MPAA (PG) CNS/USCCB (A-1) ChicagoTribune (1 Star) RE.com (0 Stars) AV Club (C+) Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)
IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
ChicagoTribune (R. Moore) review
RogerEbert.com (C. Lemire) review
AVClub.com (J. Hessenger) review
RottenTomatoes.com (T. Ryan) review
Okay, by any sentient being's estimation Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2 [2015] (directed by Andy Fickman, screenplay by Kevin James and Nick Bekay) was gonna be a SILLY / "STUPID" MOVIE ;-). But honestly SO WERE THE THREE STOOGES. And though the venerable media critics considered to have "a special place" by the RottenTomatoes.com website GAVE THIS FILM a ZERO rating -- yes that's ZERO -- I'D WEAR THAT ZERO RATING as A BADGE OF HONOR. I write this because IMHO this was ONE FUNNY (often PAINFULLY FUNNY) MOVIE ;-).
As in the 2009 original, Paul Blart (played perfectly / sincerely straight by Kevin James) is a RANDOM / UTTERLY AVERAGE security guy at a shopping mall, a "mall cop." Who respects "mall cops"? Nobody. Who aspires to "one day grow-up to be a mall cop?" Nobody. But there he is, a mall cop, representing EVERYBODY who's ever found oneself (or finds oneself) in a job that IS PERHAPS NEEDED, but NOBODY really cares about.
... 'CEPT of course for someone like Paul Blart, who knowing, "okay I'm (just) a security guy at a shopping mall," STILL SINCERELY TRIES TO BE THE BEST "MALL COP" THAT HE COULD POSSIBLY BE. Why? Because THAT'S WHAT HE IS, a MALL COP. And honestly, if you're not proud of who you are, who will be? And then he has a family -- his beloved 70-80 y/o mother who gets actually run-over by a speeding milk truck SECONDS INTO THIS MOVIE as she reaches out into the street for the newspaper (probably MIS-THROWN there by some _careless paperboy_) one morning; and then his UTTERLY ADORABLE chubby but ALWAYS SMILING, now TEENAGE DAUGHTER Maya (played MAGNIFICENTLY by Raini Rodriguez) who LOVES him, even WORSHIPS him. Why? Because HE'S HER DAD.
I LOVE THIS FILM.
I can honestly say that MY WORLD is FILLED WITH PAUL and MAYA BLARTS, good and often largely invisible people who WITHOUT THEM the world would be a much more difficult AND HONESTLY MUCH LONELIER PLACE. AND AS AN ETERNAL "Associate" I know a thing or two about "not being a somebody."
Yet we're given (if we believe, by God...) what we're given and asked to do the best that we can with that. (And we CAN ALWAYS do A LOT ... we CAN always CHOOSE to make the world around us a better place, NO MATTER WHERE WE ARE or ROLE / POSITION THAT WE HAVE ... ;-) ... LIKE "WRITE A BLOG" ;-) ;-)
The current film begins with Paul and Maya each getting surprising letters bearing "good news" in the mail. Paul's invited TO BE HONORED at a NATIONAL CONVENTION OF MALL SECURITY PERSONEL (Yup, there appears to be truly a "National Assoc." for everything ;-) to be held in LAS VEGAS and MAYA gets a letter of acceptance to UCLA (the Blarts live in New Jersey ...) for college next year.
Paul's happy/ecstatic to have received his letter ("It's about time ... that I should be so honored" ;-), while Maya doesn't know how to break _her_ "good news" to her loving if over-protective dad.
Much, much, much, often corny but utterly heartfelt ensues ...
I'll also say here that James' timing in this film is phenomenal. A lot of the jokes in the film are physical, yes, A LOT LIKE THE OLD HUMOR of THE THREE STOOGES. And he honestly PULLS IT OFF, REPEATEDLY, OVER AND OVER AGAIN ... It's a film that makes one laugh-out-loud, REPEATEDLY, and at times makes one cry.
AND PARENTS, YES, THE "PG" RATING IS UTTERLY APPROPRIATE. This film is for just about everybody!
So good job PAUL & MAYA! Good job Kevin James / Raini Rodriguez, IMHO you really pulled this film off ;-)
<< 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! :-) >>
Reviews of current films written by Fr. Dennis Zdenek Kriz, OSM of St. Philip Benizi Parish, Fullerton, CA
Friday, April 17, 2015
Thursday, April 16, 2015
Betibú [2014]
MPAA (UR would be PG-13) APUM (3 Stars) Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
CineNational.com listing*
APU-Mohicano (A. Núñez Stock) review*
CinesArgentinos.com.ar (Chandler) review*
ElPais.com (J. Ocaña) review*
El Espectador Avezado (R. Gallego) review*
EscribiendoCine.com (E. Obregon) review*
LaNacion.com.ar (D. Batile) review*
CultureFly.co.uk [S. Mayne] review
Global Cinema (R. Stafford) review
The Hollywood Reporter (J. Holland) review
Betibú [2014] [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]* (directed and screenplay cowritten by Miguel Cohan [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]* along with Ana Cohan [IMDb] [CN]* [SC]* based on the novel [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Claudia Piñeiro [es.wikip]* [GR]* [Amzn] [IMDb] [CN]* [SC]*) is a fun / well-crafted contemporary ARGENTINIAN who-done-it / noirish crime thriller that played recently at the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival.
The story is set around a murder of a rich older man named Pedro Chazaretta. His housekeeper found him one day, still sitting in his chair in the living room on the second floor of his well kept / quite spacious home, his throat slit, apparently from behind, old jazz record still spinning on the stylish turntable.
Okay, a murder of a rich guy, in this case Argentinian ... so what? As always in a good, well spun "genre" tale, there's more going on than just a "regular" / "run of the mill" murder.
The murder, of course, causes a local / national media sensation, the more so, since Chazaretta had been accused (and acquitted) some years back in the suspicious death of his wife. That suspicious death (and the investigation into Chazaretta's possible involvement) had previously caused a local/national media sensation. So every newspaper / media outlet in the country (Argentina) was sending-in its "best people" to cover this story.
Enter the Buenos Aires Tribune, a newspaper / media outlet (fictionalized), which like newspapers / media outlets _everywhere_ else has been trying to adapt / survive / maintain an audience in an environment increasingly dominated by the internet.
Indeed, the Tribune's managing editor Lorenzo Rinaldi (played by José Coronado [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*) had recently made the decision of offering his grizzled veteran crime reporter Jaime Brena (played by Daniel Fanego [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*) an "early retirement package" in favor of a (presumably cheaper) "fresh out of journalism school" 20-something newbie Mariano Saravia (played by Alberto Ammann [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*) to lead his paper's "crime beat." Of course, Lorenzo wasn't expecting such a sensational murder to pop-up just as he was trying to lead the paper in this cost-cutting transition. So good-ole Lorenzo has to "eat crow" a bit as he goes "hat in hand" to Brena's appropriately gritty "hole-in-the-wall" apartment to ask him to "stay on for a bit longer" to help the still "quite green" Mariano tackle the case for the paper. Besides, Brena covered (quite well) the suspicious death of Chazaretta's wife a few years back as well ...
But the business minded Lorenzo also realizes that he needs more than a couple of "crime reporters" on this story. He needs a ringer ... someone who'll bring people WITH KINDS OF MEDIA CHOICES (BACK) TO HIS PAPER. And so ... as a GOOD MANAGER (and perhaps reflective of his desperation to "get this right...") he decides to eat yet "more crow":
He calls-up an old flame, a famed (Argentine) mystery/thriller writer Nurit Iscar aka Betibú (played by Mercedes Morán [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*), offering her a large enough number of column inches on the front page each day to stop her eyes from rolling (Lorenzo was married when they started dating, and she finally dumped him when she finally/painfully realized that he'll never leave his wife). He tells her that the other two -- she knows Brena, not "the new guy" -- would help her with the research, but that he, HIS PAPER, needs HER celebrated writing skills to "sell the story" ON / FOR HIS PAPER.
