Unit 7 (orig. Grupo 7) [2012]

MPAA (UR would be R)  SensaCine (3 1/2 Stars)  Fr. Dennis (3  1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
SensaCine listing*

Correo de la Andalucia (J. Gallego Espina) article*

CineParaLeer (F. Lopez Bejarano) review*
Cultture.com (S. Sanz) review*
SensaCine (A.G. Calvo) review*

Unit 7 (orig. Grupo 7) [2012] (directed by Alberto Rodríguez [IMDb] [SC]*, screenplay by Rafael Cobos [IMDb]) is a 6 Goya Award (Spain's equivalent of the Oscars) winning (largely fictionalized?) Police Detective Drama that played recently at the Chicago's 17th Annual European Film Festival held at the Gene Siskel Film Center in Chicago.

The film's about a unit of anti-corruption police in Seville, Spain tasked with "cleaning up the town" in the years leading up to the 1992 World's Fair held there.  But how does one "clean up a town" of its vices to put on a "bella figura" without getting at least partly "tainted" in the process?  So this is about a unit of police officers that comes to realize that they really can "knock heads" and "do what they want" because the city's and indeed the countries' officials are willing to accept just about anything aside from "being made to look bad" at least "while the show's going on."  Afterwards?  Well ... who's gonna know ... or care?

The film's thematics are perennially current.  Last year, a film, Tlatelolco, Summer of 68 (orig. Tlatelolco, Verano del 68) [2013], played at Chicago's Latino Film Festival, about the Tienanmen style massacre of 300+ protesting university students in Mexico City in the run-up to the 1968 Mexico City Olympic Games.  Then consider recent years: The Sochi Winter Olympics just ended, the Men's Soccer World Cup is scheduled to be held across Brazil this summer.  Then in 2016, Rio de Janeiro will be holding Latin America's first Summer Olympics and four years ago, in 2010, South Africa hosted that continent's first Men's Soccer World Cup.  In each case, there've been plenty of government officials who desperately didn't want to look bad, even as they wanted their events to "run smoothly, without incident," and yet the temptation to "cash in ..."

So in the crucible of the lead-up to the 1992 World's Fair is this unit of four vice cops, "anti-corruption police" -- rookie Angel (played by Mario Casas [IMDb] [SC]*) with a young wife (played by Inma Cuesta [IMDb] [SC]*), the unit's head Rafael (played by Antonio de la Torre [IMDb] [SC]*), Miguel played by José Manuel Poga [IMDb] [SC]* and the pudgy middle-aged, oldest guy in the unit Mateo (played by Joaquín Nuñez [IMDb] [SC]*) who becomes enamored with a similarly aged Madam (they've both been "around the block") going by the name Mahogany (played by Estefanía de los Santos [IMDb] [SC]*).

With an ensemble like this much can happen, and neither the script nor the actors/director disappoint.  yes, the Unit-7 becomes remarkably successful in getting arrests and otherwise driving crooks out of town.  But how exactly do they do it?  And in the end, does it, ANY OF IT, really matter? 

A very, very interesting and thought provoking "gritty police drama" from Spain.


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

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

The Excursionist (orig. Ekskursantė) [2013]

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

IMDb listing
Forumcinemas.lt listing*
Kino-Teatr.ru listing*

15min.lt (U. Milkintaitė) review*
Bernardinai.lt review*
lritas.lt (E. Zabulėnienė) review*
Obuolys.lt (R. Jaščemskas) review*
 
The Excursionist (orig. Ekskursantė) [2013] [IMDb] [FC.lt]* [KT.ru]* (directed by Audrius Juzėnas [IMDb] [FC.lt]* [KT.ru]* screenplay by Pranas Morkus [IMDb] [KT.ru]*) is a Lithuanian historical drama that played recently to packed showings at Chicago's 17th Annual European Union Film Festival organized by the Gene Siskel Film Center.  (Seriously, it seemed that 1/2 of Chicago's substantial Lithuanian-American community was present.  And the Consul from Lithuania's Consulate in Chicago said a few words after the showing as well).

The film is set in the early 1950s during the period of mass deportations of Lithuanians from their native country to Siberia.   The film focuses on the story of a 12 year old Lithuanian-girl named Mariya (played by first time actress Anastasija Marčenkaitė [IMDb]) whose father had already been shot by the NKVD before her and her pregnant mother's deportation (in typical "cattle car" fashion) East.

Along the way, Mariya's mother expires as well.  After her mother's body was unceremoniously removed from the train by soldiers at a checkpoint en route, the distraught 12-year-old is helped, arguably pushed out of the still stopped train through a small window/air hole opposite the doors of the cattle car (police and dogs patrolling the train's other door-opening-side) by the other (Lithuanian) passengers.  They probably did this, in part to "help" her, to "give her a fighting chance to survive."  But they also probably did this in good part to simply get rid of her.  The stress of Deportation under such literally inhuman, cattle car, conditions would have been difficult as it is.  To have a hysterical orphaned 12-year-old bewailing the sudden (and total) loss of her mother (her body just ripped from the train at said checkpoint) would have been all but unbearable.

So the other passengers pushed 12-year-old Marija out the backside of the still-stopped cattle car with the words: "God be with you!  Find some way to live!"  And that was that.  The train soon started moving, the dogs started barking, and 12-year old Marija, had still the survival instincts TO RUN into the woods before the train passed away and the police dogs could go after her.

Now how could a 12-year-old survive out in the Siberian Taiga on her own?  The short answer ... she would not have been able to.  SO THE REST OF THE STORY is about A WHOLE LOT OF STRANGERS (MOSTLY RUSSIANS (!) HELPING HER TO SURVIVE AND OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL YEARS MAKING IT BACK TO LITHUANIA.  And indeed, some of Russia's MOST FAMOUS ACTORS (notably Raisa Ryazanova* [IMDb] [KT.ru]* and Sergey Garmash* [IMDb] [KT.ru]*) CHOSE to PLAY SIGNIFICANT ROLES in this mostly Lithuanian film about what could only be described as Soviet Russia's shame.

And to be clear, not every Russian in this film was "good."  There were a-holes including a Principal at a Siberian Reformatory School, where Mariya found herself during at least part of her journey.  The Principal did consider Marija, a 12 or perhaps 13 year old by then (and would have been only about 5-6 years old at the end of World War II) a "Fascist," and treated punitively at times sadistically her as such.

