Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 [2017]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (K. Turan) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review


Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 [2017] (screenplay and directed by James Gunn, inspired by the Marvel Comics comic book series [MarvU] [wikip 1969 2008] of the same name) which OPENED to ENTHUSIASTIC crowds worldwide, CONTINUED the whimsical tale of abducted-as-a-child earthling Peter Quill a.k.a. "Star Lord" (played by Chris Pratt) and his band of misfits who became by the end of the first installment "The Guardians of the Galaxy" AND ... beh ... I throw-up my hands and sigh.

It's a cute, even at times _adorable_, movie (witness purportedly Vin Diesel's tree-like "Baby Groot" though the character is animated and "Groot" really HAS NO LINES, so what exactly does Vin Diesel "do" in "playing" him ;-).  But get past the "adorable schmuckishness" of the film, what's left?

IMHO not much, 'cept perhaps if you ... hate your family.  Zoe Saldana's "abused since even before her birth" (she had been genetically engineered to be a heartless warrior) Gamora (not exactly the most Judeo-Christian friendliest of names ...) turns out to have a sister Nebulah (played by Karen Gillan) who really, really hates her (in good part for what their father did to both of them).  And then Peter Quill's, yes "GOD-like" Father (literally named Ego) (played by Kurt Russell) turns out to be a real D...

So ... "Joyful, Joyful we adore Thee ..."

Yes, this is a cute movie, but it's also "really kinda evil..." I suppose a lot of Hollywood stars come from really messed-up families (indeed, it may serve as the underlying reason for their drive to "get known"), but more than pretty much any other Marvel Comics story to date, there's a real "your family are your friends" / "your real family will mess you up" message in this story that may surprise a lot of Viewers who thought they were coming to a movie that was just gonna entertain them. 


< 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 Circle [2017]

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

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


The Circle [2017] (directed and screenplay cowritten by James Ponsoldt and Dave Eggers [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb] based the latter's novel [GR] [WCat] [Amzn]) is an IMHO pretty thought provoking teen / young adult oriented cautionary tale about a Google-like internet company that's piercing / shedding ALL boundaries.

Yes, 20-something "every Millennial" Mae (played by Emma Watson) along with most Viewers found it cool to have, thanks to well-connected friend Annie (played by Karen Gillan), scored a job with said Google-like Silicon Valley giant named "The Circle" led by an Apple-founder Steve Jobs' like "charismatic visionary" named Bailey (played with magnificent high-tech witchery by Tom Hanks).  Indeed, with a MS-suffering dad (played by Bill Patxon) and a company that "cares" it could have seemed to May and her family like a lifesaver.  'Cept and there's ALWAYS a 'Cept ... what a creepy outfit "The Circle" turned out to be ...

A few weeks into working at said Circle a couple of nice / polite HR people come by Mae's cubicle to say: "We couldn't help but notice that you were off campus for 46 hours this past weekend.  We were just wondering ... why?"

"BECAUSE I HAVE A LIFE / A FAMILY / LOVED ONES ..." could have / should have been her answer.  And to some extent, that's the answer she gives, but ... she also gives in: The Circle's campus, Readers should note is ... pretty Cool.  It has pretty much EVERYTHING that a twenty-something could want, 'cept (that word again ...) PAST FAMILY / FRIENDS.

In other words, "The Circle" is a Totalitarian Cult and an expanding / pretty Evangelical one at that.

The rest of the film becomes a near constant interrogation of Viewers: What would YOU do?  When would YOU finally say ENOUGH?  (But even if you said ENOUGH ... WHERE would you "run to"?)

As such, The Circle presents that "Titanium Gulag" of the future, where one comes to have difficulty in distinguishing "The Shining City on a Hill" with a REALLY BRIGHTLY LIT ... PRISON.

Yes, Mae _kinda_ gets back at her (perhaps) "oppressors" but "kinda" is the operative word.  It isn't convincing.

With everybody's identities / privacy so thoroughly compromised in this near-future Dystopia by such "Circle innovations" as "SEEchange" (tiny disposable web-connected battery operated webcams that ANY USER could DROP ANYWHERE so that ANYONE, ANYWHERE, COULD SEE EVERYTHING GOING ON ANYWHERE) and "TruSELF" (a "secure" onestop "identity profile" that the Circle would provide, WITH THE PROVISO that ... well, one could be FOLLOWED online by ANYBODY, ANYTIME for ANY REASON), who cares ultimately that Mae is (perhaps) able to put her Bosses under the same scrutiny as she (and all the other "little people") are?

A lot of the younger reviewers (above) sigh "so what?"

Yes, perhaps here I am happy that I'm middle aged.  This is simply NOT the way we should be heading.  We should have a right to be able _to hide_ (to breathe...) occasionally.  Let our Confessions be to God (or to a Priest in a Confessional), not to ANYBODY, ANYWHERE, WATCHING US FOR ANY REASON ...