The other two don't mind. Brena's just pissed-off because no-matter what the outcome, he's losing his job at the end of the tale because (and he knows it) he's "a dinosaur." Mariano perhaps doesn't even realize that eventually he's going to have to stand on his own stories. But both are actually kinda impressed to be working with a top-notch nationally renowned (celebrity) crime novelist.
So this then was the team that "The Trib" outfitted to tackle this case (and the nation's other major newspapers / media outlets were presumably busily assembling similarly impressive teams).
And a good part of the film's charm is of course this subtext of "what today's media outlets have to do to compete / survive" and even the more-or-less obvious scandal being presented here in the "Entertainment-izing of the News." After all the Trib's managing editor HIRED a FICTION WRITER to be the _lead writer_ ON A NEWS STORY ... ;-)
But let's get back to the murder...
A murder of a rich guy would probably make news anywhere. But this is, of course, contemporary Argentina, with its own cultural / subtextual concerns.
It becomes clear that part of what shocks and even offends the Argentine populace is WHERE the murder takes place. Good ole Chazaretta was murdered in his luxurious home LOCATED INSIDE one of those SUPER-SECURE "gated communities" that much of Latin America (including famously Argentina) is (in)famous for. And the murder itself ISN'T what really "offends" the average Argentine reader (or the Argentine writer like Nurit "Betibú" Iscar). Instead, what really offends the average Argentine is _the existence_ of these SUPER-EXCLUSIVE "gated communities."
Nurit Iscar, famed Argentine novelist and armed with a "Press Pass" CAN'T EVEN GET INTO THE GATED COMMUNITY without jumping through all kinds of demeaning hoops: "Who do you know who's living here?" "Nobody, I'm going there ON BEHALF OF THE TRIBUNE to write about the guy murdered there." "Well we need a name and phone number of a resident to call." "HE'S DEAD ... you idiots ..." "Well, I'm sorry we're not allowed to let just anybody in." "I'M NOT JUST ANYBODY, YOU KNOW WHO I AM (I'll autograph a book for you if I have to ...) AND I'M GOING THERE TO WRITE FOR ONE OF OUR MAJOR PAPERS (here's a copy of today's edition if you need one...) ..." "Well, I need someone INSIDE to call." "Argh ..."
When Nurit finally gets in, she talks into her dictaphone: "Here I am investigating a murder that should not have happened. And I wonder what's more terrifying to residents of this gated community Las Maravillas (The Wonders), that A MURDERER was able to slip through all their security OR that A MURDERER may be in living in their midst ..."
What then of the murder? This is, of course Argentina. Chazaretta was, of course, a "rich guy." But in Argentina, "rich guys" who live in ISOLATED, HEAVILY PROTECTED GATED COMMUNITIES are a relatively small circle of people and ... people who basically _all know each other_ AND THEN PRETTY MUCH ALL THEIR LIVES ...
So, what happened?
Well a team with a old grizzled "crime reporter" who'd "know a guy" for everything, "guys" who'd know "every plumber, electrician, auto mechanic, and ... (again, this is Argentina) every army PX-clerk in the country" would come-up with some leads. Similarly a team with "a young guy" who "knows a thing or two about social media / Facebook" ;-) would come up with some leads as well (Maybe the old Patriarchs / Good ole Boys wouldn't use Facebook but their kids, grand-kids and nephews would ;-) --. And then someone with the imagination of a successful who-done-it / crime novelist could connect the dots ;-).
It makes for a very fun and well spun story ...
And one that EVERYONE living in our world today could appreciate. So good job folks! Good job!
* Decent enough (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! :-) >>
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
CineNational.com listing*
APU-Mohicano (A. Núñez Stock) review*
CinesArgentinos.com.ar (Chandler) review*
ElPais.com (J. Ocaña) review*
El Espectador Avezado (R. Gallego) review*
EscribiendoCine.com (E. Obregon) review*
LaNacion.com.ar (D. Batile) review*
CultureFly.co.uk [S. Mayne] review
Global Cinema (R. Stafford) review
The Hollywood Reporter (J. Holland) review
Betibú [2014] [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]* (directed and screenplay cowritten by Miguel Cohan [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]* along with Ana Cohan [IMDb] [CN]* [SC]* based on the novel [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Claudia Piñeiro [es.wikip]* [GR]* [Amzn] [IMDb] [CN]* [SC]*) is a fun / well-crafted contemporary ARGENTINIAN who-done-it / noirish crime thriller that played recently at the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival.
The story is set around a murder of a rich older man named Pedro Chazaretta. His housekeeper found him one day, still sitting in his chair in the living room on the second floor of his well kept / quite spacious home, his throat slit, apparently from behind, old jazz record still spinning on the stylish turntable.
Okay, a murder of a rich guy, in this case Argentinian ... so what? As always in a good, well spun "genre" tale, there's more going on than just a "regular" / "run of the mill" murder.
The murder, of course, causes a local / national media sensation, the more so, since Chazaretta had been accused (and acquitted) some years back in the suspicious death of his wife. That suspicious death (and the investigation into Chazaretta's possible involvement) had previously caused a local/national media sensation. So every newspaper / media outlet in the country (Argentina) was sending-in its "best people" to cover this story.
Enter the Buenos Aires Tribune, a newspaper / media outlet (fictionalized), which like newspapers / media outlets _everywhere_ else has been trying to adapt / survive / maintain an audience in an environment increasingly dominated by the internet.
Indeed, the Tribune's managing editor Lorenzo Rinaldi (played by José Coronado [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*) had recently made the decision of offering his grizzled veteran crime reporter Jaime Brena (played by Daniel Fanego [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*) an "early retirement package" in favor of a (presumably cheaper) "fresh out of journalism school" 20-something newbie Mariano Saravia (played by Alberto Ammann [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*) to lead his paper's "crime beat." Of course, Lorenzo wasn't expecting such a sensational murder to pop-up just as he was trying to lead the paper in this cost-cutting transition. So good-ole Lorenzo has to "eat crow" a bit as he goes "hat in hand" to Brena's appropriately gritty "hole-in-the-wall" apartment to ask him to "stay on for a bit longer" to help the still "quite green" Mariano tackle the case for the paper. Besides, Brena covered (quite well) the suspicious death of Chazaretta's wife a few years back as well ...
But the business minded Lorenzo also realizes that he needs more than a couple of "crime reporters" on this story. He needs a ringer ... someone who'll bring people WITH KINDS OF MEDIA CHOICES (BACK) TO HIS PAPER. And so ... as a GOOD MANAGER (and perhaps reflective of his desperation to "get this right...") he decides to eat yet "more crow":
He calls-up an old flame, a famed (Argentine) mystery/thriller writer Nurit Iscar aka Betibú (played by Mercedes Morán [IMDb] [FAes]* [CN]* [SC]*), offering her a large enough number of column inches on the front page each day to stop her eyes from rolling (Lorenzo was married when they started dating, and she finally dumped him when she finally/painfully realized that he'll never leave his wife). He tells her that the other two -- she knows Brena, not "the new guy" -- would help her with the research, but that he, HIS PAPER, needs HER celebrated writing skills to "sell the story" ON / FOR HIS PAPER.
