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! :-) >>

Friday, May 25, 2018

Solo: A Star Wars Story [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  RogerEbert.com (2 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)


IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller Seitz) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review

Solo: A Star Wars Story [2018] (directed by Ron Howard screenplay by Jonathan Kasdan and Lawrence Kasdan based on the characters created by George Lucas [wikip] [IMDb]) was quite possibly _the most enjoyable installment_ in the whole Star Wars franchise.

Why??  Because _unlike_ Rogue One of a few years past, Solo _wasn't_ slavishly attached to the Star Wars franchise's main story arc.

Sure, focused as the current film was on Han Solo (played here by Alden Ehrenreich) "in his early years," the story _had to_ lead us _in the direction_ of where we _eventually_ meet him (as a 35-40 year-old played by Harrison Ford) in Star Wars: Episode 4 - A New Hope [1977] (actually the first movie released) of the Star Wars Saga). 

HOWEVER, we the Viewers were allowed to experience A BIT of THE WONDER of this enormous and diverse galaxy (yes, perhaps being pulled together by the tentacles of an Evil Homogenizing Empire).  But, Han's home (industrial) planet of Corellia was SO OUTLYING, sooo full of smoke and soot, that it's hard to imagine that "The Republic" would have been much better for its citizenry than the Evil Empire.

BUT Han's world had it own joys:  We, the Viewers, get to hear a Jazz singing duo in which one of the two is really "cool-cat" / presumably intelligent fish ;-) and we find that Han's future partner Lando Calrissian (played by Donald Glover) was madly in love with a FUN "bot-ist" L3-37 (robot) with an attitude (voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge).  Han's own first love serious love interest Qi'ra (played wonderfully in the film by Emilia Clarke) asks "her" "But how does it work?" to which L3-37 answers: "Oh yes it does honey, oh yes it does."  And honestly we do see a minutes later Lando clearly showing feelings for this "Equal Rights for Bots" significant other of his ;-).

Other new characters enter into the story, a "good thief" mentor-for-Han-figure named Becket (played by Woody Harrelson) and Becket's tough as nails girlfriend named Val (played by Thandie Newton).

All in all, this film serves as a reminder to all of us that the Star Wars Saga really is to have played out IN A GALAXY _filled with_ ALL KINDS OF INTERESTING BEINGS for a good number of whom, the Evil Empire, as awful as it was, was still relatively inconsequential to their lives.  The Han that we meet in Episode 4 of Star Wars would have had already _a full life_ without ever having been sucked into the conflict between the Empire and the Rebellion.

And this may actually be a _very interesting_ (if perhaps UNINTENTIONAL) message of this film -- Life and EVEN FUN can exist _outside of politics_, no matter who the President or "Great Leader" is. Yes a Regime can become so oppressive that it does begin to diminish Life for all, but generally speaking, in all but the most oppressive circumstances (here honestly we come to appreciate the unique horror Nazi Germany which had _no place_ for tens of millions to hundreds of millions of people) there's at least some Life present.  And that Life has a way to EXPLODE into joy.   

Anyway, I THOROUGHLY ENJOYED THIS FILM ABOUT "THE LITTLE PEOPLE" OF "THE GALAXY FAR FAR WAY" and sincerely _hope_ that more will come.  Incessant "grand battles" against "Evil Empires" get tiresome and as we are seeing in the Hunger Games story / the last Trilogy of the Star Wars Saga ... get quite depressing as well.

So great / fun job here!


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! :-) >>

Sunday, May 20, 2018

Czech that Film Tour 2018


Of the films that were recently offered as part of the 2018 Czech That Film tour, I've seen and reviewed the following:


Barefoot (orig. Po Strništi Bos) [2018] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]* (Screenplay and directed by Jan Svěrák [IMDb] [CSFD] [FDB]*, based on the book [GR]*[DBK]*[WCat]* by Zdeněk Svěrák [en.wikip] [cs,wikip]*[GR]*[WCat]*[IMDb] [CSFD]* a quite classic Svěrák production (Zdeněk and Jan are father and son) that North American viewers would recognize as a cross between Neil Simon (Brighton Beach Memoirs [1986], Biloxi Blues [1988]) and Steven Spielberg, tells the tale of a Czech kid named Eda (played by Alois (Lojzik) Gréc [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]) growing-up during the era of Nazi "Protectorate" occupation.

