Annie [2014]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller-Seitz) review
AVClub (K. Rife) review

BET coverage
Ebony (R. Mays) interview w. Jamie Foxx
Essence.com (T. Lewis) cover article
TheSource.com interviews [1] [2]

I honestly didn't expect to like Annie [2014] (directed and screenplay cowritten by Will Gluck along with Arlene Brosh McKenna based on the stage play by Thomas Meehan [IMDb] based on the comic strip Little Orphan Annie by Harold Gray).  When I was a kid growing-up, I didn't much like or even have interest in the original stage musical.  Even at 10 or 12 I had a remarkably similar view of the musical as I later had of the musical Les Miserables [2013] -- I basically found it to be poverty porn: "Oh look at how much the characters suffered (and AT A TIME SO FAR, FAR AWAY), but the Actors SANG SO WELL (or NOT SO WELL or WHATEVER ...)."

So I went to see the remade / updated  Annie [2014] (the lovely, precocious African American 10 year old Quvenzhané Wallis playing the precocious starring role previously played by lovely preccocious white/redheaded vaguely Irish looking girls) in a matinee, going to see it only _because I felt I had to_ for the sake of the credibility of my movie review blog... :-)

I left already liking the new film, and liked it EVEN MORE when I got home and rented the canonical 1982 film version (the one which starred, among others Carol Burnett as the evil, self-serving/scheming orphanage running Miss Hannigan).

Why the change?  Well, I found the updating of the story both BRILLIANT and WORTHY of the story -- the new version setting Annie's story, not during the Great Depression (FAR FAR AWAY...) but IN THE PRESENT DAY.  And then, if one is going to move "Little Orphan Annie" to the present day (while STILL SETTING IT IN NEW YORK), IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE to change her from a precocious curly red-haired vaguely Irish-looking girl living in a Depression Era orphanage to a precocious, yet still big / curly-haired African-American girl living in a CONTEMPORARY "FOSTER CARE" situation. 

Then the rest of the characters in the original story translate VERY WELL into the new.  Cameron Diaz' drunk, sulking, scheming "I could have been a star" Hannigan making a few extra bucks by taking-in kids as a "Foster Mom" is a brilliantly dead-on updated version of Carol Burnett's character in the canonical 1982 film version).  Jamie Foxx' telecom billionaire Will Stacks (running in the current version for NYC mayor) is a similarly brilliantly updated version of the Depression Era Oliver ("Daddy") Warbucks tycoon played by Albert Finney in the 1982 film, though much of Daddy Warbucks' privileged / "evil" default tendencies get shifted to Stacks' "I get paid to do the things that you can't" campaign manager credited in the new film as simply "Guy" (played by Bobby Cannavale).  Then Rose Byrne does a wonderful job in the current version of playing Grace, Stacks' personal assistant, whose role is an updated version of Daddy Warbuck's assistant Grace Farrell played (and danced ...) in the 1982 version by Ann Reinking.   Stack's driver Nash (played by Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje) played a pretty good updated version of "Punjab", Daddy Warbucks' driver (played by Geoffrey Holder in the 1982 version).

Then some of the scenes in the updated version, which more-or-less follows the trajectory of the original, are again brilliantly inspired.  In both the current and the 1982 versions, there's an episode in which Annie wants to go to the movies.  In the 1982 version, Daddy Warbucks makes a call and RENTS OUT THE ENTIRE RADIO CITY MUSIC HALL so that HE, Annie and Grace could go to see a movie (which turns out to be some appropriately sappy 1930s melodrama).  IN THE CURRENT VERSION, Annie convinces Stacks to take HER, her other foster home friends and Grace to see a sappy Twilight-like film apparently starring Mila Kunis in a Bella-like role,  Ashton Kutcher as the Twilight-like Edward (or perhaps Jason)-like "lizard-man hunk" (with Rihanna and Scarlett Benchley playing assorted, "moon and fish goddesses").  It's simply PRICELESS to watch Billionaire Stacks, there, popcorn-in-lap, TOTALLY DISORIENTED in a theater FILLED WITH SIGHING 10-12 year old girls (and Grace) holding-onto EVERY WORD and EVERY GLANCE in this very contemporary "sappy melodrama" involving an "impossible romance" between the Twilight's Bella-like character (played by Mila Kunis) and her "lizard man" beau ;-).  [Actually, to my Czech ears, the plot of this Twilight-like "water saga" seems VAGUELY like the libretto of Antonin Dvorak's opera about the "water nymph" Rusalka [wikip] [YouTube] ;-)]

So folks, what I would suggest to skeptics here is to go see BOTH the current updated version of Annie and then come home and RENT the 1982 version.  I think that most would honestly appreciate what was done here.  The updated version honestly came across to me as FAR MORE REAL than the DEPRESSION ERA version (set again, at a time SAFELY "far, far away...")

And finally to those who would find some of the messaging in the current version to be uncomfortably "Liberal" ... remember that THE ORIGINAL was UNABASHEDLY LIBERAL / pro-FDR.  Indeed FDR and Eleanor WERE EVEN CHARACTERS in the play (played in the 1982 version by Edward Herrman and Lois de Banzie respectively). 

So I found this film far, far, far more engaging than I ever thought possible prior to seeing it, and as I did in the case of the "crazy" (DaVincian airship filled) updating / re-imagining of The Three Musketeers [2011] some years back I APPLAUD THE COURAGE AND CREATIVITY OF THE SCREENWRITERS and FILM MAKERS HERE.  Awesome job here, simply awesome.  And again, I didn't even really want to go see this 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! :-) >>

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb [2014]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb [2014] (directed by Shawn Levy, screenplay and story by David Guion and Michael Handelman along with Mark Friedman, characters by Thomas Lennon and Robert Ben Garant) continues and perhaps concludes this very nice / family friendly series of films about lowly New York Museum of Natural History night security guard Larry Daley (played by Ben Stiller), who in the first film, Night at the Museum [2006], discovered that thanks to a magically endowed ancient Egyptian tablet, all the statues / wax figures in the museum "come alive" at night. 

Among the "people" that Larry met in the first film were: (1) Teddy Roosevelt (played by Robin Williams); (2) an eyes rolling Sacajaweja (played by Mizou Peck) (Lewis and Clark NEVER asked her for directions ;-); (3) a strangely sad Attila the Hun (played by Patrick Gallagher) (who pillaged because he never had a good father-figure in his life ;-); (4) two miniature figurines, one of an American "Wild West" era prospector named Jedediah (played by Owen Wilson) and another of Roman Centurion Octaius (played by Steve Coogan) from neighboring (and it turns out competing) "dioramas" (Jedediah and his miner friends would try to "miniature dynamite" their way into the neighboring Roman empire themed "diorama" while the Romans would try to blow their way into the "Wild West" themed "diorama" with a battering ram... ;-); and (5) finally "young" Egyptian pharoah Akhmenrah (played by Rami Malek) to whom the magical tablet "belonged."  All these figures, who previously just caused havoc in the Museum after dark come to like the lowly and previously largely down-on-his-luck / friendless, night-watchman Larry and later rally to save his job when HE gets blamed for the mess that they cause each night.  And thus, an ensemble for many, many playfully "historically based" adventures was born ...

The second movie, Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian [2009], moved the story to, well, Washington D.C., where at the Smithsonian Institute Larry and his "band of anachronistic merrymen/women" met the energetic and brave Amelia Earhart (played there by Amy Adams), the hapless Indian-War loser General Custer (played there by Bill Hader) as well as a true "gang" of History's "bad guys" including a cursed Egyptian pharoah named Khanumrah (played there by Hank Azaria), Ivan the Terrible (played there by Christopher Guest), Napoleon Bonaparte (played there by Alain Chabat) and Al Capone (played there by Jon Bernthal).  The "gang of baddies" had nefarious plans of "world domination" if only they could get their hands of the magical tablet ... ;-).  Much ensued...