The other two don't mind. Brena's just pissed-off because no-matter what the outcome, he's losing his job at the end of the tale because (and he knows it) he's "a dinosaur." Mariano perhaps doesn't even realize that eventually he's going to have to stand on his own stories. But both are actually kinda impressed to be working with a top-notch nationally renowned (celebrity) crime novelist.
So this then was the team that "The Trib" outfitted to tackle this case (and the nation's other major newspapers / media outlets were presumably busily assembling similarly impressive teams).
And a good part of the film's charm is of course this subtext of "what today's media outlets have to do to compete / survive" and even the more-or-less obvious scandal being presented here in the "Entertainment-izing of the News." After all the Trib's managing editor HIRED a FICTION WRITER to be the _lead writer_ ON A NEWS STORY ... ;-)
But let's get back to the murder...
A murder of a rich guy would probably make news anywhere. But this is, of course, contemporary Argentina, with its own cultural / subtextual concerns.
It becomes clear that part of what shocks and even offends the Argentine populace is WHERE the murder takes place. Good ole Chazaretta was murdered in his luxurious home LOCATED INSIDE one of those SUPER-SECURE "gated communities" that much of Latin America (including famously Argentina) is (in)famous for. And the murder itself ISN'T what really "offends" the average Argentine reader (or the Argentine writer like Nurit "Betibú" Iscar). Instead, what really offends the average Argentine is _the existence_ of these SUPER-EXCLUSIVE "gated communities."
Nurit Iscar, famed Argentine novelist and armed with a "Press Pass" CAN'T EVEN GET INTO THE GATED COMMUNITY without jumping through all kinds of demeaning hoops: "Who do you know who's living here?" "Nobody, I'm going there ON BEHALF OF THE TRIBUNE to write about the guy murdered there." "Well we need a name and phone number of a resident to call." "HE'S DEAD ... you idiots ..." "Well, I'm sorry we're not allowed to let just anybody in." "I'M NOT JUST ANYBODY, YOU KNOW WHO I AM (I'll autograph a book for you if I have to ...) AND I'M GOING THERE TO WRITE FOR ONE OF OUR MAJOR PAPERS (here's a copy of today's edition if you need one...) ..." "Well, I need someone INSIDE to call." "Argh ..."
When Nurit finally gets in, she talks into her dictaphone: "Here I am investigating a murder that should not have happened. And I wonder what's more terrifying to residents of this gated community Las Maravillas (The Wonders), that A MURDERER was able to slip through all their security OR that A MURDERER may be in living in their midst ..."
What then of the murder? This is, of course Argentina. Chazaretta was, of course, a "rich guy." But in Argentina, "rich guys" who live in ISOLATED, HEAVILY PROTECTED GATED COMMUNITIES are a relatively small circle of people and ... people who basically _all know each other_ AND THEN PRETTY MUCH ALL THEIR LIVES ...
So, what happened?
Well a team with a old grizzled "crime reporter" who'd "know a guy" for everything, "guys" who'd know "every plumber, electrician, auto mechanic, and ... (again, this is Argentina) every army PX-clerk in the country" would come-up with some leads. Similarly a team with "a young guy" who "knows a thing or two about social media / Facebook" ;-) would come up with some leads as well (Maybe the old Patriarchs / Good ole Boys wouldn't use Facebook but their kids, grand-kids and nephews would ;-) --. And then someone with the imagination of a successful who-done-it / crime novelist could connect the dots ;-).
It makes for a very fun and well spun story ...
And one that EVERYONE living in our world today could appreciate. So good job folks! Good job!
* Decent enough (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! :-) >>
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
One for the Road (orig. En el Último Trago) [2014]
MPAA (UR would be R) Fr. Dennis (4+ Stars)
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
Chilango.com (J. Pérez) review*
CineGarage.com review*
CinemaTradicional.com (A. Acuña Navarijo) review*
CinePremiere.com.mx (A. Magaña) review*
CorreCamera.com (D. Farjí) review*
CorreCamera.com (H Lara) review*
El Rincón de Dacne (C. Bernal Romero) review*
El Universal.com.mx (J. Mérida) review*
Hoy (G. Orozco) review*
One for the Road (orig. En el Último Trago) [2014] [IMDb] [FAes]* (directed and cowritten by Jack Zagha Kababie [IMDb] [FAes]* along with David Desloa [IMDb] and Yossy Zagha Kababie [IMDb]) is a lovely / nostalgic OCTOGENARIAN COMEDY and "BUDDY" / "ROAD TRIP" movie from MEXICO that played recently at the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival.
Three friends, Emiliano (played by José Carlos Ruiz [IMDb] [FAes]*), Benito (played by Eduardo Manzano [IMDb] [FAes]*) and Agustín (played by Luis Bayardo [IMDb] [FAes]*) embark on a road trip presumably from Mexico City [en.wikip] to Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* to fulfill the dying wish of a fourth buddy Pedro (played by Pedro Weber 'Chatanuga' [IMDb] [FAes]*).
The film opens with Pedro, their friend, playing dominoes with them in some small neighborhood bar somewhere in the D.F., and KNOWING that "his time was near," he orders five tequilas: "But Pedro, with all the medicines that we're taking, YOU KNOW that NONE OF US can drink anymore?" "Guys, I'm not ordering them FOR US, I'm ordering them FOR ME. ;-)" -- and downing them, one by one, one ("Mmm..."), two ("Ahh.." ;-), three ("Okay, now I'm emborrachado" ;-) ;-) -- he continues:
"You know this story, I've told you it at least fifty times," -- the other three roll their eyes because they've heard this story A THOUSAND TIMES ;-) -- "THE CLOSEST I EVER CAME TO _TRUE GREATNESS_ -- [ pause for an appropriate moment of silence ;-) ] -- was ONE NIGHT, ONE CRAZY NIGHT that I spent drinking with José Alfredo Jiménez [es.wikip]*[en.wikip] (a VERY FAMOUS Mariachi singer from Dolores Hidalgo, Gto) ...
... AT THE END OF THAT NIGHT he wrote on a napkin the words to "En El Ultimo Trago" ("The last shot") which became one of his most famous songs [YouTube]
... and HE WROTE THE DEDICATION _TO ME_, telling me that this was THE FIRST TIME he ever wrote the song down. And by all accounts he was right because the song only became a hit many years afterwards...
... ANYWAY ... my dying wish is -- "But you're NOT dying..." "OH YES I AM, just wait ..." -- "take that napkin with that dedication TO ME ;-) and deliver it to his museum there in Dolores Hidalgo. Have them put it up in a prominent place, so that PEOPLE WILL SEE that dedication, WITH MY NAME ON IT, there at the bottom of napkin, after I'm dead ... "
And, finishing his "last request" to his three fellow octogenarian dominoes partners, he ... has a heart attack, and ... dies ;-). One heck of an "último trago" ;-) ;-)
Well, for the other three -- 80+ years old or not -- that was one heck of a dying wish and though Emiliano's ALREADY USING A WALKER ... they decide to fulfill it ;-)
The rest of the movie follows ... often VERY, VERY SLOWLY ... ;-)
This is just a wonderful (and, parents note, at times crude ;-) movie about life-long friendship!
A GREAT, GREAT JOB!
* 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! :-) >>
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
Chilango.com (J. Pérez) review*
CineGarage.com review*
CinemaTradicional.com (A. Acuña Navarijo) review*
CinePremiere.com.mx (A. Magaña) review*
CorreCamera.com (D. Farjí) review*
CorreCamera.com (H Lara) review*
El Rincón de Dacne (C. Bernal Romero) review*
El Universal.com.mx (J. Mérida) review*
Hoy (G. Orozco) review*
One for the Road (orig. En el Último Trago) [2014] [IMDb] [FAes]* (directed and cowritten by Jack Zagha Kababie [IMDb] [FAes]* along with David Desloa [IMDb] and Yossy Zagha Kababie [IMDb]) is a lovely / nostalgic OCTOGENARIAN COMEDY and "BUDDY" / "ROAD TRIP" movie from MEXICO that played recently at the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival.