But there were also good people, including Baba Nadya (played by Raisa Ryazanova* [IMDb] [KT.ru]*) an old and believing Orthodox Christian woman who first nursed the Catholic 12-year-old Mariya (all Mariya has of her mother is the crucifix of her mother's rosary that she keeps through the whole of the movie) back to health after her daughter's boyfriend (played by Igor Sovochkin* [IMDb] [KT.ru]*) first found her after she had escaped from the train and brought Mariya to her.  And then there is an NKVD officer (played by Sergey Garmash* [IMDb] [KT.ru]*) who uses his position -- he was State Secret Police after all -- to help the girl (again more or less clandestinely) get back to Lithuania.  Why did he do it?  Well, though he was NKVD, it becomes _also_ clear that he had some life experience that made him perhaps more compassionate than others in his position to innocent CHILDREN like Mariya who were in need.

So this is a remarkable film.  It's about the horror of the deportations of the Stalinist Era.  BUT it's also about finding good people, often SURPRISING PEOPLE, in the midst of that horror.

Then from a technical aspect both the cinematography and the gentle if often very, very poignantly sad classical sound track are certainly of the highest caliber.  Westerners often think of Siberia as simply a frozen wasteland.  Actually the vast majority of it is Taiga -- seemingly endless coniferous forest.  Indeed, part of the HORROR of Siberia becomes: HOW COULD SUCH EVIL BE ALLOWED TO TAKE PLACE IN ENDLESS ROLLING FOREST LAND THAT OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCED AS BEING SO BEAUTIFUL?

Anyway, I just wanted to cry through almost the entire movie.  What this poor little girl went through, what her family had went through, what millions of others like them went through.  And then yes the existence of people who did try to help.

In the end, the film becomes a Lithuanian/Siberian "Saving Private Ryan [1998]" where "Private Ryan" is 12-13-14 year old Marija.  And yes, it's intended to make one want to cry.


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

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

Muppets Most Wanted [2014]

MPAA (PG)  CNS/USCCB (A-I)  ChicagoTribune (2 Stars)  RE.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RE.com (B. Tallarico) review
AVClub (E. Adams) review

Probably the single most important thing that one should remember about Muppets Most Wanted [2014] (directed and cowritten by James Bobin along with Nicholas Stroller characters by Muppets creator Jim Hensen [IMDb]) is that like its immediate predecessor, The Muppets [2011] reboot, the film is "just a dumb Muppets movie," :-) and hence not altogether "politically correct."

So if in the last movie, the villain was an "Oil Baron" bent on buying the Muppets Theater in order to destroying it so that he could drill for oil there, in this case the villains are a French crook literally named "Badguy" (played very well by Ricky Gervais) -- who tells the "taken aback" Muppets that his name's pronounced "Badghee" :-) to which the muppets all nod still with incomprehension but, not wanting to "look stupid," approval saying "ooooooh..." -- and a Russian "Kermit the Frog" look-alike named Constantine (voiced by Matt Vogel) with the reputation of being "the world's most dangerous frog."  Add to this the "Gulag Master" Nadya (played by a "Russian accented" Tina Fey, she's actually quite funny :-)) and an ""super-lazy, ever on break" French Interpol agent named Jean Pierre Napoleon (played by Ty Burrell)...

So this is not exactly "America at its Best." In fact, it would be _just perfect_ for some upcoming Putin-sponsored Moscow State U. "See how they hate us..." film seminar.  And I honestly don't know the film could be marketed in France except under the title "Les Americains sont les houls" :-).  But to be fair, it's hard to imagine the previous Muppets movie being particularly popular in the Dick Cheney household: "Come kids, come see how Evil your Grandpa is ..."

Other countries -- the Italians for instance -- are able to make very good comedies and very good children's films without requiring there to be _any_ "villains" to ridicule or tar-and-feather.  But we still have to "drop safes" on them ... ;-).  But there we are ...

Okay, what's then the set-up for this "kids lets learn to hate each other" story ...?

Well it begins quite literally the moment after the last film ends.  The Muppets have saved their theater.  They've finished their last song and ... as the Muppets (and children often) are ... immediately, they're asking: "What now?"

That's when M. Badguy comes in ... and offers to take them on a "European tour."  Kermit (voiced by Steve Whitmire) would prefer to wait, reflect on it a bit.  But even the rest of the Muppets realize that "A Sequel's Never as Good as the First Film" (one of the funniest songs that they sing in the course of the film) ... the alternative is ... EEEK ... BOREDOM, which most of the Muppets (like most kids) find worse than just about anything.  SO ... after M. Badguy suggests they put it up for a vote, most of the Muppets vote for "a bad idea" to "no idea at all." ;-)  And so they're off ... to Europe ... with no idea really what they're gonna do there (they have no show prepared) BUT ... "it's better than doing nothing at all ..." ;-)

Enter then the Russian fiend Constantine, "the world's most dangerous frog," who turns out to be a friend and partner of the French M. Badguy.  Constantine breaks out of a Siberian prison and ... soon finds himself (somehow) in Europe where, since he looks _almost exactly like_ Kermit the Frog, he manages to do with the switcheroo with Kermit and fool most of the Muppets into believing that he's him, while Kermit gets arrested by Interpol and sent back down to the Russian Gulag as Constantine.

So how could the other Muppets be so stupid?  How could they not recognize that "Kermit's not quite the same" (actually it must have been fun for an American voice artist to play a Russian trying to quickly learn an American accent ;-).   Well, Russian-accented, trying to quickly learn an American accent, Constantine (unlike the more responsible Kermit) lets the childish Muppets "do what they want."