The current movie, moves the story to the British Museum, where N.Y.C. Museum of Natural History's "young" pharoah Akhmenrah's father Merenkhare (played by Ben Kingsley) "lives."  The magical tablet was starting to wear-out and the characters from the N.Y.C. museum had to figure out why.  So ... Larry as well as a number of the other characters ... find their way to London's British Museum, and ... much again ensues ;-). 

Among that which ensues is that they meet "Sir Lancelot" (played by Dan Stevens) who, when brought to life by the magical tablet has an interesting problem that differs from the experiences of the other figures under its spell: Lancelot never actually existed, but NOW there he is ;-).  It's an interesting take on the question of "What to do IF YOU "DISCOVER" THAT _YOUR WHOLE LIFE_ HAS BEEN 'A LIE.'" ;-). 
 
Another priceless bit that perhaps is a MINOR "SPOILER" here but is simply worth sharing is the dialogue between the Ben Kingsley's Pharoah Merenkhare and Ben Stiller's Larry the Security Guard when Pharoah hears that Larry's "half Irish and half Jewish."  Pharoah says delightfully: "Oh I always LOVED Jews, I used to own 40,000 of them ;-).  Always, happy people, loved to sing..."  To which Larry responds: "Oh, believe me, the feeling wasn't mutual.  They spent 40 years in the desert running away from you.  WE STILL GET TOGETHER _EVERY YEAR_ to talk about it ;-)"

Additionally, the film had its (since its making) poignant moments.  Two actors from the film, Mickey Rooney (who plays a bit part as a retired museum security guard) and Robin Williams have died since the making of the film, Robin Williams, of course, of suicide.  Seeing Williams' ever "saddish" smile is quite sad to watch.

In any case, a very good film capping a very nice three part, ever family friendly series.  Good job folks!  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 Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies [2014]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review  

The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies [2014] (directed and screenplay cowritten by Peter Jackson along with Fran Walsh, Philipa Boyens and Guillermo del Toro) is the final part of a three part series of films based on J.R.R. Tolkien's [IMDb] novel The Hobbit [Amazon] released over the past several years.

The near universal critical opinion of this project has been that the source material, a single 300 page or so book (shorter than any of the three part Lord of the Rings Trilogy [Amazon]), was simply too thin to justify a three part film.  Yet, as I wrote in my review of the first part of this trilogy of films, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey [2012], those viewers who were "at all enamored by (or perhaps more fittingly here, enchanted by ;-) the LOTR series, [will probably] just bask in the opportunity of spending a few extra hours in the 'Middle Earth' of these films because the New Zealand location, the CGI and the cinematography in general are once again simply AWESOME."

Some nine hours (!) of three Hobbit movie(s) later, my own patience has admittedly worn thin as even MOST TEENAGERS could probably READ THE BOOK in shorter time than that need to watch the three movies ;-).  Still, I suspect that many fantasy role-playing gamers (and I would count myself as a lesser one among them) will probably find the extended (and I mean extended, perhaps 2/3 of the current movie) battle scenes between the promised five armies -- dwarves, elves, orcs, humans (Laketown refugees) and (once sleeping cousin) dwarves and/or orcs again (I lost count / got confused after a while ;-) -- quite AWESOME again ;-). [Note here that the book posits the Battle of Five Armies to be between dwarves, elves and humans (said Laketown refugees) on one side and "goblins and wild wolves" on the other (pg 281 of 305 in my Kindle edition).  While goblins do certainly make a brief and identified appearance -- "Look, there!  (A rather small detachment of) Goblins!" --- the primary enemy in the film would appear to be orcs].

The battle scenes are filmed then made "close-up" to show various individual hand-to-hand battles, as well as well "from a distance" to give a "bird's eye view" (which actually proves important because as in the book, the battle finally comes to an end with the arrival of Eagles ... ;-) who swoop down to take care of the remaining goblins (or orcs).

Now why was there fighting at all?  This is where IMHO things get interesting from my perspective (writing this blog) as well as that of Tolkien fans who've ALWAYS understood his works to be more than "just fantasy" but rather fundamentally allegorical in nature: Arguably The Hobbit is an allegorical presentation of World War I: 

The Dwarves (little people) whose mountain kingdom was stolen from them by the Dragon Smaug "centuries before" perhaps represent the "little kingdoms of the Slavs" and/or various other "little kingdoms" of Eastern and Southern Europe which had been swallowed-up by some of the larger countries in the region.  The Elves (living mostly "in the woods," and who _didn't particularly like the Dwarves_...) could have been the various Germanic peoples (with their own little / magical kingdoms).  The Hobbits, "living quietly in the Shire" would have almost certainly been "common English folk."   At the beginning of the story, the Hobbit Bilbo (played throughout by Martin Freeman) gets recruited by the Merlin-the-magician-like wizard Gandalf (played by Ian McEllen) perhaps representing British "high aristocracy" (or "all that is/was good and true in ancient / modern Britain / Britannia") to join the fight _of the dwarves_ TO REGAIN _THEIR_ (mountainous) HOMELAND (Note that with the exception of Poland, itself bordered to the south by mountains, the whole of Central and Eastern Europe is one mountain or mountain range after another).  Bilbo's initially quite skeptical but does ultimately join The Cause.

But as soon as Bilbo and the small party of Dwarves drive the Dragon out of the Dwarves' Mountain (their ancestral homeland) ALL SORTS OF PROBLEMS BOTH ANCIENT and NEW APPEAR.  Among the ANCIENT PROBLEMS that (RE)APPEAR are those pesky Orcs/Goblins who had seemed buried (or at least out of mind) before.  Among the NEW PROBLEMS that APPEARED was the destruction of the previously PEACEFUL TOWN OF "LAKE TOWN" (Flanders??) whose residents were now Refugees as a result of its (unwanted) battle with (and ultimate defeat of) the Dragon Smaug.

Then finally, the Dwarves, PITIED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE STORY (for having lost their homeland centuries before as a result of the BEASTLY DRAGON SMAUG) TURN OUT TO NOT BE ALL THAT "GOOD" AS SOON AS THEY REGAIN THEIR MOUNTAIN KINGDOM.  Their "king" Thorin (played throughout by Richard Armitage) turns out to be quite greedy / self-interested as soon as "he gets his gold back."  Thus, he proves NOT willing to help the Laketown refugees, who after all, were the ones who ACTUALLY DEFEATED THE DRAGON (the dwarfs just chased him out of their mountain ...) and then he didn't even want to pay Bilbo his promised share for having joined their expedition to begin with.

It's fascinating, but a lot of Englishmen _could have felt similarly_ like Bilbo or the Laketown people after World War I (then The Great War).  Millions of Englishmen died in The Great War, for what?  Okay, the Central Powers of Europe (Imperial Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire) were defeated / destroyed.  BUT the resulting tiny countries that reappeared all quarreled with each other and many/most probably didn't even appreciate how many Englishmen died in that War that didn't really give England all that much as a result, except PERHAPS the sense of "having done the right thing."

The story today could remind us that even "just causes" have unexpected consequences and even the leaders of various just causes, when in power, could end-up "like the Dwarf King Thorin," that is, "problematic."

Still, Bilbo (and Gandalf) "did the right thing" and certainly Bilbo got an Adventure that he could talk about "in the Shire" (where "nothing ever happened") for the rest of his life.

Hence the book (or the THREE movies) gives one much to think about ... the value / pitfalls of setting out on a "Grand Adventure" even when "the Cause" is Just.  (Yes, it's still worth it, but ... not without its Disappointments).


<< 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 Imitation Game [2014]

MPAA (PG-13)  Chicago Tribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (1 1/2 Stars w. Expl.)