Three friends, Emiliano (played by José Carlos Ruiz [IMDb] [FAes]*), Benito (played by Eduardo Manzano [IMDb] [FAes]*) and Agustín (played by Luis Bayardo [IMDb] [FAes]*) embark on a road trip presumably from Mexico City [en.wikip] to Dolores Hidalgo, Guanajuato [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* to fulfill the dying wish of a fourth buddy Pedro (played by Pedro Weber 'Chatanuga' [IMDb] [FAes]*).
The film opens with Pedro, their friend, playing dominoes with them in some small neighborhood bar somewhere in the D.F., and KNOWING that "his time was near," he orders five tequilas: "But Pedro, with all the medicines that we're taking, YOU KNOW that NONE OF US can drink anymore?" "Guys, I'm not ordering them FOR US, I'm ordering them FOR ME. ;-)" -- and downing them, one by one, one ("Mmm..."), two ("Ahh.." ;-), three ("Okay, now I'm emborrachado" ;-) ;-) -- he continues:
"You know this story, I've told you it at least fifty times," -- the other three roll their eyes because they've heard this story A THOUSAND TIMES ;-) -- "THE CLOSEST I EVER CAME TO _TRUE GREATNESS_ -- [ pause for an appropriate moment of silence ;-) ] -- was ONE NIGHT, ONE CRAZY NIGHT that I spent drinking with José Alfredo Jiménez [es.wikip]*[en.wikip] (a VERY FAMOUS Mariachi singer from Dolores Hidalgo, Gto) ...
... AT THE END OF THAT NIGHT he wrote on a napkin the words to "En El Ultimo Trago" ("The last shot") which became one of his most famous songs [YouTube]
... and HE WROTE THE DEDICATION _TO ME_, telling me that this was THE FIRST TIME he ever wrote the song down. And by all accounts he was right because the song only became a hit many years afterwards...
... ANYWAY ... my dying wish is -- "But you're NOT dying..." "OH YES I AM, just wait ..." -- "take that napkin with that dedication TO ME ;-) and deliver it to his museum there in Dolores Hidalgo. Have them put it up in a prominent place, so that PEOPLE WILL SEE that dedication, WITH MY NAME ON IT, there at the bottom of napkin, after I'm dead ... "
And, finishing his "last request" to his three fellow octogenarian dominoes partners, he ... has a heart attack, and ... dies ;-). One heck of an "último trago" ;-) ;-)
Well, for the other three -- 80+ years old or not -- that was one heck of a dying wish and though Emiliano's ALREADY USING A WALKER ... they decide to fulfill it ;-)
The rest of the movie follows ... often VERY, VERY SLOWLY ... ;-)
This is just a wonderful (and, parents note, at times crude ;-) movie about life-long friendship!
A GREAT, GREAT JOB!
* 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! :-) >>
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Neruda [2014]
MPAA (UR would be PG-13) Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
CineChile.cl listing*
Official website
El Agente de Cine (A. García) review*
ElMostrador.cl (V. Minué Maggiolo) review*
LaNacion.cl review*
LaTercera.com (J. García) review*
Neruda [2014] [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]* (screenplay and directed by Manuel Basoalto [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]*) is an beautifully shot (the outdoor vistas are often spectacularly beautiful) CHILEAN film / period piece about the 1948-49 flight into exile -- 13 months from house-to-house, town-to-town, eventually on horseback over the Andes Mountains from Chile to Argentina -- of Chilean Poet / ever Leftist-then-Communist Politician later Nobel Prize for Literature winning Pablo Neruda [es.wikip]*[en.wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb-Char] (played in the film by José Secall [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]*). The film played recently at the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival.
The director, Basoalto [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]* had already completed a documentary series a number of years previous about Neruda's famous escape, but believed, rightly IMHO, that the subject matter deserved treatment as a biopic as well.
The reason for Neruda's need to flee Chile was of course political. Some background:
Born Neftali Ricardo Reyes Basoalto "in the provinces" (in Parral, Chile) he began using the pseudonym Pablo Neruda after he left at sixteen for Santiago the Capital to study (French was his major) at the University of Chile. His father was apparently opposed to "his wasting his time with writing poetry." So publishing poems under a pseudonym allowed him to publish without his father's knowledge. And a poet he became! By eighteen he published his famous Twenty Poems of Love and A Song of Despair (orig. Veinte poemas de amor y una canción desesperada) [1923] [GR-eng] [GR-esp] [WCat-eng] [WCat-esp] [Amzn-eng] [Amzn-esp]. By 20 he was arguably world-renowned -- as a poet! Yet, he was also penniless.
So Neruda took a job in the Chilean diplomatic corps, serving first in then British India (in Burma and Ceylon) and eventually "moved up" to serve IN SPAIN just as the Spanish Civil War was about to begin. That's where he got radicalized and became a lifelong Communist / Communist apologist.
After serving also in Mexico and then Paris, he eventually came back to Chile and in 1945 was elected to serve as Senator. (It is at this point, Neruda's return to Chile and election to the Chilean Senate, that the film begins).
In 1946, Neruda was asked to serve as the CAMPAIGN MANAGER for Gabriel González Videla [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* who was running for Chilean President as part of a coalition of left-wing political parties (which the Communists were a part).
HOWEVER soon after getting elected, Videla, expelled the Communist Party from the ruling Coalition and then pushed through the Chilean Congress a McCarthy-like law called the Law for the Permanent Defense of Democracy [en.wikip] [es.wikip]*, which among other things banned the Communist Party in Chile. Why would Videla do this, after having Neruda, a Communist after all, ACTUALLY LEAD HIS CAMPAIGN is still fodder for dispute. However it's assumed that pressure probably came from the United States to do so (as the Cold War was just beginning).
In any case, in the tradition of the famous J'Accuse letter written by French writer Emile Zola in defense of Alfred Dreyfus in the 1898 French Dreyfus Affair, on January 6, 1948 Pablo Neruda -- AND THIS WAS SHOWN VERY DRAMATICALLY IN THE FILM -- rose to give his own "I Accuse" (orig. "Yo Acuso") speech in the Chilean Senate, where quoting Franklin Roosevelt's 1941 Four Freedoms speech -- where FDR postulated the Universality of the Freedom of Speech, the Freedom of Worship, the Freedom from Want, and the Freedom from Fear -- Neruda accused Videla's law of violating Chileans' rights to both the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom from Fear.
After giving the speech, since the Communist Party was already banned, Neruda had to go into hiding and the rest of the film followed...
The rest of the film includes then the process of Neruda's escape, again involving moving from safe-house to safe-house and eventually going by horseback over the Andes and into Argentina. The film also includes reminiscences from Neruda's childhood (again he was born "in the mountains / provinces") and reminders of Neruda's continued writing during this time of escape. During the Q&A with the director of the film, present at its screening here at the 2015 Chicago Latino Film Festival, the director noted that Neruda wrote his Canto General (1950) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] "while on the run" at this time.
All in all, this is a very well done Chilean film about probably the most renowned Chilean who ever lived.