The bitter-sweet genius of the film (and it is excellent) is that is beautifully portrays the "normal" dimension of growing up in what would have been a quite average family -- Eda has some issues with his dad (played by Ondřej Vetchý [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]), and Eda's family is dealing (not particularly well...) with the consequences of some definite, but all things considered tragic though they may be, quite "normal" (recognizable) "demons" in the family's recent past -- BUT SUPERIMPOSED ON TOP of those "NORMAL PROBLEMS" are of course the effects of living under (here Nazi) Occupation.

So, mad at his dad for unfairly punishing him "in front of everybody" at a Prague neighborhood picnic / block party, 9-10 year old Eda lashes back yelling: "Well, you (dad) listen to (clandestine) BBC radio ..." Well ... a few days later, the apartment manager discretely tells Eda's family that it'd "probably be a good idea" for the family to "leave Prague" and move back to the village where the family was originally from ... where the rest of the story plays out.

Then the story makes mention of some of the _national demons_ that came with the closing stages of the war: (1) the post-war expulsion of the Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia (in vengeance for the Sudeten Germans' forcing the collapse of pre-WW II thoroughly democratic Czechoslovakia and bringing the era of Nazi occupation onto the Czechs), (2) the somewhat senseless Czech uprising against the Nazis in the closing days of the war, that only resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of poorly armed and largely unorganized Czechs (ironically almost as many Czechs died in those chaotic closing days of the war as would have died if the Czechs had fought the Germans under much better / much more organized terms in 1938 during the Sudeten Crisis) and still did not prevent subsequent Soviet domination of the country for the decades following and (3) the largely suppressed truth (certainly during the Communist Era) that much of the Czech nation, including the capital Prague was actually liberated by the Vlasovites [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* an army of Russian defectors who did fight on the side of Nazi Germany for much of the war but always much more _against Stalin_ rather than "for Hitler."  (For his part, Hitler did not invade the Soviet Union to "liberate it" from Stalin, he invaded the Soviet Union to steal its land and resources and to enslave its people(s).  So the Nazis never really took seriously what General Vlasov was offering them: "Just arm us and let us take care of Stalin / Soviet Communism ourselves.")  This is the first time that I've certainly seen the Vlasovites mentioned in a Czech film even though most Czechs know well who actually liberated their country from the Nazis -- the Americans (Patton's 3rd Army) from the West (all the way up to Plzeň) and the Vlasovites from the East.  The Soviet army entered Prague only after the Vlasovites (and Czech patriots) did most / all of the fighting for them...

Anyway, a lovely film about growing up in a _very average family_ living in the midst of  "Great Events" happening all around them -- 4 Stars.



Milada [2017] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]* (directed and screenplay cowritten by David Mrnka [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]* along with Robert Conant [IMDB] [CSFD]*) a bio-pic (actually available on Netflix) about Czech Protestant / humanitarian / feminist / social democrat Milada Horáková [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* (played in the film by Ayelet Zurer [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) who advocated for the Czechs to the English (to no serious avail) in the time leading up to the 1938 Sudeten Crisis, spent most of Nazi occupation in jail and then was arrested / jailed once more and _executed_ in 1950 by the post-War Czechoslovak Communist Regime for "anti-state activities" (she and her husband were using her position in a Czechoslovak child welfare agency to help those persecuted by the Communist regime flee the country) despite appeals by the World Council of Churches, Eleanor RooseveltAlbert Einstein, Winston ChurchillJean-Paul Sartre and Bertrand Russell among others for clemency on her behalf.  To many Czechs, remains Horáková emblematic of a true martyr, honestly on the level of a Czech female / feminist Dietrich Bonhoeffer -- one who dedicated _her entire life_ to try to do what is right and ended up getting condemned / _murdered_ for it in the worst possible _staged_ Stalin Era show trial fashion. -- 4 Stars



Ice Mother (orig. Bába z Ledu) [2017] [IMDB] [CSFD]*[FDB]* (written and directed by Bodhan Sláma [IMDB] [CSFD]*) is a contemporary family dramedy focused on the family's matriarch/grandmother (played wonderfully by Zuzana Kronerová [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) who a widow at 60-something years of age had reason to be disappointed with how her two sons Ivan (played by Václav Neužil  [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) and Petr (played by Marek Daniel [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) turned out.