IMDb listing
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. Wloszczyna) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review  

The Imitation Game [2014] (directed by Morton Tydlum, screenplay by Graham Moore based on the book by Andrew Hodges [IMDb]) tells the story (in very rough outline it turns out) of smart, socially-challenged oddball (and gay) Alan Turing who improving on similar machines already designed and constructed by Polish intelligence services in the 1930s, designed and supervised the construction of the proto-computer (that he nicknamed "Christopher") that definitively broke Nazi Germany's all-but unbreakable Enigma code during WW II that helped the Allies win the war.  

Turing's story plays out in this film in three stages of his life: in the 1920s when he when he was a teenager at a British all-boys boarding school, during the war years 1940-1945 when he was first part of and then allowed (very, very reluctantly by his bosses much less bright than he and his colleagues ever were) to lead the U.K.'s Bletchley Park Enigma code-breaking unit (code-named ULTRA) and then in the early 1950s after he was arrested for a (homosexual) morals charge.  As a teenager, he is played by Alex Lawther, as an adult, engagingly and magnificently throughout by Benedict Cumberpatch (Cumberpatch is almost certainly going to get an academy Award Nomination for his performance in this film and despite some other excellent performances by other actors in other films this year, I'd hand him the Oscar now). 

As could be imagined from the hints already given above, this is a fairly challenging story to put on screen.  First of all, Turing was an interesting character -- brilliant but perhaps almost necessarily odd.  Second, while his role in breaking the Enigma code was certainly significant, the film really plays the Polish contributions the code's breaking with almost categorical racist (WASP in the worst possible way) disrespect.  And yet, after the war, BECAUSE HOMOSEXUALITY WAS STILL A CRIME IN BRITAIN, Turing, without a doubt A LEGITIMATE WAR HERO (if only the public and EVEN CIVIL AUTHORITIES of the time would have / could have known) was DESTROYED for not fitting the heterosexual norm: Given a choice of PRISON or "hormonal therapy" (for A BLOW JOB ...) he chose the latter so that he could continue his work in the then still infant science of computer engineering.  In 1954, he died as a result of (probably) committing suicide...

The film's thematics, IMHO are excellent: Can we accept diversity AS A GIFT?  It did take someone who was "odd" (and not just that he was gay, even today, he'd probably be considered "socially challenged" / "odd") to do something next to unimaginable.  Yet, I do wish this was done in a manner that did give DUE CREDIT to the Poles (who are AS WHITE AS CAN BE and yet _still_ considered by more "Anglo" / "Aryan" whites to be SOMEHOW NECESSARILY "LESS" than they ...).

Sigh ... _excellent film_ otherwise, but 1 1/2 to 2 Stars ... (and I do think I'm being kind here on account of its _otherwise excellent message_).


<< 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! :-) >>

Exodus: Gods and Kings [2014]

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

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

Nat'l Catholic Register (S.D. Graydamus) reflection , interview w. director / stars of film

The first thing to say about Exodus: Gods and Kings [2014] (directed by Ridley Scott, screenplay by Adam Cooper, Bill Collage, Jeffrey Caine and Steven Zaillian) is that it is an intelligent, thought-provoking, discussion-provoking film.  It is not simply a retelling of the story of Moses of the Book of Exodus.   What good would that do, after both having received the Canonical text in the Bible, and even perhaps a "canonical" presentation of it in Cecil B. DeMille's presentation of it in The Ten Commandments [1956]?

Instead, the current film, is a kind of Midrash or Reflection, as it tries to "get into the heads" of the Exodus story's main characters -- Moses (played by Christian Bale), Ramses (played by Joel Edgerton) who was according to the second chapter of Exodus for the first 40 years of Moses' life "like a brother to him", and yes, even God, or at least a messenger of God or Moses' visualization of God, credited in the film as Malek (played by Isaac Andrews).  [Note that Malek translates from Hebrew to English as "Angel" or "Messenger"].

For instance, the film explores the question of what would have it been like / WHAT COULD HAVE IT BEEN LIKE for Moses who grew-up AS AN EGYPTIAN to encounter the THE HEBREW GOD at the Burning Bush?   The film-makers' portrayal of God here is fascinating:  They portray Moses "seeing" the Hebrew God as a VERY POWERFUL (indeed DIVINELY POWERFUL) ... CHILD. 




Now why would Moses "see" / "experience" the Hebrew God "as a child"?  Well, Moses would have grown-up in the Royal Court of the most powerful, most sophisticated country of that time.  Egypt had an elaborate and complex / ELABORATED Pantheon of its own, perhaps even TOO ELABORATED for his liking (Near the beginning of the film, we see him more or less "roll his eyes" as a very solemn-looking Egyptian Priestess goes through the very solemn-looking motions of performing an oracle for the Pharoah's court).

As someone educated in Egypt's court, the Hebrew God VERY WELL COULD HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCED by Moses, as somewhat "childish" / "primitive", indeed at times PETULANT and YET, PERHAPS, ...  ALSO _FRESH_.

The Divine Name that the Hebrew God gives for Himself, "I am what I am," when Moses asks Him for it at the " Burning Bush" (Exodus 3) , IS kinda ALL OF THESE THINGS: "childish", "petulant" and FRESH ... God tells Moses (and US, the readers) that HE (God) can be WHOEVER / WHATEVER HE WISHES TO BE.  Indeed, isn't that a pretty good fundamental definition of a God?  A GOD [TM] would be someone WHO CAN DO WHATEVER ONE WANTS.

And yes, someone truly "Godlike" (able to do whatever he/she likes) WOULD RUN THE RISK being experienced (at least initially) as "kinda childish," "kinda despotic", "kinda petulant" UNTIL ... one got to know him better.  ;-)

And yet, such a partly "childish" God would be ALMOST THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF A LARGE IMPOSING STONE STATUE REPRESENTING ONE OR ANOTHER EGYPTIAN "GOD" about whom very long and (seeking to be) manipulative incantations would have been written (and often dryly recited...) which could have been the experience of someone like Moses who had grown-up in a "sophisticated court" like Pharoah's.

The Hebrew God may have seemed "childish", at times even "petulant" but ALSO SOMEHOW FAR MORE ALIVE than the "stone Gods" of Egypt.

So ... having made his "initial acquaintance" with "the God of his forebears" ... Moses then struggles with his Call.  Why him?

Good question, why?  By this point in the story, Moses was NO LONGER OF PHAROAH'S COURT but LIVING AS A SHEPHERD IN FAR OFF EXILE.  In the film, the "boy" representing "God" tells Moses: "I don't need a (lowly) shepherd.  I need a General."

Again, why?  The film has Moses coming back to Egypt initially to try to train some sort of a Hebrew resistance army.  But, if this seems apocryphal (and it certainly is), the film then makes clear that NO this was NOT the reason why "God needed a General."  AS IN THE BOOK OF EXODUS, SO TOO IN THE MOVIE, NEITHER MOSES NOR THE HEBREWS DO ANY REAL FIGHTING.  IT'S GOD WHO DOES THE FIGHTING FOR THEM THROUGH THE VARIOUS PLAGUES ... and yes, while SOME OF THE PLAGUES WOULD SEEM TO INITIALLY BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO "NATURAL CAUSES" (and plausibly would have even experienced by the Egyptians at the time as such ...) AS THEIR INTENSITY INCREASED, IT BECAME INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT TO "EXPLAIN THEM AWAY" IN THAT WAY ... (As such, the film actually does _powerfully affirm_ God's action in the tale).  [So why did God "need a General" if not for fighting?   MILD SPOILER ALERT: The film makers remind us that a General does more than just fight.  A General is, above all, a logistician, one who can organize and _lead_ a great deal of people].

So this IS an INTERESTING TAKE ON THE EXODUS STORY one that is CERTAINLY NOT "Literalistic" but tries to play, indeed _wrestle_ with the points / implications of the Exodus story:

Would God [TM] "not care" what happened to all those Egyptians killed by the Plagues sent down on them?  Well the "childish" but quite self-righteous God portrayed in the film gives a quite "certain" answer to this question: "Did the Egyptians 'care' about what they have been doing to their Hebrew slaves over the last 400 years?"