That said, A THOROUGHLY FASCINATING 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! :-) >>

15th Indian Film Festival of Los Angeles [2017]

 Of the films that played recently at the 15th Annual Indian Film Festival of Los Angeles, held at the Regal L.A. Live Cinema in Downtown Los Angeles, I was able to view and review the following:

Chronicles of Hari (orig. Harikatha Prasanga) [2016] [IMDb] [FiBt] (directed and cowritten by Ananya Kasaravalli [IMDb] [FiBt] along with Girish Kasaravalli [IMDb] [FiBt] and Gopalakrishna Pai [IMDb]) offered a quite fascinating, traditional Indian contribution to the TRANSGENDER QUESTION raging through society across the world today.  The story here, based in part on truth, is about an actor (played by Shrunga Vasudevan) who apparently _committed suicide_ after many years of playing the role of Hari an Indian Goddess as part of a traditional, ALL MALE, Hindu acting troupe. HE DIDN'T PARTICULARLY LIKE PLAYING THIS ROLE, but the troupe's director essentially forced him to do so, telling him that somebody had to play the role, it made no sense to train multiple actors to play it especially since he was actually quite good at it.  Indeed, a lot of the traditional Hindu women going to the troupe's presentations were quite impressed in his playing of Hari.  But soon his playing of this role got in the way of his personal life: He found it all-but impossible to get married, because even though traditional marriages in Hindu culture tend to be arranged, neither the families, nor the potential brides wanted [their daughters] to get married to someone who made his living playing a woman.  Rejected in this way, and unable to "switch roles" within the troupe, he did then fall into a certain amount of "gender confusion": He started to wonder if he was actually "[meant to be] gay."  But then to be gay in rural India is not necessarily the easiest thing in the world to be either and this caused him all sorts of other problems -- rejection now by his own family, rejection in pretty much every town / village that he tried to set-up home in.  So, driven eventually to despair, he ... The film calls quite stark attention to a fair number of contradictory messages sent by [in this case traditional Indian] society:  Here the society _wanted_ young men to play women's roles in traditional Hindu plays, but then had _no place for these actors_ afterwards -- they were rendered both "unmarriageable" [with traditional Hindu women] and not allowed to be openly gay.   So what options would these actors have?  A simply fascinating / thought provoking film -- 3 1/2 Stars 

Sexy Durga [2017] [IMDb] [FiBt] (written and directed by Sanal Kumar Sasidharan [IMDb] [FiBt]) was a simply _excellent_ minimalist contemporary Indian _horror movie_.  The story is SET IN SOUTH INDIA in and around a small town in the midst of an annual festival in honor of the Hindu Goddess Durga.  And it is about A YOUNG COUPLE -- Kabeer, A MUSLIM presumably from said town, and Durga, HINDI, BUT FROM NORTH INDIA (played by Rajshri Deshpande [IMDb] [FiBt]) and hence one who didn't speak the local language -- trying to hitch a ride to the train station to "get out of town."  Why?  Presumably because neither of the two "fit in."  They get picked-up by a couple of young SOUTH INDIAN MEN in a van, who ... and THAT'S THE POINT OF THE FILM ... one honestly doesn't know their motivations: On one hand they're kinda helpful, on the other hand, they REPEATEDLY (inadvertently?) SCARE THE DAYLIGHTS OUT OF said couple, especially out of said woman who has the same name as the Goddess in honor of whom this enormous and ecstatic festival was taking place (Honestly, the footage from the festival itself is both fascinating and at times disconcerting, though the Christian viewer should note that there are Christian faithful in various parts of the world who do some fairly disturbing things as well as part of their devotion -- including literally handling poisonous snakes up in Appalachia and having themselves literally crucified in some places in the Philippines).   Were the young men trying to be helpful to this already "on edge" couple?  AGAIN ONE SIMPLY DOES NOT KNOW and the film plays out JUST LIKE A NIGHTMARE: Just as one thinks that things are FINALLY being resolved (in one way -- good, or horribly bad -- or another) THERE'S  NEW TWIST ... and THE FILM'S TENSION resumes again.  It all plays like a SIMPLY OUTSTANDING HORROR / PSYCHOLOGICAL THRILLER -- 4 Stars.

Hotel Salvation (orig. Mukti Bhawan) [2016] [IMDb] [FiBt] (directed and screenplay by Shubhashish Bhutiani [IMDb] [FiBt], dialogues by Asad Hussain [IMDb] [FiBt]) CLOSED this year's Indian Film Festival of Los Angeles and proved to be a simply outstanding film about a naturally complicated relationship between aging father Daya (played by Lalit Behl [IMDb] [FiBt]) and grown/middle aged son Rajiv (played by Adil Hussain [IMDb] [FiBt]) with his own family, indeed marriageable 20-something daughter.  Basically, the film is about the father Daya, aged 77, who comes to the conclusion that "it's his time to die." As a good Hindu, with moderately reasonable means - not super-rich, not poor - this meant making _a final pilgrimage_ to the Hindu Holy City of Varanasi on the banks of the Ganges River ... where he would achieve moksha (the Hindu term for spiritual liberation/salvation) ... die.  And there are hotels along the river there in Varanasi run by Hindu priests which offer accompaniment to the Hindu devout who come to the city, to the mighty Ganges, to die.  Now was Daya particularly sick?  No not really.  He just had a clearly sincere / profound feeling that "his time has come."  Interestingly enough, when he and his son arrive at the hotel, the Hindu priest running the hotel, taking a look at Daya, does in fact believe him that he's probably going to die there.  But he _also_ tells him and his son that they can only stay at the hotel for two weeks and afterwards if Daya does not die, they must go back home.  How can one "schedule death"?   As a non-Hindu looking at this story play out, I did leave with something of a naturalistic theory BUT ... I do think there's a sincerity present that does go beyond simply the naturalistic.  Plus, it is clear that while most of the devotees who come to the town to die, do (somewhat surprisingly) do so, there are others (including one woman who becomes a fairly important character in the story) who don't.  Plus the Hindu priest who gave the incoming Daya "two weeks to die" (or else leave) proves to be a bit more flexible with the devotees coming to the hotel than it would initially seem (he does let some clearly stay longer).  ANYWAY, THIS IS A FASCINATING FILM and honestly WORTH THE VIEW for ANYONE INTERESTED IN INTER-FAITH DIALOGUE / COMPARATIVE RELIGION -- 4+ Stars.