The rest of the Muppets JUST LOVE THIS, but "childish" as they are ... they have some really stupid ideas ;-) :

One of them has always dreamed of staging an "Indoor Running of the Bulls..." ;-) ... Poor, poor. poor Salma Hayek, who comes out ALL DRESSED IN RED, when this Muppet gets his dream fulfilled by the evilly permissive Constantine while they're in Madrid ...  ;-)

Then Miss Piggy wants to sing her renditions of 5-6 Celine Dion songs at every show ... Eeek!  Talk about a "Crime against Humanity!" ;-)  Indeed talk about a "Crime against Celine Dion" ;-)

The Muppets band's drummer wants to fulfill his dream of banging out a 2-3 hour drum solo at one of the shows ... ;-)

You get the picture... ;-)

The ideas are all "stupid" but so long as Constantine lets them "do what they want" NONE of the Muppets "asks any questions"  (And that's why kids we need a "wise-but-firm" benevolent SEIG HEIL FUHRER ... to keep us all in line ;-).  Peter Sellers' Dr. Wirklichlieber (err... Dr. Strangelove) couldn't have put the message more clearly.   And Putin (and Dick Cheney...?) actually would probably agree... ;-)

Sigh ... meanwhile our wise and responsible Kermit languishes in a Siberian Gulag.  Well, Gulag commander Nadya (knowing actually who he is, but for her own reasons wanting to keep him there) decides to try to make Kermit "feel better" by allowing him to organize the annual "Gulag Talent Show!" ;-)  This actually produces some of the funniest scenes in the movie as Kermit organizes the inmates, played by some of the toughest looking mugs in Hollywood, among them Ray Liotta and Danny "The Machete" Trejo, singing and dancing selections out of Fame [IMDb] and A Chorus Line [IMDb] ;-).

Back to The Muppets European Tour:  A strange thing about the venues.  It seems that M. Badguy and Muppets leader Constantine, er "Kermit-the-Frog with a persistent Cold," seem to always stage their shows RIGHT NEXT TO RENOWNED ART MUSEUMS and while the Muppets are doing some REALLY REALLY STUPID THINGS (but also REALLY REALLY FUNNY THINGS... again that "Indoor Running of the Bulls" / the "2 hour drum solo..." / Miss Piggy singing the "Theme From the Titanic", etc ;-) ON STAGE ... something, often VERY ODD (they're Muppets villains after all ;-) "goes missing" from said Museums.

SO ... both the CIA (represented by an eminently "wise" / "reasonable" and "don't you just love him (I suppose when he's not water-boarding anyone ...)" fuzzy Muppet Eagle (voiced by Eric Jacobson)) and Interpol (represented by the really, really by-the-book and the book says: "it's time to take my break", "time to call it a day", "time to take my wife and kids on our state mandated 8 week vacation" ... LAZY above mentioned Interpol Agent (played by Ty Burrell)) get on the case.

Much then ensues...

A lot of the gags are _really_ really funny.   It's just that the jokes are all done at the expense of Others.  And yet, at the end the message is:  "Kids we need wise, responsible people to do the thinking for us," a philosophy that a lot of those "Evil Others" would actually very much agree with.

But "Rock On," drum soloing Crazy Harry, "Rock On ..."


<< 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! :-) >>

Divergent [2014]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RE.com (C. Lemire) review
AVClub (K. McFarland) review

At times, Hollywood has been called a "dream machine" both reflective and a trend-setter with regards to the happenings in (American) society.  I go back to this image of "Hollywood as dream machine" to help me understand the "why?" of current film, Divergent [2014] (directed by Neil Burger, screenplay by Evan Daugherty and Vanessa Taylor, based on the first installment of a trilogy of novels by Veronica Roth [IMDb]) the latest book-to-movie entry of the currently popular (to the point becoming formulaic) YA (teen)-oriented "girl-hero-based" Post-Apocalypic genre.

Now please don't get me wrong.  That a story has become "formulaic" does not make it necessarily "cheap" or "shallow." Instead, if anything, it means that the story has "struck a chord," and somehow speaks to a society (or a portion of a society) in a way that other, less successful stories have not.

English author J.K. Rowling's enormously popular Harry Potter series of YA (teen)-oriented books (eventually made, of course, into an enormously popular series of movies, the last two installments reviewed here [1] [2]) opened the door to a renaissance in (and mainstreaming of) YA (teen)-oriented magical / fantasy literature not seen since J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings Trilogy of the 1930s-40s.  And, of course, riding this "Harry Potter" wave of renewed interest in YA (teen)-oriented magical / fantasy literature, Tolkien's LOTR was made into an enormously successful trilogy of epic films, with Hollywood perhaps "over reaching" in trying to milk the magic once more, indeed, three more times, with the current attempt to turn even Tolkien's much smaller, earlier, indeed, arguably "pilot" novel The Hobbit into a trilogy of epic films as well (the first two installments [1] [2] reviewed here as well).

Then American author Stephanie Meyer's wildly popular Twilight Saga of YA (teen) oriented (and here specifically TEENAGE GIRL ORIENTED) books built on J.K. Rowling's success with two crucial changes (1) she introduced the "teenage girl heroine" to the genre and (2) she moved the story's setting to the United States.

First, by making a "once average teenage girl" Bella (played in the subsequent wildly successful films by Kristen Stewart) the heroine of her story, Meyer filled an enormous hole previously existing in that genre: J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series at least had Hermione (played in the films by Emma Watson), but TOLKEIN'S LOTR and The Hobbit were, if typical of their time, SUPREMELY EMBARRASSING TODAY in being ALMOST ENTIRELY DEVOID OF SIGNIFICANT FEMALE CHARACTERS, this despite (I suspect) a far larger number of teenage girl readers (and potential buyers of books...) than teenage boys. (I would suspect that today, teenage girls would be far more likely to "listen to their parents and stay home and read" than teenage boys, who'd prefer "playing video games" or otherwise "doing something").

Second, by moving the story to the United States (in the case of her Twilight Saga to the "foggy" often "forgotten hinterlands" of the American Pacific Northwest), Meyer both tapped into our national narcissism (the term American Exceptionalism doesn't exist for nothing...) but also, frankly, made it easier for other American writers (and then Hollywood) to crank-out variations on Harry Potter's and the Twilight Saga's characters and themes.

And boy did our nation's largely East Coast based publishing machine and West Coast based Hollywood JUMP on that American "collective unconscious" gravy train:

Hunger Games [IMDb] (the first two movie installments reviewed [1] [2] here), set in a post-Apocalyptic U.S. (75-years after a brutal civil war), though largely in "Appalachia," the once average heroine being Katniss Everdeen (played in the film series by Jennifer Lawrence)

Beautiful Creatures [IMDb], set in a small town near Charleston, South Carolina (involving a society of "light and dark" though not-race-based witches), the once average girl heroine being Lena Duchaness (played in the film by Alice Englert)

The Host [IMDb] (the movie reviewed here) set in a post-Apocalytic U.S. (following an alien invasion) but mostly around the state of Texas, the once average heroine being Melanie (played in the film Saoirse Ronan).
   