I'm fascinated by this kind of newly audacious inquiry into / wrestling with the Scriptures and I'm VERY HAPPY that a director like Ridley Scott did TAKE THE RISK of making a film such as this.  Martin Scorsese was certainly "burned" for making The Last Temptation of Christ [1988] and the result has been to scare-away serious directors from making Biblically themed movies for almost a generation.

I'm very happy to see that since Terrance Malick's Tree of Life [2011] the drought may have finally come to an end.

Good job Ridley Scott!  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 Pyramid [2014]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChiTribune/Variety (1 1/2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (1 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (C-)  Fr. Dennis (2 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune/Variety (G. Lodge) review
RogerEbert.com (P. Sobczynski) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review  

The Pyramid [2014] (directed by Grégory Levasseur, screenplay by Daniel Meersand and Nick Simon) is actually a kinda fun horror movie conflating one of the oldest genres of horror films (the "mummy movie" with one of horror's newest genres (the "lost footage film").

Set in contemporary Egypt with Cairo, in flames because of various disturbances, we're told that using satellite imaging American researchers recently discovered a previously completely buried pyramid located in the desert some 200 miles to the south. 

The researchers, a father and daughter team Miles and Nora Holiday (played by Denis O'Hare and Ashley Hinshaw respectively), both PhDs of course, are both "working together" and "of different schools." 

When a documentary crew Sunni (played by Christa Nicola) and Fitzie (played by James Buckley), probably hired by the daughter, comes out to the excavation site, they encounter something straight of an Indiana Jones movie -- hundreds of Egyptians with shovels, pick axes and wheelbarrows clearing away the sand to expose said pyramid, and more to the point "an entrance" detected previously by ground penetrating radar.  Who hired the Egyptian diggers? probably dad.  Who thought of getting the radar imaging scan? probably the daughter.  Dad's looking forward to entering the pyramid, "old school," with rope, pick axe, etc.  Daughter and her techie Egyptian boyfriend Zahir (played by Amir K) are looking forward to sending a small remote control rover, "borrowed from NASA," into the pyramid first. 

So part of the initial joy of watching this film is the back-and-forth between Father and Daughter, who again, are "(basically) on the same team," but then again "they're (kinda) not" ;-)

Okay, the hired Egyptian diggers get to the entrance to the Pyramid and ... suddenly, they are ORDERED by the Egyptian government TO STOP.  Now remember folks, Cairo's "in flames" ... So why the heck would they care about a dig 200 miles away?

Well, that's exactly what both Father and Daughter (Americans) think.  So they try to tell a rather angry Egyptian soldier (played by Faycal Attougui) sent there to shut them down to give them just a "couple of hours" to at least get to see something of the inside of the pyramid that they spent so much time and money digging out.  He's not exactly convinced, but they decide to steal those few hours anyway.

What now?  Well, the rover seems the better way go now since they don't really have the time to explore it (quickly) themselves.  HOWEVER, a few minutes into the rover having entered the pyramid SOMETHING -- is it some sort of a feral dog? -- jumps out of nowhere and knocks said rover out of commission.   Well, that rover REALLY WAS "on loan from NASA" and we're told it cost $3 million.  So now the team has to go quickly into the  pyramid ... to retrieve that rover ;-).  The rest of the movie ensues ...

What ensues? ... Well, there are "things" in there that appear to be really dangerous.  What kind of "things"?  Well, the kind of things that perhaps a society really would want to entomb / bury for a really, really long time (and perhaps even for eternity).  Hence _perhaps_ answering the question of why the Egyptian government with seemingly "much more on its plate than simply a random 'dig' by a team of American archeologists" would _care_ about the dig ... 

Anyway, what follows is a kinda an "Ancient Alien" inspired stew (kinda "Ancient Alien" inspired but not that much...) that's again both kinda fun to watch and kinda scary.  And, of course, every "bump in the night" is being recorded by the invited "Documentary Crew."

So this is NOT a particularly deep movie.  But it is quite contemporary.  And CNN / History Channel junkies would probably enjoy it.  So even though this film will certainly win no Oscars ... IMHO it is a kinda fun movie to watch.  So good job folks, pretty 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! :-) >>

Wild [2014]

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

IMDb listing
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (S. Wloszczyna) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review  

Wild [2014] (directed by Jean-Marc Vallée, screenplay by Nick Hornby based on the memoir by Cheryl Strayed [IMDb]) tells the a compelling story of a young 20-something woman Cheryl Strayed (played in the film by Reese Witherspoon) whose life disintegrated into a chaotic mess after her mother Bobbi (played by Laura Dern), 45, first was suddenly diagnosed of having cancer and then rapidly died of it (within a month).

In the chaotic aftermath, Cheryl had perhaps married the right guy, Paul (played by Paul Sadoski), but certainly at a terrible time.  The result was that she just spiraled down, having sex repeatedly with random men, acquiring a heroin habit along the way, smashing a marriage that could have perhaps worked in other, better circumstances, but certainly NOT in the circumstances that she found herself in.

Couldn't she get help?  Honestly, for many people WHERE???  Bobbi/Cheryl's family WAS NOT WEALTHY.  There's a great scene in the film, a flashback when she did have a session with a counselor.  She asks: "Shouldn't there be a couch and some kleenex somewhere."  Instead, she's meeting the counselor in what seems to be a community college classroom.  He tells her calmly but directly: "That would be $50/hr therapy.  What you're getting here is $10/hr therapy..."

FOR ALL THOSE WHO'VE MADE IT A VIRTUAL DOGMA OF "FAITH" TO OPPOSE "OBAMA CARE" ... THIS IS OUR NATION'S HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.  OBAMA CARE WAS GOING TO MAKE THINGS MARGINALLY BETTER ... BUT STILL UNBEARABLY HOPELESS TO BASIC MENTAL HEALTH CARE.  We are NOT EVEN CLOSE when it comes to being "The Greatest Country in the World" when it comes to providing affordable health care to either people like Bobbi (people DON'T DIE IN A MONTH of Cancer unless they come to the doctor REALLY, REALLY LATE, or their affordable treatment options are NIL) or Cheryl (even TODAY there is NOTHING SERIOUS THAT THIS COUNTRY WOULD HAVE AVAILABLE TO HER IN HER NEED).

So, a smashed marriage, and an apparent abortion after conceiving by anyone of a random number of men later and LUCKY SHE DIDN'T GET HIV OR HEP ... she did what a lot of people over the ages have done in times of otherwise unbearable personal crisis: She decided to walk ... The Pacific Crest Trail.

By her own admission, this was something of a random decision.  However, she decided that she was going to "Walk her way back into being the woman that her mother thought she was."

So then, what this story is about, is this woman's "walk" back to sanity.

Look, I'm a Catholic priest, so for me the Religious theme here is obvious.  Indeed, I've reviewed two recent films on my Blog about the increasing popularity of walking the "Camino de Santiago de Compostela" (The Way [2010] directed by Emilio Estevez and starring Martin Sheen, and then the documentary Walking the Camino: Six Ways to Santiago [2013]).

Journey, Pilgrimage is an obvious metaphor for LIFE - which itself, like it or not, is "a journey."  NONE OF US STAY "IN THE SAME PLACE."  OUR LIFE even HISTORY is always moving, even if we wish they were not.

-- In Buddhism, "Change" is seen as the fundamental source of "Sadness" (Samsara -- the title of ANOTHER recent film that I reviewed here on my blog).

-- The foundational experience of Biblical Israel was its 40 year "Journey in the Desert" from "Slavery in Egypt" to "The Promised Land" recounted in the Torah / Pentateuch (the first five books in the Bible). 