Though both were married, both had kids, neither had turned-out to be particularly solid.  Instead, were rather shifty, Ivan perhaps a little better off than Petr, but both were ultimately hovering around her just waiting to pounce on her house as soon as she either died or decided to move to a retirement community.  In the meantime, neither particularly cared that grandma was expected to cook big meals for their two families on Sunday (they simply called it "tradition") or that since grandma didn't have a lot of money -- no doubt spending a good part of it on these Sunday dinners for them and their families -- so she had to keep her house rather "cold" (part of the reason for the film's title) to keep her bills manageable.  When they started to complain "Gee ma, you seem to be keeping the house rather cold this winter..." she started to understand their complaints in a different way: that her two grown sons were simply zhýčkaný (spoiled).

Indeed concurrently she comes to be rather fascinated with a group of senior citizen otužilci (or North American parlance "polar bear club" of swimmers) who would have weekly races in the seemingly ice cold Vltava and Labe Rivers near Prague.  What's going on here?  Were her sons really "soft" or was she (and other seniors with not particularly good pensions making "lemonade" out of the "lemons" that they were being given in life?  Or was it both?

It all makes for an interesting commentary on contemporary life in post-Communist Central Europe where seniors with poor pensions are seen turning the hardships that they face -- having not enough money to keep their homes warm -- into virtue (Look at how tough in my old age I am?  I can swim across an ice cold river in winter because "cold" has no effect on me anymore...).  Anyway, it's one thing to be tough.  It's another because one's forced to be because one could not make ends meet otherwise.  But certainly a very interesting / challenging film -- 3 1/2 Stars.



Masaryk [2017] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]* (directed and screenplay cowritten by Julius Ševčík [IMDB] [CSFD]*[FDB]* along with Petr Kolečko [IMDB] [CSFD]* and Alex Königsmark [IMDB] [CSFD]*) focuses on two critical years (1938-1939) in the life of Jan Masaryk [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* (played in the film by Karel Roden [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) the son of the modern Czechoslovakia's founder T.G. Masaryk [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]*

It's a generally sympathetic, humanizing portrayal of a man, basically a "Son of Moses," during one of the worst possible times of both his life and the life of his country.  His revered father had died the year before and he himself was serving as a critical ambassador (to Britain) in his father's successor's Edvard Beneš' [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* (played in the film by Oldřich Kaiser [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) administration, while the whole project of his father's life, the creation / success of a modern-independent-democratic Czechoslovakia was under mortal threat of Nazi aggression.

But Britain was under the hapless / didn't have a clue / perhaps would have been _a great_ (or even then just a mediocre but harmless) British Prime Minister a couple of generations back under Queen Victoria, but this was the late 1930s (!), Neville Chamberlain [en.wikip] (played in the film by Paul Nicholas [IMDb]).  And in Chamberlain's and much of England's still race / class tinged eyes, the Czechs were basically "Great Nation" Germany's Irish and the Sudeten Germans were the Anglophilic Protestants of Northern Ireland.   If Ireland could be divided to "keep the peace" (and keep the North Ireland's Protestants "protected" from being subjected to "barbaric" Irish Catholic rule) why couldn't the Sudeten Germans be allowed to be "protected" from (lower-race "a nation about which we know nothing") Czech (Slavic) rule?  Again, in Victorian England, that would have made total sense, 'cept THE DEMOCRATS HERE WERE THE CZECHS and the Nazis were the thugs, something that Churchill, for instance, understood immediately but alas was not yet being heard.