Mortal Instruments [IMDb] (the first movie installment reviewed here) set in a rainy Harry Potteresque New York City (involving a parallel shadow/spiritual battle between forces of light and darkness), the once average girl heroine being Clary (played by Lily Collins).

Add to this the most "Harry Potteresque" series, that of Percy Jackson [IMDb] (the latest installment reviewed here), set in New York (rather than London) and involving Greco-Roman mythology rather than the world of pre-Christian Celtic based witchcraft, in which the lead character is the Harry Potter-like (male) Percy Jackson (played by Logan Lerman) with a Hermonine-like friend named Annabeth (played by Alexandra Daddario).

To this rather impressive list we now add the current film Divergent [IMDb] set in a post-Apocalyptic U.S.A. though largely in Chicago, Illinois (100 years after a devastating war plus attendant environmental catastrophe), the once average heroine being Beatrice / Tris (played by Shailene Woodley).

Further, neither did these stories simply share a "magical" or otherwise "fantastic" setting and basically the same "once average" hero or heroine.  ALL these YA (teen) oriented series included other common characters (archetypes) and themes:

For instance, in almost all the cases, the parents "didn't have a clue."  They weren't necessarily "bad" just largely outside the picture feeding again another kind of narcissism... that "nothing really existed before our time..." or, in the post-Apocalyptic variations of the story "the Past" was simply (and conveniently...)  "destroyed." 

Second, in every one of the teenage-girl oriented stories, there was a "dreamy" (often "shirtless" sometimes tattooed) slightly older (but appropriately so), _more experienced_ male heartthrob -- basically Jacob (played by Taylor Lautner) of the Twilight Series.   In the current film, Divergent [2014], the requisite slightly older, "more experienced" heart-throb Four (played by Theo James) keeps his shirt on through most of the film, but (MILD SPOILER ALERT) when he does take it off, he reveals ... one heck of a tattoo ;-). 

Now one could "lament" the potential "exploitative" nature of these films with (1) the authors / film-makers of these stories presuming to take-over the role of parents by marginalizing the parents of the fictional heroes of their stories and (2) more or less obviously (if somewhat "turn-about" amusingly ;-) pandering to the "lesser" (er ... "more lustful") "angels" of the predominantly teen-age girl audience that they are targeting.

BUT LETS ALSO BE FAIR: If these YA (teen)-oriented stories seem to target teenage girl readers (presumably because they read more than teenage boys) the YA (teen)-oriented stories targeted to boys are often based on comic books and video games and often involve heroines (where dressed) dressed head-to-toe in spandex/leather and toting machine guns spraying all sorts of "bad guys" with lead.   I've written about this as well, describing this black-leather clad heroine with a REALLY BIG GUN as basically "the Jungian Anima let out to play" (Sucker Punch [2011], Underworld Awakening [2012], Resident Evil: Retribution [2012], The Avengers [2012]).

ALL THIS IS TO SAY is to say that when a PARTICULAR CHARACTER TYPE or STORY-LINE starts APPEARING OVER AND OVER AGAIN that character type or story-line seems to have "STRUCK A CHORD" with the society's "Collective Unconscious" and it's going to remain there until the society gets tired of it.  So when does the society get tired of it?  Well, a good indication will be when it will cease to be to publish books / make movies ESSENTIALLY REPEATING THE SAME STORY (with minor variations).

MY SENSE IS THAT WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR THE END of the popularity of this "previously average young girl asked/forced by circumstance to do great things" story line BECAUSE ... HONESTLY ... RESTATED IN THOSE TERMS, THE STORY-LINE becomes almost a modern day "cinematic apparition of Mary" the humble handmaid of the Lord (Lk 1:38) who exclaims in the Magnificat:

     "My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord
     and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
     For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness,
     and behold, from now on all generations will call me Blessed.
     The Mighty One has done great things for me
     And Holy is is name..."
             -- Lk 1:46-49

In other words, "we've seen this before."  Indeed, in the horror / slasher movies of my youth, it was always "the Good Girl" (we used to honestly call her THE VIRGIN) who remains to defeat the monster.  How?  Often by "crushing his head" with? "her heel" (c.f. Gen 3:15, honestly look at the closing sequence of The Terminator [1984] ...)

FURTHER, if we RESTATE the STORY-LINE in this imagery EVEN THE HUNKY ("DREAMY") SHIRTLESS MENTOR FIGURE BEGINS TO GET INTERESTING ;-) -- He becomes AN "ANGELIC" PROTECTOR FIGURE.  Indeed, often times the heroine's relationship with this "angelic protector figure" becomes "complicated": In the Twilight series, though Jacob protects Bella (and then her daughter) she ends up with Edward.  The other "protector" figures are similar.  It's never an easy thing for there to be a relationship between the "Good Girl heroine" and her slightly more experienced "Protector."

SO THEN, AFTER ALL THIS, how does "the Good Girl who ... comes to do great things" fare in this variation?

Well first, "The Good Girl" (played by Shailene Woodley)'s given name is Beatrice (an evocative name as Beatrice was the name of Dante's inspiration in his Divine Comedy...).  Then in a post-Apocalyptic society that divides itself into five castes (called "Factions" in the story), these being -- The Erudites (the intellectuals, scientists), The Amities (the amiable, hippie-like "granola people" who do the farming for the society), the Candors (who are honest to the point of argumentative, hence the lawyers and judges of the society), the Dauntless (the "courageous" people of the society, hence their soldiers and police officers) and Abnegations (the self-less ... who give of up to the service of the rest) -- she's born into an Abnegation household.

We're told that at least originally, or up until the beginning of the story, the Abnegation caste was given charge of the government of the society.  (As they were deemed "self-less" they were seen as the ideal people to be in charge of making sure that the government / society was run right.

Interestingly, the Abnegations' self-lessness makes them makes them the most Priestly / religious-like of the factions (something noted also by the J. McAleer of the CNS/USCCB in his review of the film).

Well Beatrice (like the Biblical Mary...) is born into this governing / "priestly" caste (The Biblical Mary's uncle was Zechariah, a Priest at the Temple in Jerusalem)

But there are two plot points that have to be added here.