-- To this day, the Israelites' 40 year "Journey in the Desert to the Promised Land" becomes the metaphorical backdrop to the Catholic Church's annual 40 day observance of Lent in preparation for Easter (Jesus' Resurrection seen as "the first fruits" / a "prefigurement" of OUR ENTRY into A FINAL "PROMISED LAND" (Heaven) after "The Journey of Earthly Life")

-- In Islam, the making of the Hajj, a pilgrimage to Mecca, _at least once_ in one's life is a fundamental duty of all Muslims.

All this is to say that the idea of finding Truth, Wellness, Healing, Insight, Purpose, HOPE while "on a/the Journey" is a concept appreciated by many, many sages / religions across the ages.

But here it must be said, that certainly in the film Cheryl Strayed did not embark on this journey for ANY religious motivation.  Should that matter?

I would say emphatically NO.  This was a woman who desperately needed help, to bring her life back together, and she tells us that she found new hope, new purpose, a new future as she "walked her way back to being the woman her mother thought her to be."   And honestly, good for you!  And good for the others that her experience may help.

But if you do find God along the Way ... I'm not going to object either ;-)

In any case, a good job!  And a great and hopeful 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! :-) >>

A Small Southern Enterprise (orig. Una Piccola Impresa Meridionale) [2013]

MPAA (UR would be R)  MM.it (2 Stars)  OC.it (6.5/10)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars w. Expl.)

IMDb listing
FilmTV.it listing*

Panorama.it (S. Santoni) review*
CineBlog.it (A.M. Abate) review*
MyMovies.it (D. Zonta) review*
OndaCinema.it (C. Cerofolini) review*

A Small Southern Enterprise (orig. Una Piccola Impresa Meridionale) [2013] [IMDb] [FT.it]* (directed, starring and cowritten by Rocco Papaleo [IMDb] [FT.it]* along with Walter Lupo [IMDb]) is at times an exaggerated / silly but at other times quite poignant and intelligent recent Italian "dramedy" about a Catholic priest, leaving the priesthood, that in this time of Pope (St) Francis-the-first could offer some interesting / thought provoking viewing -- if, of course, one can get past some of the film's silliness (obviously, since I gave the film 3 1/2 Stars, I did).  The film played recently as part of the 1st Chicago Italian Film Festival organized by the Italian Cultural Institute of Chicago and held at the Music Box Theater here on the North Side.

At the center of the story is a 50-year-old (ex)priest Constantino (played by Rocco Papaleo [IMDb] [FT.it]) who explains in the initial voice over that 3 months past he filed for laicization.  Why?  Over a woman, who he's since discovered was far more attracted to him as a Priest than as a Person.  So, we find him in the beginning sequence of the film, literally with his one suitcase in hand, leaving his old rectory, no longer a priest nor a "significant other" of another, heading, with some dread, to the home of his 70+ year-old mother Stella (played quite well by Giuliana Lojodice [IMDb] [FT.it]*) to break her the news.  

When he gets over to his mother's house, he discovers her in full-panic-mode regarding another family crisis that's suddenly surfaced:  Her daughter, Constantino's sister, Rosa Maria (played by Claudia Potenza [IMDb] [FT.it]*) had just left her husband Arturo (played by Riccardo Scamarcio [IMDb] [FT.it]*) for apparently "someone else" (who?) and ... vanished.  Constantino had married the two, Rosa Maria and Arturo, some years back in what seemed to have been the "happiest of days" for all of them.  What happened?  Obviously it would take some time to sort it all out.  Seeing mom devastated by news about Rosa Maria, Constantino did not feel it particularly opportune to tell her then that he's left the priesthood.  SOO ... he tells her that he's taking "some time off" (perhaps simply "a short vacation") and that he was wondering if he could spend the time at a property (an old lighthouse) at the edge of town that the family apparently owned.

The "old light house" (talk about a symbol...) amidst all kinds of "rocks and cliffs at the edge of the sea" (talk about another symbol...) "at the edge of town" (yet another symbol...) seemed like a good place to set oneself down, when one's trying to figure-out what the heck to do now/hence with one's life.  And so it is, he walks down a lonely path (another symbol...) to the light-house, opens up the living quarters, finds himself a bed, plops down and ... begins to ponder WHAT THE HECK TO DO NOW.

But ... soon ... the cell phone rings (a new symbol :-).  It's Arturo, Rosa Maria's (soon to be ex?) husband.  He wants to Confess.  Constantino's no longer a priest.  BUT HE HASN'T TOLD ANYBODY YET in the family.   AND here's Arturo, CLEARLY IN CRISIS.   What can he do?  What should he do?  What would YOU do? ... In any case, Constantino ... hears Arturo's "Confession." 

Arturo's Confession is not particularly revelatory (Honestly, most Confessions generally aren't.  Rather they're generally a list of sins that one's ALWAYS / LONG-TERM struggling with) but MOST WOULD UNDERSTAND that in the situation like the one that Arturo's found himself in (his wife's left him for ... still no one knows who) one would like TO GET A LOT OF THINGS "OFF ONE'S CHEST." 

By the end of the Confession (or "Confession") it's clear that Arturo does feel better ... and both Constantino (and probably a good part of the audience) are reminded THAT a (Catholic) PRIEST DOES HAVE A USEFUL EVEN FUNDAMENTAL / ARCHETYPICAL ROLE IN THE WORLD.  Among the Priest's "gifts" / "usefulness" to the world is the priest's ability to raise people out of the depths of despair and even sin when they find themselves crushed down by them.  (And where do they get that "Power" / Power? ... Honestly ... from "God" / God).

Things get "curiouser" for Constantino when a short time after Arturo leaves "the old lighthouse" for "home" another even stranger set of visitors come by:  There's a young-early 30 something woman Valbona (played by Sarah Felberbaum [IMDb] [FT.it]*) who, surprised to find "the old lighthouse" not empty, introduces herself to Constantino as his sister Rosa Maria's "friend." "You know Rosa Maria?  WHERE IS SHE?  Valbona does not say.  However, she's there to dump her older sister A "RETIRING" FORMER PROSTITUTE (and proud of it, "I worked my way up from 'lap dancer' all the way up to 'top escort') going by the name Magnolia (played by Barbora Bubolova [IMDb] [FT.it]*) at the old lighthouse because goos ole Magnolia "just dropped back into her life" suddenly and "with so much else going-on" at the moment, she didn't know where to put her.  So Rosa Maria had suggested "old lighthouse" where "no one ever goes." 

So Rosa Maria's friend Valbona drops her older sister / "retiring" prostitute over there at the "old lighthouse" where Constantino, who just dropped-out of the priesthood, was trying to get some rest and get some new direction in his life.  (Honestly, I found _this subplot_ somewhat needlessly distracting).  MILD (though rather obvious) SPOILER ALERT (because "inquiring minds" would "want to know"): No, the two never come even close to sleeping together.  HOWEVER, they do have some rather interesting discussions.

Then a construction crew comes to the old lighthouse, sent there by Constantino's mother to, since her son would be there to look after / supervise them, do some much needed reconstruction / renovation (still more symbols ...) of the place.  Among the first things that they are there to "repair" is the roof, of one of buildings, where they of course, find Magnolia "sunbathing" in "all her glory" ...  She doesn't mind.  BUT they, it turns out, have other worries on their minds ... mostly to simply get their jobs done and to get paid: One of the construction workers is divorced and simply needs the money to be able to keep custody of his daughter who's there with them as well.  (Interestingly enough, the former prostitute is told _at least twice_ in the story and by different men that "You know, you're beautiful and all, but I honestly have other concerns on my mind than simply sex ...")

Then as the story goes on ... Rosa Maria is "found."  Previously, there were all sorts of rumors in the family (and of the soon-to-be ex-inlaws) that she fled all the way to Beijing with some lover.  It turned-out that she was staying with, HIDING WITH ... the thirty-something Valbona IN A RAMSHACKLE SHACK (another symbol ...) AT THE VERY EDGE OF THE SEA (symbol again ...) UNDER THE LIGHT HOUSE (yes, we already know that's a symbol). 

Why is she / WHY ARE THEY THERE?  Well .. of course they are "in love."