In any case, Jan Masaryk FAILED to convince Chamberlain [en.wikip] and the vast majority of the British political elite of the time to stand by the Czechs' in their hour of need and ... apparently some weeks after the Czechs under true _gangster style duress_, acceded to the British-French-German-Italian signed Munich Pact by handing over Czechoslovakia's Sudeten territories (and actually much more) to Hitler's Germany, Jan Masaryk, having resigned his post as Ambassador to Britain, he admitted himself into _a psychiatric sanitarium_ in Vineland, New Jersey in the United States for convalescence / treatment.  (Here the Reader may wonder, WHY in the U.S.?  Well Jan Masaryk's mother, his sainted father's wife, Charlotte Garrigue, was actually American).

Much of the film takes place during this period of convalescence.  It's certainly the most controversial aspect of this film.  I certainly _did not know_ that he had done this, BUT I WOULD TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.  After all, here again was "the son of a Moses" who's just watched the country that his father had created, a country that he himself tried as hard as he could to defend be dismembered again by the Great Powers ("the Egyptians") of his time.  It's enough to drive one almost to suicide, and ...

Actually 10 years later, after the whole drama of World War II was over BUT THE SAME STORY PLAYED OUT AGAIN for poor Czechoslovakia -- with the Soviet Communists taking over the role of the Hitler's Nazis ... Jan Masaryk, was found dead, outside his Prague apartment window.  Did he jump?  Or was he pushed (then by Stalin's NKVD)?  I've always thought that the NKVD pushed him.  But this movie offers honestly the possibility that he really could have jumped.  And who could have blamed him? -- sigh.

STILL ... with a new cloud of Evil (Putin) on our horizon, it's possible that this _very_ anti-English (and Jan Masaryk "had his problems") film _could be_ some sort of a Putin-Russia inspired piece of propaganda as well.  One would have to look more deeply into where the inspiration and financing for this film came.  Until then -- 2 1/2 Stars.



Gangster Ka: Afričan [2015] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*(screenplay and directed by Jan Pachl [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*, based on the book [DBK]* by Jaroslav Kmenta [cs.wikip] [GR] [DBK]*) continues the story of a fictionalized contemporary Czech gangster named Radim Kraviec aka Káčko or simply as in the film's title Ká (played by Hynek Čermák [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) whose person and story is largely based on the now South Africa residing fugitive Czech swindler-turned-gangster Radovan Krejčíř [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]*).  Part One of the story played in the States as part of the 2016 Czech that Film Tour.

Said Part One of the story ended with Radim and Dardan (played by Predrag Bjelac [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) his enforcer / right-hand-man having successfully fled the Czech Republic one step ahead of law and resurfacing in the Seychelle Islands in the Indian Ocean, near Madagascar, off the coast of East / Southern Africa.

The Seychelles apparently had not extradition treaty with the Czech Republic, so it would have been a pretty good place for Ká to just _crash_ and live-out the rest of his life with his wife Sandra (played by Vlastina Svátková [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDB]*) in safe, luxurious obscurity.  Sandra was never accused of any wrong-doing in the CR and hence there was no legal ground to prevent her from leaving the country and eventually flying even to The Seychelles meet-up with her husband again, which she did some months after he resurfaced and established himself there.

All could have gone so well ... if only Ka would just be able to shut-up and lead a comfortable if _quiet_ life in obscurity, but ... of course he could not.  And hence the rest of the story unfolded, with him eventually having to leave The Seychelles for the (post-Apartheid) Republic of South Africa, which apparently does have an extradition treaty with the Czech Republic (under certain circumstances) BUT was also the only country that Ka was willing to go to after his sojourn in The Seychelles did not turn out so well.  Did he end up doing better in South Africa?  Well ... guess ... ;-)

The whole story is cautionary tale reminding us that no matter how well we think we have can have things figured out, there's _always something_ that make a life of crime difficult / "not pay."

Quite well done contemporary post-Communist Central/Eastern European crime drama - 3 1/2 Stars


* 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! :-) >>