<< 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! :-) >> 

2017 Newport Beach Film Festival

 Of the films that played recently at the 2017 Newport Beach Film Festival, I was able to view and review the following:

North of Known [2017] (directed by Bryan Smith) is a visually spectacular extreme sport documentary about Gavin McClurg [wikip] and Dave Turner traversing (over 37 days) the whole of the remote 480 mile Alaska Range (which includes Mt Denali the tallest mountain in North America) largely be means of paraglider.  Beautiful, simply beautiful.  I honestly never would have thought of the idea of doing this, but, oh my, what a remarkable Odyssey.  Who knows, one day astronauts on mars may travel that planet in this way as well.

In preparation for the trip, the two had dropped off by helicopter several caches of food, spacing them along the route at regular intervals (basically at where they expected to find themselves at the beginning of each week of travel).  They did this so that they wouldn't have to carry all their supplies for the whole month with them.  Then, of course, a film crew would helicopter-in to film them, though some of the footage included that taken by helmet cams and cameras otherwise mounted to their (paraglider) gear.

I left the film absolutely exhilarated.  Honestly, what's possible these days, and what a beautiful world we (still) have! -- 3 1/2 Stars

Good after Bad [2016] (written and directed by Anne Marie Hess) is a small indie film about a somewhat bullied/put-upon high schooler named Shelley (played quite excellently by Maddie Hadson) with _lots of issues at home_ who gets helped-out by a somewhat "dropped out of the sky" random wealthy man named Wes (played again quite excellently by Billy Burke) who was a relative of one of Shelley's "sort of" (but not particularly good...) high school friends.  Yes, a film like this today raises eyebrows.  Yet, the film is quite unapologetic.  Shelley's quite realistically portrayed teenage life was often (not always) veering precariously to the edge and her single mom had a great deal of difficulty dealing with her own difficulties.  So Wes became something of a godsend.  Are all rich older men good?  No, certainly not.  But are they _all_ (somehow) self-absorbed / bad?  Certainly _not_ as well.  In my six months here at my new assignment in Southern California, I've met a truly large number of richer middle-aged+ people (people my age plus), both men and women, who are by any standard good, concerned and generous people.  What Wes did for this teenager-at-risk is certainly quite interesting and discussion producing.  Yes, this film probably would have been easier-to-watch if some other character took interest and helped this girl.  But, what if (as is often the case...) there is simply no one else around to do so?   Do we let people drop-off the edge / fall through the cracks (just) to be PC? -- 3 1/2 Stars


 << 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! :-) >>

Gifted [2017]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub () review


Gifted [2017] (directed by Marc Webb, screenplay by Tom Flynn) while generally well and compassionately acted, treads (except when the film-makers _chose_ to be stupid...) where it's safe. 

The story was to center on a seven-year-old girl Mary Adler (played quite convincingly by McKenna Grace) the daughter of at least one gifted mathematician (and quite possibly two) who had been raised up to this point by her uncle Frank (played by ... Luke Evans).  Why?  Why would her uncle Frank, her mother's brother be raising her and not either her mother or father?  Well her mother was a very gifted mathematician, from a family of gifted mathematicians, but ... giftedness has its price.  Mary's mother was awkward socially, got herself pregnant by a man who also proved incapable of making a commitment to the child produced by their encounter, and so ... Mary's mother _committed suicide_ (!) at some point, in Frank's apartment, leaving Frank with her.

Now Frank, in the story no slouch on the brainy side -- he apparently was an Associate Professor (in Boston ...) at the time -- took his sister's suicide as something of a sign (or final straw) to give up that lifestyle and ... took his infant niece to Florida where he chose to live in a trailer park and "fix boats" for a living.  Again, why?  One's guess is that he was _tired_ of being "special" and preferred to seek to have a more normal way of life.  And that is then what he wanted his niece to have as well.

Well, all went well, until Mary made it to first grade, and ... it became clear that she was ... gifted as well.  What to do?  Frank seemed adamant with almost Evangelical zeal that she _remain_ "in a normal school" (even if she was bored there ...).  The school teacher and then principal google the family's name and find that Mary comes from a family of mathematicians.  Since the principal becomes "fuzzy" about the validity of Frank's guardianship of Mary, she makes contact with Mary's grandmother (and Frank's mother...) Evelyn (played by Lyndsay Duncan), and Evelyn comes down to Florida to try to take away Mary from her wayward son to put her into a proper (genius) school ...

And soon, the battle for Mary's future / upbringing is on ...

The story isn't bad, just predictable except in perhaps the most banally stupid of ways: Frank and Mary's school teacher Bonnie (played quite well by Jenny Slate) following stupid / seamy "Hollywood protocol" find their way to bed, which could have cost Teacher Bonnie her job ... and certainly makes Frank into a "big dumb jerk" ... and makes a film that OTHERWISE would have made for _a very nice family film_ into one that really wouldn't be suitable for actual kids of Mary's age.

Stupid, but I guess why waste big hunk of "man flesh" like Luke Evans on a sympathetic regular guy role.  All that was missing, I guess was a speedo scene ... And then, perhaps the film-makers thought "Jenny Slate should have felt so lucky" to do a topless covered by a pillow scene with an "A-list hunk" like Luke Evans.

#Sigh. #Sad.

 << 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 Lost City of Z [2016]

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

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


The Lost City of Z [2016] (screenplay and directed by James Gray based on the book [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by David Grann [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) while based on a true story is certainly no Raiders of the Lost Ark [1981]. 

Instead, call it "Downton Abbey [2010-2015] goes to the Jungle" (and perhaps with this film along with the "Dunkirk drama" Their Finest [2017] this sub-genre about _really boring_ "lower born turn of the century British aristocrats" will have finally "jumped the shark"). 