* 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! :-) >>
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
CineChile.cl listing*
Official website
El Agente de Cine (A. García) review*
ElMostrador.cl (V. Minué Maggiolo) review*
LaNacion.cl review*
LaTercera.com (J. García) review*
Neruda [2014] [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]* (screenplay and directed by Manuel Basoalto [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]*) is an beautifully shot (the outdoor vistas are often spectacularly beautiful) CHILEAN film / period piece about the 1948-49 flight into exile -- 13 months from house-to-house, town-to-town, eventually on horseback over the Andes Mountains from Chile to Argentina -- of Chilean Poet / ever Leftist-then-Communist Politician later Nobel Prize for Literature winning Pablo Neruda [es.wikip]*[en.wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb-Char] (played in the film by José Secall [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]*). The film played recently at the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival.
The director, Basoalto [IMDb] [FAes]* [CCh.cl]* had already completed a documentary series a number of years previous about Neruda's famous escape, but believed, rightly IMHO, that the subject matter deserved treatment as a biopic as well.
The reason for Neruda's need to flee Chile was of course political. Some background:
Born Neftali Ricardo Reyes Basoalto "in the provinces" (in Parral, Chile) he began using the pseudonym Pablo Neruda after he left at sixteen for Santiago the Capital to study (French was his major) at the University of Chile. His father was apparently opposed to "his wasting his time with writing poetry." So publishing poems under a pseudonym allowed him to publish without his father's knowledge. And a poet he became! By eighteen he published his famous Twenty Poems of Love and A Song of Despair (orig. Veinte poemas de amor y una canción desesperada) [1923] [GR-eng] [GR-esp] [WCat-eng] [WCat-esp] [Amzn-eng] [Amzn-esp]. By 20 he was arguably world-renowned -- as a poet! Yet, he was also penniless.
So Neruda took a job in the Chilean diplomatic corps, serving first in then British India (in Burma and Ceylon) and eventually "moved up" to serve IN SPAIN just as the Spanish Civil War was about to begin. That's where he got radicalized and became a lifelong Communist / Communist apologist.
After serving also in Mexico and then Paris, he eventually came back to Chile and in 1945 was elected to serve as Senator. (It is at this point, Neruda's return to Chile and election to the Chilean Senate, that the film begins).
In 1946, Neruda was asked to serve as the CAMPAIGN MANAGER for Gabriel González Videla [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* who was running for Chilean President as part of a coalition of left-wing political parties (which the Communists were a part).
HOWEVER soon after getting elected, Videla, expelled the Communist Party from the ruling Coalition and then pushed through the Chilean Congress a McCarthy-like law called the Law for the Permanent Defense of Democracy [en.wikip] [es.wikip]*, which among other things banned the Communist Party in Chile. Why would Videla do this, after having Neruda, a Communist after all, ACTUALLY LEAD HIS CAMPAIGN is still fodder for dispute. However it's assumed that pressure probably came from the United States to do so (as the Cold War was just beginning).
In any case, in the tradition of the famous J'Accuse letter written by French writer Emile Zola in defense of Alfred Dreyfus in the 1898 French Dreyfus Affair, on January 6, 1948 Pablo Neruda -- AND THIS WAS SHOWN VERY DRAMATICALLY IN THE FILM -- rose to give his own "I Accuse" (orig. "Yo Acuso") speech in the Chilean Senate, where quoting Franklin Roosevelt's 1941 Four Freedoms speech -- where FDR postulated the Universality of the Freedom of Speech, the Freedom of Worship, the Freedom from Want, and the Freedom from Fear -- Neruda accused Videla's law of violating Chileans' rights to both the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom from Fear.
After giving the speech, since the Communist Party was already banned, Neruda had to go into hiding and the rest of the film followed...
The rest of the film includes then the process of Neruda's escape, again involving moving from safe-house to safe-house and eventually going by horseback over the Andes and into Argentina. The film also includes reminiscences from Neruda's childhood (again he was born "in the mountains / provinces") and reminders of Neruda's continued writing during this time of escape. During the Q&A with the director of the film, present at its screening here at the 2015 Chicago Latino Film Festival, the director noted that Neruda wrote his Canto General (1950) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] "while on the run" at this time.
All in all, this is a very well done Chilean film about probably the most renowned Chilean who ever lived.
* 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! :-) >>
Saturday, April 11, 2015
Breaking the Wave (orig. Rompiendo la Ola) [2014]
MPAA (UR would be PG-13) Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
SensaCine.com listing*
Breaking the Wave (orig. Rompiendo la Ola) [2014] [IMDb] (directed and cowritten by Annie Canavaggio [IMDb] along with Vicente Ferraz [IMDb]) is a fun PANAMANIAN "SURFING DOCUMENTARY" that played recently at e 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival about the surfing community at Playa Santa Catalina in Veraguas Province, Panama.
The film clearly plays-off of the common perception that surfing (though actually having its origins among the browner-skinned Polynesians of Hawaii and the South Pacific) is today largely a "white sport." Yet presented here is a still largely quiet surfer's paradise where most of the confident yet laid-back and smiling surfers are black, mulatto and even indigenous Panamanian locals who've actually done increasingly well international surfing competitions. (And at the end of the film, one these local surfers became the first black surfer - at least from Panama - to ever win a sponsorship contract from one of the world's major surfboard manufacturers).
So how does the life of this Panamanian surfing community compare and contrast with the perceived life-style of surfers worldwide? Well, that's a good part of the movie ;-)
Differences noted would include that the Panamanian locals would probably be poorer than most of their counterparts from more industrially advanced countries. As such, while certainly loving to surf, more than a few of them interviewed were also shown working hard in construction and harvesting jobs as they noted (if at times sadly): "you can't eat by surfing."
Then, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, drugs weren't portrayed as being a big part of the local surfing subculture. Yes, having a beer with friends, especially among the older / mentor now 40-something coaches was deemed okay. AND packages of cocaine were shown in the documentary as actually occasionally washing onshore (after presumably having fallen off of various drug boats). BUT the father of one of the main surfers in the film spent four years in prison after being caught trying to sell one of these kilo packages of cocaine that he found washed-up on shore one day. As such, most of the younger local Panamanian surfers interviewed in the film appeared to equate drugs with inviting problems that none of them (or their families) really needed.
It was also quite clear that religion, both popular Catholicism and charismatic Protestantism, played a significant role in the local surfing community as well. Almost all of the younger surfers were one or the other -- Protestant or Catholic -- and certainly their families were.
Finally, it was clear that family -- parents and brothers / sisters / cousins -- probably played the most important role in all of their lives. Perhaps that's why they worked first and surfed when they had time. That's why appeared to stay away from drugs -- they didn't want to give their families needless problems. And perhaps that's why they all seemed to be either Protestant or Catholic (again that's what their families were). FINALLY, THEY ALSO CLEARLY ENJOYED TEACHING THEIR YOUNGER BROTHERS, SISTERS, COUSINS how to surf -- even if they didn't have a board for them to use (they just drew the outline of a "board" in the sand, and had the kids "pretend" ;-)
All in all, I found this film to be A DELIGHT to watch. It makes total sense to me that people, the world over, watching waves come in from the sea would find the prospect of surfing those waves tantalizing. I'm just happy as pie to see that people across the world are now increasingly doing so. 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! :-) >>
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
SensaCine.com listing*
Breaking the Wave (orig. Rompiendo la Ola) [2014] [IMDb] (directed and cowritten by Annie Canavaggio [IMDb] along with Vicente Ferraz [IMDb]) is a fun PANAMANIAN "SURFING DOCUMENTARY" that played recently at e 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival about the surfing community at Playa Santa Catalina in Veraguas Province, Panama.