It's (ex)-priest Constantino who convinces them to "come out of the shack" to "safer ground" EVEN IF IT WOULD (INITIALLY) BREAK THE HEART OF THEIR MOTHER (yet another symbol actually ...).  And yes, he himself has to "come clean" at one rather poignant point to tell Mother as well that he's no longer (at least canonically) a Priest.

The film ends (SPOILER ALERT ... BUT MOST READERS HERE WILL NOT FIND A WAY TO SEE THIS MOVIE ANYWAY) with Constantino, PRESIDING, no longer as a Catholic priest (but in some larger / even more basic perhaps archetypical capacity) AT HIS SISTER'S (necessarily LESBIAN WEDDING) on the Grounds of the Lighthouse, now renovated into something of a RETREAT HOTEL ... AND MOM, with BOTH TEARS AND A SMILE, IS THERE (THEY ARE HER KIDS AFTER ALL).

And in the last line of the film, ex-Father Constantino asks his sister for a dance at the wedding.

HONESTLY, ONE HECK OF A CHALLENGING / THOUGHT PROVOKING FILM ... and all said with a ton of (at times nervous) smiles.


ADDENDA (how to find / play this film):

This film albeit in European PAL format is available with English subtitles for a reasonable price through Amazon.com (Amazon.it)

Further, DVD players capable of playing DVDs from various regions (North America, Europe, etc) are no longer particularly expensive (costing perhaps $10 more than a one region DVD player).

Finally, a simple program called DVDFab Passkey Lite (downloadable FOR FREE from Softpedia.com) allows one to play DVDs from all regions on one's computer's DVD-Rom drive. 


* Reasonably good (sense) translations of non-English webpages can be found by viewing them through 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 Mafia Only Kills In The Summer (orig. La Mafia Solo Uccide d'Estate) [2013]

MPAA (UR would be PG-13)  CineBlog.it (7/10)  OndaCinema.it (7/10)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDb listing
FilmTV.it listing*

CineBlog.it (G. Capolino) review*
MyMovies.it (M. Gandolfi) review*
OndaCinema.it (A. Pettiere) review*

Hollywood Reporter (S. Dalton) review 
I Love Italian Movies (Cheri) review

The Mafia Only Kills In The Summer (orig. La Mafia Solo Uccide d'Estate) [2013] [IMDb] [FT.it]* (starring, directed and screenplay cowritten by Palermo native Pierfrancesco Diliberto (Pif) [en.wikip] [it.wikip]* [IMDb] [FT.it]* along with Michele Astori [IMDb]) is a critically acclaimed / award winning and really quite brave Forrest Gump [1994]-like, dramedy about growing-up in Palermo, Sicily during the various Mafia Wars of the 1970s-90s. 

The film won two Donatello di David (Italy's closest equivalent to the Oscars) awards (for best new Director and best "Young David") [Official Site] [en.wikip] [it.wikip]* and a host of nominations as well as several Italian Golden Globe nominations and wins.  The film played recently as part of the 1st Chicago Italian Film Festival organized by the Italian Cultural Institute of Chicago and held at the Music Box Theater here on the North Side.

The film tells the story of Arturo (played by Alex Bisconti [IMDb] [FT.it]* as a child and the director Pif [IMDb] [FT.it]* himself as a 20-something young adult).  In voice-overs throughout the film, Arturo explains that his entire life FROM CONCEPTION TO THE PRESENT has been tied-up with the Mob:

He explains that he conceivably owes his very existence to the Mob, as while his parents (played in the film by Barbara Tabita [IMDb] [FT.it]* and Rosario Lisma [IMDb] [FT.it]*) were making love on their wedding night, Toto Reiina (played in the film by Antonio Alveario [IMDb]), a local Mob boss, engineered his first Hit, eliminating a rival, in a room on the floor below, scaring the daylights-out of his parents and "almost certainly effecting" which of the millions of his father's sperm would that night inseminate his mother's egg, thereby creating him ("Any sperm of any sense would have 'cowered and hid.'  Only the bravest or most clueless one would have continued with his mission" ;-). 

He then explains that his baptism was "probably the shortest one in the history of Polermo."  Arturo's parents' entire families' presence notwithstanding, apparently mobbed-up Friar Giacinto (played by Antonino Bruschetta [IMDb] [FT.it]*) had to rush through his Baptism to "make it on time" to another Baptism, that of the child of the (presumably quite well) "connected" mayor of Palermo ;-).

Later, when Arturo was 2-3 years old and Fra Giacinto was by Arturo's parents' new apartment to bless it and Arturo's parents expressed their concern that little Arturo still wasn't talking, Fra Giacinto assured them that "NOT talking too much" is "not necessarily a bad thing" ;-).  As he left their apartment (again in a rush ...) little Arturo said his first word.  Pointing at the back of the priest on his way out, with his thumb up and index finger out, he said ... "MA ... FIA ..." (to the shock / surprise of his parents, now rendered speechless themselves ;-).

When Arturo was little growing-up in Palermo, he explains to viewers that the various mafia hits in the city were routinely explained away as "involving women."  That didn't bother him until ... a new girl, Flora (played in the film as a child by Ginevra Antona [IMDb] [FT.it]* and as a 20-something young-adult by Cristiana Capotondi [IMDb] [FT.it]*), came to his school.  Then he became concerned.  But the parish priest (again good ole Fra Giacinto) assured him, "Oh don't worry my son, NOBODY in this town gets killed 'because of women.'  They get shot (Fra Giacinto starts getting upset) BECAUSE THEY DO SOMETHING STUPID, BECAUSE THEY TALK TOO MUCH, BECAUSE THEY MAKE SOME SORT OF MISTAKE.  THAT's why they get shot, but CERTAINY NOT 'because of a woman.'" ;-).  Thus Arturo gets permission from the parish priest to fall in love ;-). 

Arturo comes home, and still pondering these feelings that as a ten year old he now has for this new student Flora and asks his father: "Dad, how did you first tell mom that you've fallen in love with her."  "Beh ... I don't know, I think I just kind of told her.  These things come kind of naturally you know.  Now be quiet and watch TV.  Our favorite show is coming on ..."

The show coming on was some kind of a 1970s Italian news magazine show, and the guest that week was the somewhat shifty-looking and certainly NOT particularly charismatic Italian Prime Minister of the time, Giulio Andreotti [en.wikip] [it.wikip]* of the "catch all" (by reputation "eyes rolling" corrupt and possibly /probably even "mobbed up") Italian Christian Democratic Party [en.wikip] [it.wikip]* of the time (Heck, the "alternative" of the time, remember it was the Cold War ..., was the Italian Communist Party [en.wikip] [it.wikip]*...). 

So though all kinds of people were dropping dead because of the Mob back in Sicily, the FIRST QUESTION that he's asked on this television news magazine was the UNBELIEVABLY SOFT-BALL QUESTION: "So Prime Minister, how'd you first propose to your wife?" which he, relieved, proceeded to answer ;-)

Now while almost everybody in Italy was "rolling their eyes" accepting of "the way things were," BUT CERTAINLY NOT looking at Italy's political leadership of the time as even remotely "inspiring," this "swarmy," NOT particularly charismatic Giulio Andreotti [en.wikip] [it.wikip]* becomes something of a HERO to Arturo (for giving him an answer to Arturo's then _very pressing_ 'romantic question' that Arturo's father didn't have the courage to answer).

Well, much then ensues in the film:  And almost every significant moment in Arturo's life gets SOMEHOW interrupted by mafia inspired stragi (hits):  A kindly police officer who recommends to Arturo a pastry to buy his 10 year-old beloved Flora gets knocked-off some months later in the same pastry shop where he made his recommendation to Arturo.  A similarly kindly judge who spots 10-year-old Arturo spying on Flora by her parents' apartment, gets blown-up by a car bomb later at the same spot where he first runs into Arturo.  Even a random "pol" of the quite boring (and often enough, quite corrupt, but again, look at the alternative...) Christian Democratic Party of the time on whose campaign a 20-something Flora becomes a staffer, a pol that NO ONE WOULD ARGUE WAS EVEN REMOTELY INSPIRING (His slogan, that even he didn't seem to say particularly convincingly, was simply: "Europe needs Sicily and Sicily need Europe") eventually gets knocked-off by the Mob, for ... no one honestly had a clue anymore.