Set in the early 20th Century, the current film is about thoroughly once undistinguished British officer (hence with perhaps "something to prove") turned quite by accident into Amazonian explorer Percival Harrison Fawcett [wikip] (played in the film Charlie Humman): Sent after many years in the career doldrums on a random yet quite dangerous surveying mission (arguably because better connected British officers from more distinguished families didn't want to go ...) to the then uncharted but rubber-rich (and hence disputed) frontier region between Brazil and Bolivia called Acre, he returned with pottery evidence that out there in the jungle had once existed an ancient civilization.  He then becomes obsessed with finding said civilization even though he has difficulty being taken seriously by the quite crusty if very prestigious (they were British you know...) Royal Geographic Society.

Much Downton Abbeyesque only "with flynets" ensued ... Those who like period pieces about the British Empire in the interwar period will probably not find it terrible.  But it is _slow_ ...


ADDENDUM - We Servites (my religious order) actually know something about this region as our Order's probably most famous Mission is located on the Brazilian side of the border in Acre.  And I was actually helped translate a book commissioned by the Brazilian Servites on Amazonia of that region.


<< 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 Case for Christ [2017]

MPAA (PG)  CNS/USCCB (A-II)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Christianity Today (K. McLenithan) review
BeliefNet.com (J.W. Kennedy) review


The Case for Christ [2017] (directed by Jon Gunn, screenplay by Brian Bird based on the book [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Lee Strobel [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]), I have to admit, I came to with some ... fear.

While I'm at a parish where I may now actually use Strobel's book for a still in the works "Rocket Scientists Faith Discussion Group" (yes, I've literally buried _three_ different elderly rocket scientists - aerospace engineers (veterans of the Apollo and Space Shuttle programs - since coming out to Orange County, CA to my new assignment ;-), the _vast majority_ of the thousands of parishioners who I've worked with over the last 20 years _don't_ need any proof of the Resurrection.  It's a living reality to them day to day: How else can one get the strength to put aside alcohol, to stop yelling (or even beating) one's spouse or kids (and _start_ to put family / loved ones first again ... rather than "chasing trophies" of any manner of kinds) or get over Losses (again of a plethora of kinds)?

Rising from the Put/Hammered-down / Dismissed as Dead, is a surprisingly common experience for most of us.  That Jesus would to do it FOR REAL is a Testament that God truly understands what life in this still quite Fallen world is like and his desire to assure us that NOTHING / NO ONE of this world will have the final word over any of us, that that final word truly belongs to God who made and loves us all (incidentally a beautiful reflection on God's love for each and everyone of us is given in another Christian based movie The Shack [2017] that came out at the beginning of Lent this year, with the current film coming out to close it out). 

But then is all this just a nice "pipe dream"?  This is what former Chicago Tribune investigative reporter and (as a result of his conversion in the process) later Chicago-area Willow Creek Megachurch Pastor Lee Strobel (played in the film by Mike Vogel) sought to do -- prove one-way-or-another whether all this a bunch of nonsense.   And it's clear that when he began this project he was firmly hoping to prove to his wife (played in the film by Erika Christensen) that _her_ new found faith (as a result of a near family tragedy) was silly, distracting and even threatening their marriage.

Obviously, he came to a different conclusion.  He did so in a quite sober manner that should give the educated person at least some pause.  He noted that the ancient attestations, yes, in the New Testament are numerous (more than 5000 ancient copies of the NT are existent -- for context that's more than 4x as many as the Iliad, the next most numerously available text from the ancient mid-East -- and the oldest fragments of the NT go back to only a few decades from the event).  He noted fairly significant details in these ancient attestations -- notably that ALL the NT accounts of Christ's Resurrection have WOMEN encountering the Risen Christ first (if the story was invented, this detail would not serve the inventor's interest, as women's testimony was almost universally considered "unreliable" in the ancient mideast (and really up to only recent times).  Finally, he noted that Jesus would have almost certainly have died on the Cross (a possible explanation of a "fake Resurrection" would have been that he had not have actually died).  But even an Journal of the AMA article on the matter argued that assuming that Jesus was crucified, he would have had to have died -- from asphyxiation (following the other injuries of his ordeal, notably his flogging).  So ...

... if nothing else, it should make people think.

Again, I'm not necessarily sure that this is the best way to argue for Christianity, BUT IT DOES NOT HURT that there are serious people like Strobel seeking to argue the case.

Excellent 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! :-) >>

Going in Style [2017]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (K. Turan) review
RogerEbert.com (C. Lemire) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review


Going in Style [2017] (directed by Zach Braff, screenplay by Theodore Melfi, story by Edward Cannon) is not a complicated movie and there have been similar ones made recently as well, notably: the Ben Stiller / Alan Alda / Eddie Murphy, et al starring light dramedy Tower Heist [2011], the essentially "Igor / Frankenstein" but _real_ Andrew Garfield / Michael Shannon starring horror story 99 Homes [2014] (about the culture of "vulture capitalism" in the real estate market in-and-around Orlando, Florida after the 2008 Financial Crisis), the docudrama The Big Short [2015] (about six financial odd-balls who actually _made billions_ by _betting_ on the 2008 Crash) and finally the George Clooney / Julia Roberts starring vehicle Money Monster [2016] (about a guy who storms into a CFN-style "investment talk show" wanting to just start _shooting people_ who caused him to stupidly lose his life savings).  All these films brim with (and at some point _begin_ to exploit...) obvious resentment born of the view that the rich / connected people of Wall Street have essentially looted the futures of the poor and middle class of this country for their financial benefit ... and have largely gotten away with it.

In the current scenario, three retired "specialty steel workers" (played by Michael Kaine, Morgan Freeman and Alan Arkin) facing the loss of their entire pensions due to a corporate financial deal that "moved operations completely offshore" decide to rob the bank that made that financial deal possible -- "Rat Pack" (Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis, Jr) style.  Much ensues ...