The film clearly plays-off of the common perception that surfing (though actually having its origins among the browner-skinned Polynesians of Hawaii and the South Pacific) is today largely a "white sport." Yet presented here is a still largely quiet surfer's paradise where most of the confident yet laid-back and smiling surfers are black, mulatto and even indigenous Panamanian locals who've actually done increasingly well international surfing competitions. (And at the end of the film, one these local surfers became the first black surfer - at least from Panama - to ever win a sponsorship contract from one of the world's major surfboard manufacturers).
So how does the life of this Panamanian surfing community compare and contrast with the perceived life-style of surfers worldwide? Well, that's a good part of the movie ;-)
Differences noted would include that the Panamanian locals would probably be poorer than most of their counterparts from more industrially advanced countries. As such, while certainly loving to surf, more than a few of them interviewed were also shown working hard in construction and harvesting jobs as they noted (if at times sadly): "you can't eat by surfing."
Then, perhaps somewhat surprisingly, drugs weren't portrayed as being a big part of the local surfing subculture. Yes, having a beer with friends, especially among the older / mentor now 40-something coaches was deemed okay. AND packages of cocaine were shown in the documentary as actually occasionally washing onshore (after presumably having fallen off of various drug boats). BUT the father of one of the main surfers in the film spent four years in prison after being caught trying to sell one of these kilo packages of cocaine that he found washed-up on shore one day. As such, most of the younger local Panamanian surfers interviewed in the film appeared to equate drugs with inviting problems that none of them (or their families) really needed.
It was also quite clear that religion, both popular Catholicism and charismatic Protestantism, played a significant role in the local surfing community as well. Almost all of the younger surfers were one or the other -- Protestant or Catholic -- and certainly their families were.
Finally, it was clear that family -- parents and brothers / sisters / cousins -- probably played the most important role in all of their lives. Perhaps that's why they worked first and surfed when they had time. That's why appeared to stay away from drugs -- they didn't want to give their families needless problems. And perhaps that's why they all seemed to be either Protestant or Catholic (again that's what their families were). FINALLY, THEY ALSO CLEARLY ENJOYED TEACHING THEIR YOUNGER BROTHERS, SISTERS, COUSINS how to surf -- even if they didn't have a board for them to use (they just drew the outline of a "board" in the sand, and had the kids "pretend" ;-)
All in all, I found this film to be A DELIGHT to watch. It makes total sense to me that people, the world over, watching waves come in from the sea would find the prospect of surfing those waves tantalizing. I'm just happy as pie to see that people across the world are now increasingly doing so. 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 Liberator (orig. Libertador) [2013]
MPAA (UR would be R) Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
SensaCine.com listing*
El Espectador [Bogota, Columbia] review*
VenezuelaySuHistoria.blogspot.com (Profeballa) review*
TheHollywoodReporter.com (T. McCarthy) review
Slant Magazine (O. Moralde) review
The Liberator (orig. Libertador) [2013] [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]* (directed by Alberto Arvelo Mendoza [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*, screenplay by Timothy J. Sexton [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*) is a largely VENEZUELAN funded VENEZUELAN / SPANISH joint-venture biopic about Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] the "George Washington of Latin America." The film recently opened the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival. The film can also be streamed online for a nominal fee using the Amazon Instant Video service.
It must be said from the onset, however, that there are "things to note" about this film ;-).
While Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] [IMDb] (played in the film, IMHO quite excellently throughout, by Édgar Ramírez [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*), was without doubt _revered_ across Latin America especially in the parts of Latin America that he did, in fact, liberate (Venezuela, Colombia (then New Grenada) and Panama, Ecuador and Peru) and then perhaps even more-so in Venezuela where he was from, his legacy has been appropriated in recent years by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* as a "model" / symbol of his own contemporary efforts to bring a far greater level of social justice to common Venezuelans than was the case until, well, his (Chávez') arrival on the scene.
This contemporary "battle" about the legacy of Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] [IMDb] needs to be kept in mind as one watches this film (which after all largely funded by the "Chavista" Venezuelan government), the central question being: When Bolivar called for a "liberation for all people" who did "all" include?
This may _seem_ like a silly question, but Readers here should remember when the Founding Fathers of the United States wrote in the Declaration of Independence that: "All men are created equal" it was more or less clear that the vast majority of them assumed that "all men" meant "WHITE MEN" (meaning NOT non-white men, and NOT women) and then many of the Founders would further stipulate conditions on the "equality" of the "white men" -- Originally only _landed_ white men (those who actually owned property) had the right to vote in the United States.
So, it's certainly plausible that to Bolivar, who grew-up as a son of very wealthy Venezuelan "landed gentry" (Washington, Jefferson and later Robert E. Lee all would have certainly been considered as members of a similar well-educated / landed gentry class ... ), "all" could have meant something similar.
It's Chávez and other (more) left-leaning Latin American writers like Gabriel García Márquez [es.wikip]* [en.wikip], who began to explore the ramifications of taking Bolivar at his word, that is that "all" would really have meant ALL, and opponents now to Chávez's legacy are left defending a rather embarrassing diminishment of Bolivar's: "Yup, the father of our nation, set out to liberate ... only _some_ of us." ;-)
It is more-or-less clear that the current film takes the view that ALMOST FROM THE BEGINNING Bolivar clearly preferred the more inclusive even utopian understanding of "all," that is, that "ALL really meant ALL."
And the film expresses this, in part, in its treatment of Bolivar's relationship with his wife Maria Theresa Bolivar (played by María Valverde [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*), portraying her, a Spanish born daughter of Spanish nobility, as very much sitting in on AND PARTICIPATING in the "great political / philosophical discussions" that Bolivar's circle of friends would have "over dinner" and during the years prior to his taking-up the ideals and cause of the American and French Revolutions in his part of the world.
In reality, Maria died (of yellow fever) very early (only 8 months) after her arrival with Bolivar to Venezuela from Spain. So it'd be very hard to know if the film's portrayal of the relationship between Bolivar and his wife, both then still quite young, was accurate or would have continued to have been accurate if she had lived longer.
Similarly, when Bolivar is portrayed taking-up the cause of armed insurrection against Spain, he's shown setting up a stronghold, while still accessible to the sea, nevertheless "at the edge of the jungle wilds." This allows the film to portray Bolivar's subsequent army to be composed of not merely of other like-minded Venezuelan colonists (as well as Irish / English mercenaries, er "volunteers") but also to be composed _above all_ of INDIGENOUS PEOPLE and POORER, BOTH WHITE AND BLACK PEASANTS / "FOREST DWELLERS."
This is possible, perhaps even PROBABLE (after all one can't really build a serious army out of MERELY "landed gentlemen" -- there'd never be NEARLY ENOUGH OF THEM ;-). But it's CERTAINLY A "STICK IN THE EYE" to various elites today to remind them that PRETTY MUCH _ANY_ MILITARY ADVENTURE REQUIRES A LOT OF POOR(ER) PEOPLE to do the fighting.
LOL ;-) even the American Confederate Civil War "Hero," Robert E. Lee would have been simply sitting on his white horse, leading NOBODY, if he didn't have an army of poorer Southern white people WHO NEVER HAD THE MONEY TO OWN ANOTHER (DARKER) PERSON at his disposal to then command ;-).
So the portrayal of Bolivar's army in this film is both "kinda realistic" AND amusing / argumentative and even propagandistic -- giving due honor to the multitudes of "little foot soldiers" who would have done most of the actual fighting as Bolivar fought to Liberate his part of Latin America from the Spanish yoke. Perhaps the ONLY potentially surprising aspect to this take on the Bolivar's campaign was that Bolivar is portrayed in this film as actually caring for the freedom / destiny of these "little people" under his command.