(1) The teenage Beatrice kinda finds the Abnegations' self-lessness "boring."  So when she comes to her "choosing ceremony" (basically the society's "rite of passage to adulthood" not altogether dissimilar _in effect_ to the Jewish Bar Mitzvah or the Catholic understanding of Confirmation ... after celebrating this Rite / Sacrament the person is considered "a full adult" in their respective (religious) societies) she _chooses_ another Caste (Faction) ... the far _cooler_ Dauntless faction.  It's kinda like "serving sandwiches at a parish soup kitchen" could seem to be "far more boring" to a teenager than "jumping out of a helicopter with the 82nd Airborne somewhere in Afghanistan ..."  The "service aspect" is "still there" but it seems so much "cooler" to "serve" with bravado ...

and (2) all other Factions AND IN PARTICULAR, THE ERUDITES (the intellectuals).are kinda resentful of the Abnegations  The other Factions don't really trust them, they don't really believe that the Abnegations are as "self-less" as they've claimed to be.  (Hmmm.... sounds familiar ... ;-).  Added to this is the Erudites' suspicion that the Abnegations are _breaking the rules_ by coddling and even _sheltering_ "the Factionless" (also called "Divergent" ... those who don't really fit into any particular Faction well).

Now it actually makes sense that the Abnegations, the "nice people," would have compassion toward, literally, the "misfits."  But the Erudites, who've come up with this Five Faction system of societal control are irritated.  And so, one of the esteemed professorial heads of the Erudite faction (played by Kate Winslet) tries to stage a coup against the "soft" Abnegations to keep the society "ideologically pure."  How to do that?  Well, Erudites are the society's scientists/intellectuals, not its soldiers.  HOWEVER, being 'the smart people' they can perhaps find means of manipulating the soldiers to do their bidding ...

So this inter-Factional friction is in the air throughout the whole of the story.  But this "big picture conflict" isn't all that's going on.  On the far smaller scale there's what's going on with Beatrice and her family.

Beatrice (played again by Shailene Woodley) takes her test a few days prior to her Choosing Ceremony and finds that unlike what she's been previously (that everyone is simply born/destined to become a member of one or another of the five Factions), SHE actually has aptitudes to fit into SEVERAL OF THEM (to some extent, SHE'S SPECIAL ... on the other hand, arguably, she's also VERY NORMAL as most of us have varied interests and abilities).  Now, in our society, Beatrice's versatility would not be seen as a problem, BUT IN HER SOCIETY IT WAS.  What to do?  The medical technician applying "The Test" to her, simply suggests that she CHOOSE "Abnegation" (she was born in that group) and "no one would know."  But ... it's clear that Beatrice would also "like to be more" than "just self-less"

So ... when she comes to her CHOOSING CEREMONY, Beatrice, SURPRISES MANY (and POSSIBLY disappoints her parents, good, again, basically self-less folk played by Ashley Judd and Tony Goldwin) when she CHOOSES to become a "Dauntless" (part of the "brave" warrior caste).

So after the Choosing Ceremony, she goes off with the crazy / "cool" Dauntless folk and her subsequent training ensues.  BUT ... Does she really fit there?  Again, her test showed that she could have fit into several of the Factions, including Dauntless but also Erudite (she was also quite bright) and, of course, Abnegation.  Since she could have been "many things," she wasn't necessarily "the best" or even "top caliber" in any of them.  What to do?  Well this is where her hunky, somewhat more experienced, (I'm suggesting) "angelic protector" Four (played by Theo James).  He's one of the Dauntless' training instructors (hence by definition "more experienced") and he helps her to "get by" / "make it through."

Okay ... she's more or less able to "make it through" as a Dauntless.  What happens now?

Go see the movie ;-)

Again, it's a very interesting story, and only Part 1 of 3 about a "young girl from humble beginnings ... called to do Great Things" ;-)


<< 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! :-) >>

Independent of Reality: The Films of Jan Němec

Recently Facets Multimedia here in Chicago hosted the retrospective Independent of Reality: The Films of Jan Němec currently touring North America.  Note that both Miloš Štehlík owner of  Facets Multimedia and I are of Czech descent.  I have fond memories of Facets Multimedia because my dad would drag our family there several times a year to see, one or another, often Czech but otherwise generally foreign film when I was young ;-). 
 
Jan Němec [IMDb] [CSFD]* was a key (then) young director in the "Czechoslovak New Wave" of the 1960s.  The movement, which grew out of the same creative foment that eventually produced the short-lived Prague Spring of 1968, gained international acclaim.  Over four straight years two Czechoslovak films won Best Foreign Language Picture awards at the Oscars -- Jan Kádár [IMDb] [CSFD]* and Elmar Klos' [IMDb] [CSFD]*  The Shop on Main Street (orig. Obchod na Korse) [1964] [IMDb] [CSFD]* and Jiří Menzel's [IMDb] [CSFD]* Closely Watched Trains (orig. Ostře Sledovaný Vlaky) [1966] [IMDb] [CSFD]*-- and two others were among the five nominated  for the award -- Miloš Forman's [IMDb] [CSFD]* Loves of a Blonde (orig. Lásky Jedné Plavovlásky) [1965] [IMDb] [CSFD]* and Fireman's Ball (orig. Hoří Má Panenko) [1967] [IMDb] [CSFD]*.   The movement was largely shattered with the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in August 1968.  The unabashedly brooding artistic (surrealistic in style) Jan Němec [IMDb] [CSFD]* and the still biting but more accessible (and subsequently commercially successful) Miloš Forman [IMDb] [CSFD]* ended up leaving the country while the others who remained faced renewed, often heavy handed censorship until the fall of the Communist regime in 1989.

So this then was a retrospective of Jan Němec's [IMDb] [CSFD]* work and if one likes art especially surrealistic art than this would be for you.  Indeed, I found that it took watching several of his films to "get into the groove" but once there ...

Of the films of shown in the retrospective, I saw the following:

          Pearls of the Deep (orig. Perličky na dně) [1966] [IMDb] [CSFD]* the title of which probably would be better translated as "Pearls from the Bottom" or "Pearls from the Muck."  The film is actually a composite of five vignettes, each directed by a different (then) young Czech director of the time.  Jan Němec [IMDb] [CSFD]* directed the second vignette entitled "Cheaters" or "BS-ers" (Podvodníci) about two elderly men in a nursing home trying to impress each other about how important they used to be.  The other vignettes are similar: about a motocross race that ends in a crash, about an insurance salesman trying to sell insurance to a simple villager who really doesn't care, about a somewhat sly young Gypsy woman trying to take advantage of a rather simple Czech young lad ... (yes, the last one is rather racist).  Uniting all the vignettes was their more or less obvious ugliness.  The film seemed to be both a response to both unabashedly sentimental films of similar structure like the lovely Italian film The Gold of Naples (orig. L'Oro di Napoli) [1954] and a challenge to the Communist regime which on one hand espoused a cinematic ideology of "socialist realism" and on the other hand insisted on portraying life in "liberated" Communist lands as being idyllic.  Hence "Pearls from the Muck" ...