Again, this is not a complicated story.  People of faith _should be_ at least _a little_ concerned about a story that, after all, GLORIFIES THEFT, even if perhaps "righteous theft."

Still, this film (and others like it) would probably never have been made if there wasn't a more or less obvious sense in society that justice has simply not been done (or even been close to having been done) with regards to the 2008 Financial Crisis that really did hurt / destroy the financial futures of tens of millions of people.

So my sense is that these kind of films will continue to be made (and continue to be quite popular) until the frustration these films have been fed by has been dealt with or otherwise dissipates.  The effects of crimes that go unpunished ... linger.


<< 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! :-) >>

Zookeeper's Wife [2017]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
Los Angeles Times (K. Turan) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (E. Zuckerman) review


Zookeeper's Wife [2017] (directed by Niki Caro, screenplay by Angela Workman based on the book [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Diane Ackerman [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) tells the story of Antonina Żabiński and her husband Jan [wikip] (played by Jessica Chastain and Johan Heldenbergh respectively) a Polish married couple who ran the Warsaw Zoo in the 1930s and used the premises to successfully hide some 300 Jews (some for days, others for years) during the time of Nazi Occupation (only two of the 300 Jews hidden by them were subsequently captured and killed, the rest survived the War).  For their efforts, the Żabińskis are among the 6,706 Poles (more than any other country) honored among "The Righteous Among the Nations" at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial [wikip] [website] in Jerusalem. 

To my knowledge, this may be the first Hollywood feature film to honor a Polish family that helped save Jews during the Holocaust even though, as mentioned above, the number of Poles honored at Yad Vashem exceeds all other nations, and as Poles would remind anybody who'd only listen to them, they themselves were suffered tremendously during the Nazi Occupation, and by Nazi ideology were themselves (along with the rest of the Slavic peoples) consigned do be "a slave race" for the Nazis to use as utterly expendable manual labor in the most dangerous of tasks.  As such, I can not but applaud this film that recognizes the some of the sufferings and contributions of the Poles during the brutal era of their country's occupation.

The film, like the book on which it is based, combines the story of the Żabińskis (among the source material used by Diane Ackerman in writing her book was Antonina Żabiński's own diary from the time) with other actual events of the time.  Notably, the film features an interplay (perhaps partly true, though also certainly embellished) between the Żabińskis and Lutz Heck [en.wikip] [de.wikip]*(played in the film by Daniel Brühl) who had been the head of Berlin's Zoo during the Nazi Era and was most famous for a rather bizarre Nazi-era "breeding program" for recreating an extinct species of "Ur-ox."  Of course he did not succeed, but the resulting large and _rather aggressive_ cattle have been subsequently labeled Heck cattle (or more amusingly / derisively "Nazi Cows"). 

In the film, Lutz is shown performing some of these bizarre breeding experiments on the grounds of the Warsaw Zoo (largely empty of its original animals as most were killed and others were pillaged by the Nazi occupiers / taken to zoos back in the Reich) while the Żabińskis the former caretakers of the Zoo, still living in the villa on its grounds, used the zoo's various empty pens, tunnels and other facilities to hide Jews, literally under the noses of Lutz and the other Nazi occupiers.  

It makes for an interesting (and largely family friendly) story about how the resourcefulness of a Polish family helped hide and save literally hundreds of Jewish lives in the midst of literally one of the most dangerous places to be during the Holocaust.


<< 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! :-) >>

Ghost in the Shell [2017]

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

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


Ghost in the Shell [2017] (directed by Rupert Sanders, screenplay by Jamie Moss, William Wheeler and Ehren Kruger, a live-action "remake-of-sorts" of the Japanese R-rated anime cult-classic Ghost in the Shell (orig. Kôkaku Kidôtai) [1995] [IMDb] [AW] (directed by Mamoru Oshii [IMDb] [AW], screenplay by Kazunori Itô [IMDb] [AW]) both based on the manga comic "The Ghost in the Shell" [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Masamune Shirow [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is a VISUALLY STUNNING if _definitely_ MIS-RATED Blade Runner [1982] / The Matrix [1999]-ish SciFi film (I would think that _most_ North Americans viewing this film would _simply assume_ that the current film is R-rated -- like its above mentioned spiritual cousins -- for all the reasons that a film like this would be rated-R -- theme, violence and here, okay "de facto" (the main character's a cyborg, rather than a human ...) nudity).

Yet, outside of the IMHO rather "no brainer" ratings-controversy and then _quite legitimate questions_ raised by the Asian American community / manga fans (fairly large out here on the West Coast) that ONE OF THE MOST ICONIC HEROINES IN _JAPANESE_ MANGA COMICS was played here by a Caucasian actress (Scarlett Johansson), see Justin Chang's review from the LA Times (above), even if the role was right up Johansson's alley, THE VISUALS in the film as well as ITS PREMISE are WELL WORTH the view:

Honestly folks, set in a BladeRunner-ish Tokyo of the near-future, this film is WELL WORTH seeing in 3D (as I did this time).  I usually don't go for the 3D glasses, but here it's _definitely worth_ the extra charge. 

Then at a time when we all wonder if the Russians were somehow able to HACK / INFLUENCE the recent U.S. Presidential election "from afar" ... the current film's premise that in a world (set a few decades, or in reality a generation or two, in the future) where humans would be choosing to get technological enhancements -- better eyes, better limbs, better organs, better "interconnectivity" with others -- and then straight-out machines would-be becoming more lifelike, A HACKER would enter the scene to try to mess with the programming of all these often literally inCORPORATED gadgets is a REMARKABLY TIMELY story, if also a similarly DISCONCERTING one.