Finally, many of the Venezuelan (anti-Chavist?) critics of the film have chafed at its assertion that Bolivar was assassinated rather than having died (officially) of tuberculosis. Yet even conceding that medical diagnoses in the early part of the 19th century would not have been what they are today, "tuberculosis" seems like a rather ODD cause of death for a presumably previously VITAL LEADER. Tuberculosis TODAY would be understood as a progressive debilitating lung disease not something that one comes down with and then _rapidly_ "just dies of." Yet perhaps there could have been all kinds of similar (and more rapidly mortal) diseases that he could have died of that AT THE TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED to be (like) "tuberculosis."
So all in all, this film _is_ more-or-less a "Chavista propaganda tract" about the life of Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] [IMDb] who recent Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* considered something of a model and certainly a hero.
Still it remains a PLAUSIBLE and at times even PROBABLE take on Bolivar's life that puts Chavez' opponents in a difficult position: Does one really want to argue that one's nation's FOUNDER and REVERED HERO really didn't want to free (or even respect) everybody?
As such, I smile and have to say that I enjoyed the film ;-)
* 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! :-) >>
IMDb listing
FilmAffinity.com/es listing*
SensaCine.com listing*
El Espectador [Bogota, Columbia] review*
VenezuelaySuHistoria.blogspot.com (Profeballa) review*
TheHollywoodReporter.com (T. McCarthy) review
Slant Magazine (O. Moralde) review
The Liberator (orig. Libertador) [2013] [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]* (directed by Alberto Arvelo Mendoza [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*, screenplay by Timothy J. Sexton [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*) is a largely VENEZUELAN funded VENEZUELAN / SPANISH joint-venture biopic about Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] the "George Washington of Latin America." The film recently opened the 2015 - 31st Chicago Latino Film Festival. The film can also be streamed online for a nominal fee using the Amazon Instant Video service.
It must be said from the onset, however, that there are "things to note" about this film ;-).
While Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] [IMDb] (played in the film, IMHO quite excellently throughout, by Édgar Ramírez [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*), was without doubt _revered_ across Latin America especially in the parts of Latin America that he did, in fact, liberate (Venezuela, Colombia (then New Grenada) and Panama, Ecuador and Peru) and then perhaps even more-so in Venezuela where he was from, his legacy has been appropriated in recent years by Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* as a "model" / symbol of his own contemporary efforts to bring a far greater level of social justice to common Venezuelans than was the case until, well, his (Chávez') arrival on the scene.
This contemporary "battle" about the legacy of Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] [IMDb] needs to be kept in mind as one watches this film (which after all largely funded by the "Chavista" Venezuelan government), the central question being: When Bolivar called for a "liberation for all people" who did "all" include?
This may _seem_ like a silly question, but Readers here should remember when the Founding Fathers of the United States wrote in the Declaration of Independence that: "All men are created equal" it was more or less clear that the vast majority of them assumed that "all men" meant "WHITE MEN" (meaning NOT non-white men, and NOT women) and then many of the Founders would further stipulate conditions on the "equality" of the "white men" -- Originally only _landed_ white men (those who actually owned property) had the right to vote in the United States.
So, it's certainly plausible that to Bolivar, who grew-up as a son of very wealthy Venezuelan "landed gentry" (Washington, Jefferson and later Robert E. Lee all would have certainly been considered as members of a similar well-educated / landed gentry class ... ), "all" could have meant something similar.
It's Chávez and other (more) left-leaning Latin American writers like Gabriel García Márquez [es.wikip]* [en.wikip], who began to explore the ramifications of taking Bolivar at his word, that is that "all" would really have meant ALL, and opponents now to Chávez's legacy are left defending a rather embarrassing diminishment of Bolivar's: "Yup, the father of our nation, set out to liberate ... only _some_ of us." ;-)
It is more-or-less clear that the current film takes the view that ALMOST FROM THE BEGINNING Bolivar clearly preferred the more inclusive even utopian understanding of "all," that is, that "ALL really meant ALL."
And the film expresses this, in part, in its treatment of Bolivar's relationship with his wife Maria Theresa Bolivar (played by María Valverde [IMDb] [FAes]* [SC]*), portraying her, a Spanish born daughter of Spanish nobility, as very much sitting in on AND PARTICIPATING in the "great political / philosophical discussions" that Bolivar's circle of friends would have "over dinner" and during the years prior to his taking-up the ideals and cause of the American and French Revolutions in his part of the world.
In reality, Maria died (of yellow fever) very early (only 8 months) after her arrival with Bolivar to Venezuela from Spain. So it'd be very hard to know if the film's portrayal of the relationship between Bolivar and his wife, both then still quite young, was accurate or would have continued to have been accurate if she had lived longer.
Similarly, when Bolivar is portrayed taking-up the cause of armed insurrection against Spain, he's shown setting up a stronghold, while still accessible to the sea, nevertheless "at the edge of the jungle wilds." This allows the film to portray Bolivar's subsequent army to be composed of not merely of other like-minded Venezuelan colonists (as well as Irish / English mercenaries, er "volunteers") but also to be composed _above all_ of INDIGENOUS PEOPLE and POORER, BOTH WHITE AND BLACK PEASANTS / "FOREST DWELLERS."
This is possible, perhaps even PROBABLE (after all one can't really build a serious army out of MERELY "landed gentlemen" -- there'd never be NEARLY ENOUGH OF THEM ;-). But it's CERTAINLY A "STICK IN THE EYE" to various elites today to remind them that PRETTY MUCH _ANY_ MILITARY ADVENTURE REQUIRES A LOT OF POOR(ER) PEOPLE to do the fighting.
LOL ;-) even the American Confederate Civil War "Hero," Robert E. Lee would have been simply sitting on his white horse, leading NOBODY, if he didn't have an army of poorer Southern white people WHO NEVER HAD THE MONEY TO OWN ANOTHER (DARKER) PERSON at his disposal to then command ;-).
So the portrayal of Bolivar's army in this film is both "kinda realistic" AND amusing / argumentative and even propagandistic -- giving due honor to the multitudes of "little foot soldiers" who would have done most of the actual fighting as Bolivar fought to Liberate his part of Latin America from the Spanish yoke. Perhaps the ONLY potentially surprising aspect to this take on the Bolivar's campaign was that Bolivar is portrayed in this film as actually caring for the freedom / destiny of these "little people" under his command.
Finally, many of the Venezuelan (anti-Chavist?) critics of the film have chafed at its assertion that Bolivar was assassinated rather than having died (officially) of tuberculosis. Yet even conceding that medical diagnoses in the early part of the 19th century would not have been what they are today, "tuberculosis" seems like a rather ODD cause of death for a presumably previously VITAL LEADER. Tuberculosis TODAY would be understood as a progressive debilitating lung disease not something that one comes down with and then _rapidly_ "just dies of." Yet perhaps there could have been all kinds of similar (and more rapidly mortal) diseases that he could have died of that AT THE TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED to be (like) "tuberculosis."
So all in all, this film _is_ more-or-less a "Chavista propaganda tract" about the life of Simón Bolivar [es.wikip]* [en.wikip] [IMDb] who recent Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez [en.wikip] [es.wikip]* considered something of a model and certainly a hero.
Still it remains a PLAUSIBLE and at times even PROBABLE take on Bolivar's life that puts Chavez' opponents in a difficult position: Does one really want to argue that one's nation's FOUNDER and REVERED HERO really didn't want to free (or even respect) everybody?