But eventually the people of Palermo are shown as having had enough.  And at the end of the film, when (mild spoiler alert...) Arturo and Flora do finally definitively get together and start a family, Arturo tells the audience in a voice over: "Parenthood quickly teaches you two things: First you want to protect your children from the Evil in the world.  But then second, you want to teach your children TO IDENTIFY IT."  And so the close of the film is a several minute homage to the various GOOD HONEST PUBLIC SERVANTS (that police officer, that judge (both ACTUAL PEOPLE) as well as various others) WHO WERE KILLED OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS TRYING TO STAND UP TO THE MOB.
 
It all makes for one heck of a film, both funny at times and HEART RENDING AT OTHERS.

Good job!  Very good job!



ADDENDA (how to find / play this film):

This film albeit in European PAL format is available with English subtitles for a reasonable price through Amazon.com (Amazon.it)

Further, DVD players capable of playing DVDs from various regions (North America, Europe, etc) are no longer particularly expensive (costing perhaps $10 more than a one region DVD player).

Finally, a simple program called DVDFab Passkey Lite (downloadable FOR FREE from Softpedia.com) allows one to play DVDs from all regions on one's computer's DVD-Rom drive. 


* Reasonably good (sense) translations of non-English webpages can be found by viewing them through 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! :-) >>

Horrible Bosses 2 [2014]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune/Variety (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review 

Horrible Bosses 2 [2014] (directed and screenplay cowritten by Sean Anders along with John Morris) is an inevitable sequel to Horrible Bosses [2011] a comedy that, let's face it, was never intended to be Academy Award material.   However, with a pedigreed ensemble cast, allowing many in that cast to "let down their hair" and either "play against type" (Jamie Foxx, Jennifer Aniston) or play it to the hilt (Kevin Spacey and joining this film Christoph Waltz) both the original and "the inevitable sequel" were more or less guaranteed to succeed. 

So what we have here is an (appropriately R-rated) "popcorn movie" that's perhaps even an adult "revenge fantasy" of put-upon "good people" against the people (mostly "Bosses") above them.

In the original film, conscientious "company man" Nick Hendricks (played by Jason Bateman) is strung along by his scheming Machiavellian "a-hole of a boss" Dave Harken (played by an ever-snarling Kevin Spacey).  His friend, accountant, Kurt Buckman (played by Jason Sudeikis) finds himself working for the spoiled/entitled son of his company's original owner.  If Kurt ever believed in the company for which he worked, said spoiled son, seeking to hire and fire secretaries (some working there for decades) simply on the basis of who'd most likely grant him sexual favors, ripped that loyalty out of him.  Finally, there was Dale Arbus (played by Charlie Day), poor Dale, who after being put on "a sex offender" list after being arrested for urinating by a tree next to a bar after said bar's closing time found his job prospects severely restricted.  Who'd hire "a registered
offender"?  Well, we find out: An employer like Dr. Julia Harris, D.D.S. (played hilariously, over-the-top and against type by Jennifer Aniston) who finds his "convicted sex offender" status a "turn on."

So in the original movie, the three put-upon employees conspire to kill each others' bosses.  Since none of them had the faintest idea of how to do this, they seek-out "a mentor." They settle an ex-con "so tough" that he was born with an unspeakable name (played again hilariously and against type by Jamie Foxx) who they meet in an appropriately over-the-top seedy dive.  Much then ensued.  One of the bumbling three's bosses does, indeed, die (arguably by accident), another ends up in prison, the third in sex-addiction rehab.  Guess who ends up where...

The current film begins with the three former employees of "Horrible Bosses" having decided to go into business for themselves having come-up with a show gadget that they call "The Shower Buddy."  (Basically the gadget allows liquid soap to mix with water in the shower-head).  We see them showing-off said gadget on a random morning TV news-show, a presentation that they, of course, horribly mess up.

No matter, they do get a call from a potential investor: a twenty-something Rex Henson (played by Chris Pine) the born rich and not particularly competent son of a vaguely German accented immigrant with the strangely British sounding name, Burt Henson (played by Christoph Waltz) -- honestly, there could have been a fun/interesting back-story there.  Burt the father had made a fortune marketing and distributing this kind of junk.  How?  Well, we soon find out: 

Burt has the three business neophytes make him 100,000 units of said "Shower Buddy" then promptly cancels the order, knowing that the three will almost certainly have to go bankrupt whereupon he could purchase the 100,000 units for pennies on the dollar...

That, of course, enrages the three, and they come-up with another half-baked / obviously illegal plan to recoup their losses: they decide to try to kidnap Rex and then demand that Burt pay ransom equal to the amount that they owed their creditors.  Well, when they do kidnap Rex, it turns out he's "on board as well" to try to get back at his dad and he promptly convinces the three to greatly increase the ransom amount (giving himself by far the biggest cut).  Much (mostly in the form of bumbling incompetence) ensues ...

Yes, there's not much particularly edifying in this film (or for that matter in the previous one).  The films have three "ordinary Joes" plotting SERIAL MURDER (of their "Horrible Bosses") in the first film and KIDNAPPING FOR RANSOM (from an "evil Investor that screwed them") in the current one.  Then ever-randy Dr. Julia obviously feels "rather unbounded" (ya think?) by the constraints of anything resembling traditional Catholic/Christian teaching on sexual morality (She shocks / appalls, but like Charlie Sheen's character, Charlie Harper, in Two and Half Men [2003+] or previously Ted Danson's character, Sam Malone, in Cheers [1982-1993] , or Rue McClanahan's character Blanche Devereau, in The Golden Girls [1985-1992], what adult honestly would not immediately see in Jennifer Aniston's character here wildly (and often hilariously) over-the-top exaggeration that's precisely _intended_ to shock/amuse the audience.   In this film, she matter-of-factly asks the three bumbling anti-heroes for "preferences" as to how she "should shave her ..." WHO'D ASK SOMETHING LIKE THAT?  HONESTLY.   It's MEANT TO SHOCK / APPALL and yes, as a result, AMUSE).

SO then, this is NOT (!) a "film for the kids," nor, one hopes, to be an "instruction manual" for "how to lead one's life."  But it is, often, _stupidly_ ... funny ;-) 


<< 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! :-) >>

Lovely Article about "Fr. Dennis at the Movies" at Chicago Archdiocese's "Catholic New World"

A lovely article by local journalist Dolores Madlener that recently appeared in Chicago's Archdiocesan newspaper Catholic New World.  Thank you very, very much!  

From chemical engineer to priest and film aficionado

By Dolores Madlener

STAFF WRITER

Servite Father Dennis Kriz, associate pastor at Annunciata Parish, 11128 S. Avenue G, pictured in the church on Nov. 13. Brian J. Morowczynski/Catholic New World

He is: Servite Father Dennis Kriz, associate pastor of Annunciata Parish on the Southeast Side. Popular movie reviewer with his blog, “Fr. Dennis at the Movies.” Ordained in 1999.

Youth: “My younger sister and I grew up mainly in Mount Prospect. I went to Prospect High. Dad was a chemist for a company that made specialized toners and paints (including some for the Space Program). Mom was an artist who had a degree in dress-designing from the Art Institute. My dad never had to buy her a new dress during their marriage. She even made her wedding dress. And as a good Czechoslovakian immigrant, she loved the resale stores.

“Faith was always important to our family though mostly at home with the immigrant experience as part of it.  We’d all consider ourselves believers, but in terms of Church attendance, we’d have to admit that we were the “three times a year” variety – Christmas, Easter and St. Wenceslas Day -- until my mom came down with cancer.