          Oratorio for Prague [1968] where Jan Němec [IMDb] [CSFD]* already surrealistic in artistic direction finds himself LIVING HIS ART.  He started this DOCUMENTARY PROJECT documenting the PALPABLE JOY of his people FINALLY FEELING MORE-OR-LESS FREE (after DECADES of oppression) in the weeks BEFORE THE SOVIET INVASION OF CZECHOSLOVAKIA.  Then waking-up on August 21, 1968 to SOVIET TANKS IN THE STREETS, he ended up DOCUMENTING THE CRUSHING OF THOSE HOPES AND DREAMS.  The English voice-over (his?) in the documentary is PRICELESS because it is SO, SO SAD: "Look how happy these people were ... They had NO IDEA AT ALL that ALL OF THIS was going to DIE in a few weeks time ..."

          Martyrs of Love (orig. Mučedníci Lásky) [1967] [IMDb] [CSFD]* - If the ideology of "Socialist Realism" was about showing strong "empowered" young working class types "building things" and "achieving stuff," this film in three vignettes was about soft introspective artistic types dressed in anachronistic period garb too shy/awkward to "achieve" much of anything.  While baroque/surrealist in style, by the time one gets into the second vignette -- about "The Wall Flower" (Nástěnka) -- one should begin to "understand."

          A Report on the Party and the Guests (orig. O slavnosti a hostech) [1966] [IMDb] [CSFD]* - Probably Jan Němec's [IMDb] [CSFD]* most famous film as it had stunningly amusing distinction that it was BANNED THREE TIMES in COMMUNIST CZECHOSLOVAKIA -- the first time in 1966 when it was made, the second time soon after the Soviet Invasion in 1968 (after a brief period earlier in the year when it was allowed to be shown).  The LAST TIME was just piling on.  Apparently in 1973 it was one of only four films that a Czechoslovak Communist commission empaneled for this task "BANNED FOREVER."  :-)

What the heck was the movie about that it drove the Communists so crazy?  Well it was surrealist story (again that term ...) about a group of eight picnickers who were having a nice quiet picnic in the countryside when they spotted a Wedding Procession.  What was it doing there?  Who knows... Anyway, they get up, change clothes, and decide to go to the Wedding Banquet.

Well, when they were still a long way off, they're in effect detained by the Son of the Banquet-holder and in various ways mistreated by him.  This mistreatment goes on for so long, that they begin to wonder if they'll ever make it to the Banquet.   At some point the Father comes up from the Banquet to see what's detaining his Son and sees that he's mistreating these Guests.  The Father apologizes to the Guests, Reprimands the Son and the proceeds to lead the Guests down to the Banquet.

'Cept that the Banquet is still actually quite far away and the Path is not exactly easy. Indeed it seems ridiculously far way, down a steep slope and just doesn't seem worth the trouble.  Still, being polite, the small group now dressed in Wedding Garb (women in heals ...) decide to descend to this Feast anyway.

They arrive.  It is Nice.  'Cept one of these eight guests, with apparently a "depressive personality," can't seem to get over the previous abuse that he had received at the hands of the Son above.  So tells his wife: "I want to go home."  His wife responds: "Don't be silly, we're finally here."  "But I really want to go home."  "Please don't embarrass me in front of my friends and all these other guests."  Still the socially awkward husband, still nursing that grudge against the Son, decides to leave.

For a while, all goes well, until either the Father or the Son discover that the ONE GUEST is missing (!)  And the Party comes to a halt.  "After ALL THAT WE'VE DONE FOR YOU, THIS IS WHAT WE GET?"  (Done what? Did we ask for "all this"? Etc)  So things get frozen for a while.  The guests try to convince the Father that the rest of them ARE GRATEFUL, and it kinda works for a while.

 Eventually, however, the Father just can't get past the reality that ONE of his guests CHOSE TO LEAVE  and this begins to bother the other guests as well.  EVENTUALLY they set out to FIND THE GUEST WHO HAD THE AUDACITY TO LEAVE and EVENTUALLY they decide to utilize the services of a BIG GERMAN SHEPHERD to try to "sniff him out."

Now WHY would THIS PARABLE (which actually is MORE OF A CHALLENGE TO TRADITIONAL CHRISTIANITY THAN COMMUNISM) drive the Communists so crazy?  Well, the actor playing "The Father" looked a lot like Lenin ;-).

But the PARABLE is actually a fascinating one, and I honestly found the movie on Amazon.com and bought it subsequently.

I find the film fascinating because IN ITS SURREALISTIC WAY it expresses well the argument that Carl Jung made decades before regarding the Christian Trinity (!)  In a celebrated article on A Psychological Approach to the Christian Trinity, Carl Jung argued that the Trinity is not complete.  In his article, Jung proposed two figures that would complete it: (1) Mary (a woman, human, material as opposed to the Trinity which has been traditionally understood as being Male, necessarily Divine and Spiritual) and (2) the Devil (the one who _chooses_ not to "belong").

Until I saw this film, I never really understood Jung's argument about "incorporating the Devil into the Trinity." ;-)  I THINK I DO NOW: Christianity (and really all ideologies) WILL NOT BE AT PEACE until they MAKE PEACE with those who (for whatever reason ... in the film it was simply a question of _temperament_) "don't want to belong."  If Christianity (or again ANY IDEOLOGY -- Communism, Islam, etc) would be able to make Peace with those who "just want to be left alone," then it (they) would finally have the ability to be at Peace with pretty much EVERYTHING (All That Is).

Putting it in Christian terms (and yes, this _hurts_ to some extent) -- The "Prodigal Son" will no longer have to "come home."  The Father could still love him (and PROBABLY DID, SINCE HE IS GOD) EVEN WHEN THE PRODIGAL SON IS "AWAY."