So Parents, DON'T TAKE your 10 year-olds to this film (again, the PG-13 rating here is ridiculous) but have fun talking to your older teens and college-aged adults about how this film compares to the "far out" dystopic SciFi films of _our_ younger days.  All in all A GREAT JOB worthy of its predecessors.


<< 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! :-) >>

6th Annual Czech that Film Tour [2017] - Part 1

Among the films playing as part of the fifteen city 2017 Czech That Film Tour [Variety] that is passing through the United States over the next several months (the tour began here in Los Angeles over the past weekend and will end in Chicago in June), I was able to view and review the following:

The Teacher (orig. Učitelka) [2016] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*(directed by Jan Hřebejk [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*, written by Petr Jarchovský [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) a CZECH / SLOVAK CO-PRODUCTION opened the 2017 Czech That Film Tour with, yes, LITERALLY "A BANG."  Director  Hřebejk [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]* is certainly one of the best Czech directors of this generation and the story presented here is a compelling, even spine tingling, HORROR story (yet THOROUGHLY BELIEVABLE / WITHOUT NEED FOR ANY FAKE "MONSTERS").

Set in mid-1980s (hence still thoroughly Communist Era) Czechoslovakia it's a story that could TO SOME EXTENT _honestly_ happen just about anywhere.  "TO SOME EXTENT" is, of course, THE KEY to the compelling nature of this film.

Yes, TO SOME EXTENT this story could take place ANYWHERE, BUT ... mid-1980s Communist Era Czechoslovakia WASN'T JUST "ANYWHERE" ... it was a still thoroughly entrenched Communist country where it was VERY HARD for REGULAR PEOPLE to do _anything_ in the face of even CLEAR-AS-DAY (and thoroughly EVIL)  abuse of power. 

At issue was a _burrowed-in_ CORRUPT 8th grade teacher at an utterly random Bratislava, Slovakia grade school who would begin each school year "quite innocently" asking her students to introduce themselves and then SAY A WORD-OR-TWO about WHAT THEIR PARENTS DID FOR A LIVING while she carefully "took notes."  She would then EXTORT said parents throughout the ensuing school year, asking them for quite inappropriate favors and sometimes for utterly inappropriate ones, with, well, their kids' futures HANGING IN _HER_ BALANCE.

Ah, one may say, "My kid's not going to be a rocket scientist or neurosurgeon, so who cares?"  Well ... that may be, but maybe one's kid wants to be on a sports team, or drama club or simply wouldn't  want to be "on the authorities radar" THAT OBSCENELY EARLY IN LIFE.

A school teacher, anywhere, honestly has a lot of power ... A thoroughly burrowed-in, connected, knows-how-to-game-the-system, school teacher, here even a "Comrade" (also "by chance" head of the local Communist Party Committee ... so even the Principal of the School (!) was scared of her) HAS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF POWER.

But WOULD YOU SUBMIT to "running contraband" between Bratislava and Moscow because (1) you happen "to work at the local airport" and (2) your kid could suddenly fail her grades at school and be put in a "remedial program" for the "mentally distressed" simply because "Teacher" had the power to do it  AND most heartbreakingly (3) HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN TO A THIRTEEN YEAR OLD (!) THAT HER GRADES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH HER ACTUAL SCHOOL PERFORMANCE -- that literally "one plus one" equals IN HER CASE _whatever_ the teacher wants it to be.  And that "one plus one" could RETURN to being "two" ONLY AFTER HER PARENTS DO WHATEVER TEACHER WANTS THEM TO DO ...

Well, the film begins with said "scared to be doing this at all" Principal and her Assistant, calling in the parents of the students of said school teacher (played by Zuzana Mauréry [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) for an extraordinary meeting, after said thirteen year old girl TRIED TO COMMIT SUICIDE (is one really surprised?) because she simply _could not understand_ why she was failing RUSSIAN (of all subjects) when she DID HER HOMEWORK, DID "ALL HER DECLENSIONS" RIGHT and STILL WAS GETTING "FAILING GRADES" simply because "Teacher didn't seem to like her _now_  for some reason ..."

Many / most of the parents actually knew what was going on.  Many / most had been "visited upon" by said teacher asking for THEM for various favors as well, BUT ... WHAT THE HELL TO DO?  Standing up to her could just make the situation much worse, for them, and especially their kids.  But _now_ SOMEONE (ELSE'S) KID JUST NEARLY DIED BECAUSE OF THIS TEACHER.   What to do?  What honestly to do?

Again, this is one heck of a HORROR STORY without any (fake) MONSTERS -- 4+ Stars.  

Intimate Lighting (Intimní Osvětlení) [1965] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]* (directed and cowritten by Ivan Passer [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]* along with Jaroslav Papoušek [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]* and Václav Šašek [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) played as the LEGACY ENTRÉE for the  2017 Czech That Film Tour.

Each year, the CTF tour organizers offer a film like this to help Viewers appreciate the remarkable 100 year+ history of Czech Cinema (such a small country, yet with a heck of a lot of talent ;-).  In recent past years, the legacy entrées included the truly remarkably made medieval historical epic Marketa Lazarová [1967] (to prepare for the film's making, the acting troupe actually _spent a year_ living in the medieval conditions portrayed -- cooking / eating the same food, making and sleeping on the same beds, making / wearing the same clothes) and Invention for Destruction (orig. Vynález Skázy) [1958] a truly visually spectacular 1/2 animated 1/2 live-action (in 1958!) rendering of a Jules Verne story. 