As such, I smile and have to say that I enjoyed the film ;-)
* 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! :-) >>
Friday, April 10, 2015
The Longest Ride [2015]
MPAA (PG-13) CNS/USCCB (A-III) ChicagoTribune (2 Stars) AVClub (C) Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)
IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review
The Longest Ride [2015] (directed by George Tillman, Jr, screenplay by Craig Bolotin based on the novel (2013) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Nicholas Sparks [wikip] [GR] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is largely what it is -- a "weapy (largely white oriented) romance / chick flick." BUT I would add (1) it's actually A PRETTY GOOD "weepy (largely white oriented) chick flick" and (2) IT CHOOSES, TIME AND AGAIN, TO BE POSITIVE. I want to say here that I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THIS SECOND POINT.
I write this because this film about "an impossible romance" between a hunky/ever smiling North Carolina born-and-bred, 4th generation rancher's son / BULL RIDER named Luke (played by Scott Eastwood) and previously bookish/destined to be a NPR-listener, Wake Forest U. (on scholarship) attending art history student, New Jersey (city) raised daughter of more recent Polish (perhaps Solidarity-era) immigrants Sophia (played by Britt Robertson) -- the two first meet late in Sophia's senior year in college at quite literally HER "first rodeo" ;-) -- could have EASILY gone "more negative" and in all kinds of ways. INSTEAD, Sparks / Tillman CHOSE to make this contemporary Red-State / Blue-State potentially "Romeo and Juliet"-like romance into a celebration of both and arguably ALL backgrounds / worlds. IMHO this is quite a feat and it deserves to be celebrated here.
Indeed, the entire state of North Carolina is presented in far different terms than most viewers / readers would be used to. Yes, North Carolina is part of America's "Deeper South." However, it was _always_ actually more moderate than the states that neighbor it. When North Carolina's legislature voted to join the Confederacy during the Civil War Era, its vote for Secession from the Union succeeded by only a few votes. In more recent times, Charlotte its capital has become something of a banking center / transportation hub and the state has become as "purple" of a state as one gets in the South.
The current film focuses _a lot_ actually on the University / intellectual side of the State. Again, Sophia was an art history major at Wake Forest U. and though "on scholarship" she went there because she was interested in the legacy of the Black Mountain Art Movement. "Black Mountain" what? ;-) BUT THAT'S EXACTLY IT ... For DECADES many intellectuals across the South have been screaming "We have much more here than cotton fields and racists." To some extent, Rick Linklater's film Boyhood [2014] sought to make the same point with regards to Texas.
Then "the second story" presented in the current film, that somewhat parallels the contemporary challenges faced by Sophia and Luke as they try to make their romance / budding relationship work, again playing out in North Carolina (and then North Carolina of the 1940s (!)) involved a lifelong romance / relationship between two people who were JEWISH -- Ira (played as a younger man by Jack Huston and as an older man by Alan Alda) who was already born/raised in North Carolina whose family ran furniture shop there, and Ruth (played wonderfully by Oona Chaplin) who along with her family fled Nazi occupied Vienna just before WW II -- "Jews in North Carolina? How'd they ever get here?" ;-) But why should that be surprising, given again Universities like North Carolina, Duke, NC State, and Wake Forest, as well as an entire art colony built around Black Mountain College? ... Again, there's MORE to North Carolina (and to the whole of the South) than cotton, tobacco and racism.
Then Luke's character is portrayed throughout quite honorably. He BEGINS the story as ALREADY A GOOD GUY and he ENDS as A BETTER GUY. And I can personally attest (and many times over) to the reality of Southern good manners, that again have to be taken into account when one thinks of the South. Yes, there are many problems in the South (as there are anywhere). But there is a charm / elegance in the South that extends across the various social (and racial...) strata that needs to be recognized as well. And so Sophia is also charmed / changed (POSITIVELY) in this regard as well. It _is_ a good thing to be nice ...
So, yes, while the film is "schmalzy" at times (as these kind of films often are), I have to give it a definite "thumbs up" because it does portray "the better angels" OF A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE and that inspires hope.
And I do wish that a lasting romance between a Luke and Sophia would indeed be possible.
<< 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! :-) >>
IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review
The Longest Ride [2015] (directed by George Tillman, Jr, screenplay by Craig Bolotin based on the novel (2013) [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Nicholas Sparks [wikip] [GR] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is largely what it is -- a "weapy (largely white oriented) romance / chick flick." BUT I would add (1) it's actually A PRETTY GOOD "weepy (largely white oriented) chick flick" and (2) IT CHOOSES, TIME AND AGAIN, TO BE POSITIVE. I want to say here that I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THIS SECOND POINT.
I write this because this film about "an impossible romance" between a hunky/ever smiling North Carolina born-and-bred, 4th generation rancher's son / BULL RIDER named Luke (played by Scott Eastwood) and previously bookish/destined to be a NPR-listener, Wake Forest U. (on scholarship) attending art history student, New Jersey (city) raised daughter of more recent Polish (perhaps Solidarity-era) immigrants Sophia (played by Britt Robertson) -- the two first meet late in Sophia's senior year in college at quite literally HER "first rodeo" ;-) -- could have EASILY gone "more negative" and in all kinds of ways. INSTEAD, Sparks / Tillman CHOSE to make this contemporary Red-State / Blue-State potentially "Romeo and Juliet"-like romance into a celebration of both and arguably ALL backgrounds / worlds. IMHO this is quite a feat and it deserves to be celebrated here.
Indeed, the entire state of North Carolina is presented in far different terms than most viewers / readers would be used to. Yes, North Carolina is part of America's "Deeper South." However, it was _always_ actually more moderate than the states that neighbor it. When North Carolina's legislature voted to join the Confederacy during the Civil War Era, its vote for Secession from the Union succeeded by only a few votes. In more recent times, Charlotte its capital has become something of a banking center / transportation hub and the state has become as "purple" of a state as one gets in the South.
The current film focuses _a lot_ actually on the University / intellectual side of the State. Again, Sophia was an art history major at Wake Forest U. and though "on scholarship" she went there because she was interested in the legacy of the Black Mountain Art Movement. "Black Mountain" what? ;-) BUT THAT'S EXACTLY IT ... For DECADES many intellectuals across the South have been screaming "We have much more here than cotton fields and racists." To some extent, Rick Linklater's film Boyhood [2014] sought to make the same point with regards to Texas.
Then "the second story" presented in the current film, that somewhat parallels the contemporary challenges faced by Sophia and Luke as they try to make their romance / budding relationship work, again playing out in North Carolina (and then North Carolina of the 1940s (!)) involved a lifelong romance / relationship between two people who were JEWISH -- Ira (played as a younger man by Jack Huston and as an older man by Alan Alda) who was already born/raised in North Carolina whose family ran furniture shop there, and Ruth (played wonderfully by Oona Chaplin) who along with her family fled Nazi occupied Vienna just before WW II -- "Jews in North Carolina? How'd they ever get here?" ;-) But why should that be surprising, given again Universities like North Carolina, Duke, NC State, and Wake Forest, as well as an entire art colony built around Black Mountain College? ... Again, there's MORE to North Carolina (and to the whole of the South) than cotton, tobacco and racism.
Then Luke's character is portrayed throughout quite honorably. He BEGINS the story as ALREADY A GOOD GUY and he ENDS as A BETTER GUY. And I can personally attest (and many times over) to the reality of Southern good manners, that again have to be taken into account when one thinks of the South. Yes, there are many problems in the South (as there are anywhere). But there is a charm / elegance in the South that extends across the various social (and racial...) strata that needs to be recognized as well. And so Sophia is also charmed / changed (POSITIVELY) in this regard as well. It _is_ a good thing to be nice ...
So, yes, while the film is "schmalzy" at times (as these kind of films often are), I have to give it a definite "thumbs up" because it does portray "the better angels" OF A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE and that inspires hope.
And I do wish that a lasting romance between a Luke and Sophia would indeed be possible.
<< 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! :-) >>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)