Fascinating that a "brooding Czech surrealist" could make such a sublime argument, but then Salvador Dalí's works were often clearly religious [1] [2] [3] ;-)

          Toyen [2005] [IMDb] [CSFD]* - a beautiful film made again in a surrealist style about Czech surrealist painter Marie Čermínová (a.k.a. Toyen) who sheltered her friend and fellow artist Jindřich Heisler, Jewish, IN HER FLAT in the (bohemian) Žižkov section of Prague DURING THE WHOLE OF THE NAZI OCCUPATION (an Anne Frank-like story THAT ACTUALLY TURNED OUT "SORT OF WELL") and then FLED WITH HIM TO PARIS when they had the "good luck" to sense that "the Curtain" was about to come down again.  Truth be told, Surrealism becomes a remarkably GOOD WAY to understand the Nazi Occupation / Communist Eras.  As Toyen apparently wrote in her journal, both were _shattering_ experiences... 

          Late Night Talks With Mother (orig. Noční Hovory s Matkou) [2001] [IMDb] [CSFD]* - Jan Němec's [IMDb] [CSFD] homage to fellow Praguer (if of a slightly earlier era) Franz Kafka as he wrote a work entitled "Letter to My Father."

All in all, I was honestly surprised at the depth of this "brooding surrealist's" work and I am grateful to the curators of this Retrospective for putting it together as well as to Miloš Štehlík's Facets Multimedia which continues to offer truly stunning cinematic programs to this fair city and to the world.


<< 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! :-) >>

Tricked (orig. Steekspel) [2012]

MPAA (UR would be R)  Cinema.nl (2 1/2 Stars)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

IMDb listing
KinoZeit.de listing*

cinema.nl (R. de Gier) review*
Slant (N. McCarthy ) review

Tricked (orig. Steekspel) [2012] (directed and cowritten by Paul Verhoeven [IMDb], along with Kim van Kooten, Robert Alberdingk Thijm, story by Kim van Kooten along with the input of hundreds of Dutch contributors) is a fun "user generated" / "crowd-sourced" Dutch language (English subtitled) film that comes from the Netherlands that played recently at the 17th Annual European Union Film Festival held at the Gene Siskel Film Center here in Chicago.

The concept was this:  After announcing the project on Dutch TV, Paul Verhoeven, et al, placed the script, written by Kim van Kooten for first four minutes of what he promised would be a "user generated" / "crowd-sourced" film on a Dutch website called EntertainmentExperience.nl and ASKED VIEWERS to submit script suggestions for the next four minutes.  These script suggestions would be processed and harmonized to produce the script for the next four minute installment, which would be then filmed and played on Dutch TV / placed on the website again, with VIEWERS asked to submit script suggestions for the next four minutes.  A total of 8 iterations of this process would be performed.

According to the 30 minute documentary segment about the making of the film that preceded the 55 minute final product, Paul Verhoeven, et al, noted that they averaged over 700+ full 5 page script suggestions for each installment plus multitudes of additional comments / suggestions, concurrent video enactments (by other troupes) of the script thus far.  And turn-around between segments was kept to about one month.

The somewhat eyes-rolling review by Nick McCarthy of Slant Magazine noted that Paul Verhoeven, et al simply "reinvented" the creative process that already effectively (if not explicitly) goes into making of any number of contemporary television series.  Nevertheless the project received in 2013 an International Emmy Award (for digital non-fiction) presumably for its originality.

Conceding that the concept was kinda gimmicky, I nevertheless FOUND IT FUN.

Okay, so what was the setup to the story?

The film begins at the home of Remco (played by Peter Blok) the head of some Dutch architectural firm on his 50th birthday.  We're introduced to his 40-something somewhat suspicious/somewhat resentful but 'script playing' corporate wife Ineke (played by Ricky Koole), their two college aged / young adult children Leike (played by Carolien Spoor) who's kind of a lush (she's introduced to us sitting at the breakfast table kinda hung-over) and camera toting Tobias (played by Robert de Hoog) who's later imagined to be something of a perv.

Remco goes to work where we're introduced to two of his junior partners Wim (played by Jochum ten Haaf) and Fred (played by Peter Tiddens).  We hear about a project that their firm is involved-in in Dubai.  As Remco leaves the office later that afternoon he salutes the two "see you at the party."

Remco's birthday party takes place at his house.  It's what one would expect a Party like this to be.  It's part for "family and friends" and part "for show"/"business" and as would be typical of a party like this, it's not necessarily easy to separate the two groups.  So Remco's family is there but so are his business associates.  However, two guests prove somewhat surprising:

First, Leike's BFF Merel (played by Gaite Jansen) shows up.  Leike, already holding a bottle of ... whatever (white wine or champagne) ... opens the door: "Merel?" "I'm here for the party!" Leike (eyes rolling), "But it's for my dad...," Merel (bouncy and smiling), "It's a party!"

Second, a former junior associate, mid-late 20 something Nadya (played  by Sallie Harmsen), that no one has seen for the last 6 months but everybody (including somewhat suspicious, at times resentful but knows the game 'corporate wife' Ineke) had assumed that Remco had been previously <...>, shows-up and looking 8 months pregnant.

Okay, where to we go?  The rest of the movie follows ... ;-)

Given that a project like this would attract the young ... it should not be surprising that a fair portion of the user-generated plot that follows is kinda seamy.  Yup, Leike's a lush, her best friend Merel is kinda a (somewhat gold-digging?) slut, camera toting Tobias' kinda a perv and dad Remco needs to keep his zipper-up.

BUT ... PRODUCTION CONSTRAINTS -- each of the segments out of which the film is assembled is ONLY 4 MINUTES LONG -- actually require that these personal peccadillos be more signaled than dwelt upon.  The result is a rather efficient / fast moving and often very funny film.

Yes, this film is not Gone with the Wind [1939] or Citizen Kane [1941] but it isn't Beevis and Butthead [1993] or even one or another "reality shows" (e.g. Survivor [2000]) either.  Instead there is user-generated plot and humor in the film that I don't think would come simply from "a talented group of 5-6 writers" ANY "5-6 writers."