The current "legacy entrée" was one of the first films of 1960s era Czechoslovakian "New Wave."  On hand here in Los Angeles, was the film's smiling director Ivan Passer [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*, now in his 80s talking of how the Czechslovakian "New Wave" [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* came to be: Basically he, life-long BFF Miloš Forman [wikip] [IMDb] and others came to the conclusion that to make _good movies_ in Communist-era Czechoslovakia they had to _get out of the studio_ and "go to the Provinces", USE non-professional actors, keep the lighting-and-sound as simple as possible (ALL THIS TO HONESTLY "keep them away" FROM PEOPLE WHO COULD "TURN THEM IN" ...) and then "keep things light" ... Passer noted that there was some random "Politiburo" member back then who said that he "liked comedies" and that "The People" should "be entertained."  So as long as one kept the people smiling ;-) ... one could say just about anything ;-) ... OMG ... I'VE BEEN SAYING THAT AND LIVING THAT IN MY MINISTRY AS A CATHOLIC PRIEST FOR YEARS ;-) ;-) ;-).

[I would add here that the whole creation of the the "Independent Film Movement" in the United States -- from Robert Redford's creation of the "Sundance Film Festival" / Robert Deniro's "Tribeca Film Festival" to film critics Roger Ebert / Gene Siskel's SUPPORT of "Independent Film" in their reviews (coming from "way out in Chicago...") -- was motivated by a similar if perhaps _somewhat less urgent_ need for film-makers to get away from the Politics / inevitable Restrictions (Censorship or one kind or another) of the Big Studios].

So then, the current film, Intimate Lighting (Intimní Osvětlení) [1965] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*, is really just a SIMPLE story about a Czech family living out _somewhere_ "in the villages" (na venkově, na vesnici...) being visited ONE WEEKEND by some of their relatives "from the city" (Prague).  And it's not even a particularly "mean" picture (as it might have been if it had been made in the United States today).  It's just about two sets of relatives getting together one random weekend during the summer.  And they do have something in common ... they're all (classical) musicians.

Now this will stun many contemporary American viewers: How could it possibly be that "people in a village" could have a small chamber orchestra?  Well folks, THIS WAS ENTERTAINMENT in Central Europe in the first half of the 20th century.  EVERYBODY had SOMEBODY in the family (at times EVEN THE ENTIRE FAMILY) who could PLAY THE VIOLIN (or the Bass, Cello, etc) AND PLAY IT WELL.

So I found the film to be a joy.  I "see" my own beloved Czech relatives in it (as they were back in the 1960s-early 70s), and even the house in which the story plays-out with its garden (with its angrešt (gooseberry) shrubs ... a kind of indigenous "kiwi-fruit"-like bearing tree) looks _spectacularly_ like the house that my paternal grandfather DIED building for our family in a small town outside of Prague in the early 1960s.  So I can assure Readers here that this film is absolutely authentic. 

This then is a remarkable quality of this kind of "independent" film-making: It lends itself to a kind of simplicity / authenticity that larger productions, anywhere, often lack.  So congrats to the filmmakers (and to the organizers of CTF this year).  You picked a Legacy winner here ;-) -- 4+ Stars

The Devil's Mistress (orig. Lída Baarová) [2016] [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]* (directed by Filip Renč [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*, screenplay by Ivan Hubač [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) tells _a good part of the story_ of CERTAINLY (!) the MOST CONTROVERSIAL CZECH FILM ACTRESS IN HISTORY -- Lída Baarová [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* [IMDb] (played excellently in the film by Táňa Pauhofová [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) who, while striving to become (and actually largely succeeding in becoming) a quite successful actress in Babelsberg, then (Nazi...) Germany's "Hollywood" of the 1930s, entered into what became a truly infamous affair with Nazi Propaganda Chief Joseph Goebbels (played in the film by Karl Markovics [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*).  Yup.  And by _all accounts_ Goebbels was apparently smitten enough by her that he was willing TO LEAVE HIS WIFE / CHILDREN, that is, HIS "PERFECT NAZI FAMILY," as well as HIS POST AS NAZI PROPAGANDA CHIEF (and even apparently offered to Hitler to take a random ... and distant ... post as "Nazi Germany's Ambassador to Japan") so that he could leave with Miss Baarová. 

Well this could not stand... and it did not.  Magda, Goebbels' wife (played in the film wonderfully by Lenka Vlasáková [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) took the matter up with Hitler himself (played in the film  _fascinatingly_, though apparently again _historically accurately_, as a really sexually troubled / repressed prude by Pavel Kříž [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*).   And so Hitler himself put the kabash on the whole matter.  Baarová's [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* [IMDb] film career in Nazi Germany was _summarily_ brought to an end (and it was also 1938, just as the Czechoslovak-German Sudeten Crisis was heating up as well ...).  She was able to return back to the (then) rump of Czecho-Slovakia in the months after the the German taking of the Sudetenland and apparently did some films in (Fascist) Italy during the War [IMDb].

After the War, Lída Baarová [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* was, needless to say, arrested and investigated by the (by then Communist dominated) post-War Czechoslovak authorities as a Traitor / Collaborator.  Worse, HER OWN MOTHER (played by Simona Stašová [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*) DIED UNDER INTERROGATION by the post-War Czech (again Communist dominated) authorities and her younger sister Zorka (played in the film by Anna Fialová [IMDb] [CSFD]*[FDb.cz]*), also an actress, though one who _never left Prague_ for "higher dreams" COMMITTED SUICIDE after being told that she would simply NEVER have an acting role again in post-War Czechoslovakia because she was ... Lida's sister.

For her part, Lída [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* ended-up "landing on her feet" after this several year post-War freefall, managed to get out of post-War Czechoslovakia before the February 1948 Communist Putsch definitively _slammed_ the Iron Curtain down on the frontiers of the country, and ... ended-up having _a moderately successful acting_ career IN FRANCO'S FASCIST DOMINATED SPAIN [IMDb] before retiring to (and apparently dying) in Salzburg, Austria in 2000 at the "ripe old age" of eighty six.  