“I got hooked on movies as a teenager. ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ was perfect: History, Archeology, the Bible and Nazis all mixed in.  How great was that!?”

Vocation: “I went to the U of I and studied chemical engineering. Then I went to grad school at USC in Los Angeles. While at USC, my mom died. That was a life-changing experience for me. I got involved at the USC Catholic Center, staffed by the Servites. I was in my 20s and enthusiastic. I found religion much more meaningful and explainable to others than my chemistry work. How much can you say about microscopic polymer beads? At least if you’re talking about religion — everyone has an opinion. But I finished my doctorate in chemical engineering, because ‘You finish what you start.’

“I was searching for something bigger, and entered the Servite community. I spent my first year at Berkeley at the Franciscan School of Theology, and then did my novitiate. At the end they sent me to our international college in Italy to finish my theology. Our final thesis project was to be based on an aspect of the culture we came from. In the USA our culture is so diverse one has to talk about some form of mass media, and the easiest for me was movies. My thesis title: ‘Marian Imagery in “The Terminator.’”

Parish life: “Since our parish is involved in “To Teach Who Christ Is,” my contribution has been giving up a movie or two a week that I would otherwise see.  We’ve been asking parishioners to give sacrificially.  I believe in the value of my blog, but I wanted my participation in the Parish Campaign to hurt a bit.  So it comes to about $50/month (plus missing 6-8 movies a month).  I’m responsible for our youth group at Annunciata. I’ve been here 10 years and started the blog 4 years ago. I try to alert kids to be aware of messages in films and especially who’s portrayed as a ‘good’ person and who’s a ‘bad’ person.  A lot of times the ‘bad’ people portrayed are darker skinned and foreign (yet as Catholics we believe that we’re all children of God).

“I’ve found the Marvel Comic book movies – Iron Man, Spider Man, Thor – actually quite good.  Even though they’re “superhero” types, the characters are usually complex and even the villains have their story.  Not all comic book films are like that. In Batman/Superman (DC Comics), the heroes are super-good and the villains super-evil, and the rest of us are nothing.  In contrast, the Marvel Comic stories there’s almost always a moral message to them: “With great power comes great responsibility” is the message of the first Spider Man film.  It’s hard to argue with that message and it’s expressed in a manner a teenager can understand.

“I use movies in my homilies, only when it really applies. But everyone in the parish knows I do movie reviews. They know I see the more obscure ones than the average movie-goer. By visiting my blog, they’ll know these other movies are at least out there. I’m drawn to a film by its story – if I see a point to it.”

His Blog:  “I blog several times a week at frdennismoviereviews.blogspot.com.  My ideal audience would be young adults in their 20s-30s.  The culture tends to pander to teens by calling them young adults, but they’re still too young.  However in their 20-30s is when people have options and are most free to learn and grow.” His blog lists reviews for the past four years, with various age group categories – For instance, he gave the 2013 kids’ movie “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” 3-stars and a good review! His blog has nine genres of movies, including documentaries and foreign. He also carries reviews by others, like the USCCB when available.

Film and dialogue: “For the millennium I led Servite parishes with youth groups to Italy for a youth experience. I helped lead a group to the Servites in the Amazon, where we have a mission, and led two groups to a Servite mission in Mexico. Nice projects but very expensive. The Servite Order is using Facebook now to build bridges to share what Servites are doing around the world. Movies fit in with this as well. While the cost of flying to visit the missions in Brazil or South Africa would run thousands of dollars, for 10 bucks you can pick up a movie that’s also about that culture and community. And foreign film festivals exist all over the place.” He speaks English, Czech, Italian and Spanish. There are four Servites who live in community at the Annunciata Priory. They have morning and evening prayer, Mass, and meals in common.

Favorite Scripture verse? “Peter’s words, ‘To whom shall I go? You have the words of eternal life.’” (John 6:68)

Foxcatcher [2014]

MPAA (R)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller Seitz) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review  

Foxcatcher [2014] (directed by Bennett Miller, screenplay by E. Max Frye and Dan Futterman) based on the actual 1996 murder [NYTimes] of former Olympic gold-medal winning wrestler turned wrestling coach David Schultz by John Eleuthère du Pont (yes, of the billionaire Du Pont family) tells one sad, sad triangle of a story (there's also Mark Schultz, also a gold-medal winning wrestler, but never quite as good, nor as charismatic as his older brother) about limitations:

 John Eleuthère du Pont (played in the film to IMHO Oscar nomination worthy heights by Steve Carrell) is SUPER-RICH but ... off, and off to an extent that no matter how much money he had, he was destined to have a difficult and disappointing / frustrating life, somehow serving as living, walking, breathing proof that MONEY ITSELF can't buy EITHER LOVE or HAPPINESS.

Mark Schultz (played in the film again to Oscar nomination worthy or at least consideration worthy levels by Channing Tatum) is AN OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST and yet, not particularly bright, and DAMNED to be THE YOUNGER BROTHER of a BOTH EVEN MORE SUCCESSFUL AND THEN FAR MORE CHARISMATIC OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST ... IN THE SAME SPORT.  Oh, TO BE a GOLD MEDALIST and STILL NOT BE ABLE TO ESCAPE FROM FEELING LIKE A LOSER.

And then David Schultz (played in the film, to ... eh, okay, BUT THAT'S ALL THAT WAS NECESSARY levels by Mark Ruffalo) who was the most "together" of trio, NOT RICH but MARRIED WITH KIDS, NOT FEELING THE NEED TO PROVE ANYTHING TO ANYONE ... BUT ... ENDING UP DEAD ... all the same.

Yes, what a (if the shoe fits) "Greek Tragedy" built around a sport invented by ... Greeks.


The film begins with a representative of said Billionaire John with "more money than God" but "with issues" searching out Mark Schultz to make him an offer that the poor post-Olympics sap, a Gold Medalist but in debt, couldn't possibly refuse: "My employer will fly you out on his helicopter to his (or more accurately his 80 year old mother's...) 800 acre horse farm, where you will have your own home, food / all other expenses paid, and you'll be able to do NOTHING but train for the next Games... three years hence."  Poor Mark, what's he supposed to do?  He was worried that his gas was going to be cut off in his appt.

What Mark does do, IS TALK TO HIS OLDER BROTHER DAVE, WHO TELLS HIM that a rep from the SAME "odd rich guy" CAME TO HIM with THE SAME OFFER a couple of weeks before AND HE TOLD HIM NO. ;-). 

Seeing Mark's crest falling before his eyes, Dave, "jumps back" and tells his younger, more struggling brother: "But, I think that this COULD BE a GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU."  Poor Mark, holding his heart in his hands after Dave had it going up and down and all over the place over the last 15 seconds, comes to the final conclusion that Dave's being a "good older brother" and, now, with his blessing, goes back to accept the eccentric weirdo's offer.

Thus begins a long, awkward, story that, yes, IMHO inevitably had to end badly.  Mark was just trying to get by in life.  Billionaire John was trying to grasp for that which his billions could not get him ... and certainly Mark was not what/who he wanted.  Indeed, John wanted Dave, but Mark was what/who he got.  So INEVITABLY Billionaire John starts "pining for" Dave even as Mark who's living on Billionaire John's (er Billionaire John's mother's) 800-acre horse farm, increasingly feels like fundamentally INADEQUATE ... again. 

Eventually (mild spoiler alert) finds a way to buy Dave after all.  BUT (1) how does that make Mark feel? and (2) does he _really_ succeed in "buying Dave."

If nothing else, the story leads to ... where the actual story came to ... with Billionaire John shooting Dave.

This is one heck of a sad, sad story, most filmed mostly in grey skied, slushy, Pennsylvania ... in winter.  But IMHO it's also, one heck of a film, reminding us once more that none of us is a God.


<< 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! :-) >>