So while the film was not exactly "high browed," perhaps most resembling a "user generated" Dutch Gossip Girl [2007-2012], credit needs to be given where credit is due: This was certainly a fun project that actually produced a pretty good / funny young adult-oriented (R-rated) 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! :-) >>

The Single Moms Club [2014]

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

IMDb listing

CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
TheSource (K. Lee) review
ChicagoTribune (R. Bentley) review
RE.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review

BET coverage
Ebony coverage
Essence coverage
TheSource coverage

I want to give writer/director/actor Tyler Perry a hug.  Since beginning my blog, I have not only enjoyed but found positive value (often overwhelming positive value) in every film of his that I've reviewed here.   The current film, The Single Moms Club [2014] (written and directed by Tyler Perry) is IMHO signature Perry material.

Yes, the film is somewhat formulaic -- five single mothers from very diverse backgrounds are brought together to work on a project for their kids' school -- but if it is so, that's more a reflection of the distance that we still have to go as a society in coming to respect one another regardless of our background, than the fault of the writer/director's here.  Perry is showing us what would be possible, if we would _let go_ of a social pecking order that requires us to look down on others for reasons of race, class, luck ... so that we could "feel better" about ourselves.  And Perry ALSO shows us HOW DESPERATE AND LONELY WE ARE when we _choose_ to live our lives on such a slope, with people below us (and people above us...) with us trying "to keep our balance" or even "with our fingers clawing into the slope" in dire fear that we might be slipping down.

Indeed, at least 4 out of 5 women in this story appear terrified at the beginning of the story of _falling_ to a lower social class.

The film with Hillary (played by Amy Smart) a bewildered lawyer's ex, not yet realizing that her vindictive former husband is going to make her (and their daughter ...) pay for her having the audacity to challenge him (on what? we're really never told).  A year before she was "a lawyer's wife" living with a big house and with a maid ... Now she's going to be an lawyer's ex-wife living as small an alimony check as the law would allow.

Her long time (since at least college days)  friend Jan (played by Wendi McLendon) has long seen men as the enemy.  So she has purposefully sought to structure her life to be as "man free" as possible, to the point that she had a child (a girl ...) through artificial insemination some twelve years ago.  But it's not a man free world, and without a husband or at least a father of her child, she ironically finds herself at even a bigger disadvantage career-wise (in which she's really put all her aspirations) than if she had at least a lout of an ex.  At the beginning of the film, after 17 years at a publishing firm, she's FINALLY "up for partner" BUT her 12 year old (approaching her teenage years...) "has decided" to start acting-up ... IF THERE WAS A SECOND PARENT TO SHARE THIS "RITE OF PASSAGE" / BURDEN WITH, IT'D BE EASIER ... BUT THERE ISN'T ONE ...

Jan's desire to be "a success" DESPITE MEN, causes her to be brutally harsh to writers coming to the publishing firm in hopes of getting their manuscripts published, writers like African American single mom May (played by Nia Long) who works for "a local community paper" but like so many other such writers, despite responsibilities at work and at home (her ex, we find later, has a drug problem and together with him they have a 12 year-old boy) she dreams of perhaps "one day getting a book published."  But May's dream continues to depend today, at least in part, _on the mood_ of publishing AGENTS like Jan.  And interestingly IT'S THE AGENTS LIKE JAN (male or female) who in a "dog eat dog (publishing) world" CAN'T FAIL.  Jan _looks at May_ (and perhaps at her work...) and decides "this is too much of a risk (for ME)."

So Jan sends May off from her office packing, and BOTH have "appointments at school" (with regard to something that their kids have done) ... and to BOTH'S surprise ... THEY HAVE APPOINTMENTS AT THE SAME SCHOOL, AT THE SAME TIME (along with the other three (single) moms) over "bad behavior" that their kids have become involved with ... Two of the kids were caught "tagging" (spray painting with graffiti) a wall outside of school while three others were caught smoking.

The Principal tells the five assembled mothers: "Our policy is when the kids get in trouble, we try to get the parents involved.  There's a school dance coming up in 6 weeks ... Guess who we've decided is going to be the Committee to set-up the dance?"

"But we don't know each other?"  "Good.  You'll get to know each other now."

And thus we have the set-up of what becomes "The Single Moms Club" of the movie.

Now who are the other two moms?

Well there's Esperanza (played by Zulay Henau) whose husband, a upper-scale car salesman, left her "for a younger model."  To be sure, Esperanza, has found a new boyfriend too, BUT he's bartender in a restaurant (owned by his parents) a decent enough place (kind of "chain Mexican restaurant") but IT WOULD BE A STEP-DOWN economically from being _at least_ the ex-wife of a BMW salesman.

Finally, there's Lytia (played by Cocoa Brown) who has five kids.  The oldest two (as well as their father) are in jail.  The youngest two are in day-care and the middle one, 12-year-old Hakim (played by DeVion Harris) is in the (private) school with the others and Lytia is working as a waitress so that with whatever scholarships she can get for her son, her son can stay in that school.  And yes, there are neighbors who laugh at her, including the one who Lytia pays day-care to to take care of her two daughters: "You make less as a waitress than you could make being on welfare.  Why the heck do you do it?  Do you think you're better than us?"  (No ... she's doing this because she doesn't want her youngest son to end up in jail like his father and two older brothers ...)

So there, those are the five single moms of the story.  Yes, they are "from different backgrounds."  But thanks to being forced to work together by that Principal, as they start talking they realize that they have a lot in common.  Above all, THEY'RE ALL TERRIFIED ... THEY ALL FEEL that they are NOT "in control" of their lives.  And until they come together, they honestly don't know what would happen to them IF ... (fill in the blank...).

And interestingly enough, it's not like they hate men (not even Jan completely hates them ...).  BUT THEY ARE SCARED ... And part of the rest of the film is about getting them "less scared."

What helps them to become "less scared" is the _community_ that begins to form among them, and then A POSITIVE (WORTHWHILE) MAN coming among them.  Tyler Perry writes himself that role.  And it's not that his T.K. is rich (he's not).  But he has an honest job (he has "a lighting business" for stage productions) and he's _willing to wait_ for his interest (May) to "come to feel safe" around him.

Honestly, my hat off to the guy.  There would be / is some criticism (see above) that these women would "need men" at all.  But we _share_ this planet with each other.  So unless there is good reason to keep distance from someone (and not really knowing a person is a good reason ... for a while) the default position ought to be to _eventually_ let THE OTHER "in" (again, within reason / appropriately).

And this is because THE ALTERNATIVE would be to REMAIN FOREVER AFRAID and ALONE.  And honestly, I think Tyler Perry's often fundamentally religious message would be: God did not make us that way.


<< 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! :-) >>