Honestly, ONE _HELL_ OF A WOMAN ...  -- As for the film, honestly, it's top quality.  I do wish that the film explored more of what Lída Baarová [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]* had thought during the 1938 Sudeten Crisis, as she was a _Czech actress_ in Nazi Germany (!) at the time (and HER PEOPLE were really _on the line_), but it's certainly ONE HELL of a compelling story about a woman who either made A SERIES of WORLD-CLASS BAD CHOICES (!) or one who EARLY-ON in her life really did make A PACT WITH THE DEVIL - 4 Stars. 


* 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! :-) >>

24th San Diego Latino Film Festival [2017] - Part 3

 

 Among the films that played recently at the 24th San Diego Latino Film Festival, held at the AMC Fashion Valley 18 Theater at the Fashion Valley Mall in San Diego, CA I was able to view and review the following:

The Darkness (orig. Las Tinieblas) [2016] [IMDb] [FA.es]*(directed and cowritten by Daniel Castro Zimbrón [IMDb] [FA.es]* along with Denis Languérand [IMDb] and David Pablos [IMDb]) proved to be a quite "fun" / quite well-executed low-budget post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi horror movie coming from MEXICO.  Inspired in Lord Byron's similarly post-Apocalyptic poem "The Darkness," the story centers on a family - father (played by Brontis Jodorowsky [IMDb]), older teenage son named Marcos (played by Fernando Álvarez Rebeil [IMDb]) and the younger son, about 10-12 y.o., named Argel (played by Aliocha Sotnikoff [IMDb]) and then a cute-as-a-button if rather sickly 8 y.o. daughter named Luciana (played by Camila Robertson Glennie[IMDb]).  At the beginning of the story, they find themselves holed-up in a random cabin somewhere deep in a forest, and they were, in effect, "hiding."  Hiding from what?  Well something, unclear, had happened in the world outside.  Indeed at the beginning of the film, the father and sons would don gas masks (!) whenever they stepped outside.  There also seemed to be giant spider-like (alien?) monsters outside.  However, these monsters are never really seen even though they are occasionally heard (the whole shack _shakes_ violently whenever one of the monsters seems to be foraging outside).  However, since these monsters are _never_ really seen and about midway through the story, the 10 year old son Argel discovers that he doesn't really need a gas mask when he walks out outside, both he and his younger sister (the older son disappears early in the film) begin to wonder IF THE FATHER IS JUST "MAKING IT ALL UP." Maybe HE'S making the whole house shake in some way -- blaming this on "the monsters" -- to keep his two remaining children "scared."  And there it is: Throughout the whole film, the audience also wonders if the GIANT spider-like monsters" are REAL or whether the father is somehow faking it all, in an attempt to keep his remaining children "in line." Fascinating film ;-) -- 3 Stars

Jules and Dolores (orig. O Roubo da Taça) [2016] [IMDb] [AC]*(directed and cowritten by Caito Ortiz [IMDb] [AC]* along with Lusa Silvestre [IMDb]) is a TRULY FUNNY Brazilian comedy about the circumstances surrounding the actual 1983 theft of the REVERED Jules Rimet World Cup Soccer Trophy by, it turns out, two Rio de Janeiro "good old boys" (one with a large gambling debt, owing money to a local mobster called "O Reverendo"....).  The film begins with the words: "Some of this actually happened..." ;-).    The two small time crooks (one known by all his friends in the neighborhood as "A Barba" (The Beard ... and he didn't wear a mask ...) _really_ "didn't think things through" ;-).  But then neither did the Brazilian Soccer Federation: They put the trophy in a prominent display case in their central offices "behind a plate of bullet proof glass." But THE DISPLAY CASE ITSELF was of the kind that one could "buy at Walmart."  Hence "O Barba" just took-out his keys and pried-off THE LITTLE PIECE OF WOODEN FRAME that held the "BULLET PROOF GLASS" in place.  The plate of "Bullet Proof Glass" fell to the floor (it _did not_ break ;-) ... and there they were, a grasp away from the most revered trophy in 3/4 of the world ;-).  Okay, they successfully ran-off with the second most revered object in all of Brazil, the most revered being the similarly quite small (and initially headless) image of Our Lady of the Aparecida, the Patroness of Brazil.  Where the heck does one sell it?  Who'd buy it?  One of the "gold dealers" in Rio (but also, needless to say, A SOCCER FAN) pulled out a shotgun and wanted to shoot them right then and there ... ;-).  But they do finally find a buyer ... a smiling, kinda swarmy if also kinda simpathetic ... ARGENTINIAN ;-).  Much ensues ... ;-) ... Honestly, the characters in the film were brilliantly drawn -- including the two small time crooks, the mobster "O Reverendo," the smiling / swarmy Argentinian, the "no nonsense" local police detective put on the case who generally found the easiest way "to get a lead on a case" was to just _step-on_ (well STOMP ON) the toes of some random two-bit thug "brought in for questioning" ;-) and then the never seen but often heard (by said local detective) disembodied voice of the "policia militar" (Brazil was under a military dictatorship at the time ...) offering "their assistance" to said "pansy a..." local Rio police detective if he couldn't break-open the case.  Finally, there was the girlfriend of one of the small time crooks named, Dolores (played wonderfully by Taís Araújo [IMDb] [AC]*) who, in fact, narrates the story and who was the ONLY ONE in the saga will _any_ REAL BRAINS ... ONE SPECTACULARLY FUNNY MOVIE -- 4+ Stars.

Where I Grow Old (orig. A Cidade onde Envelheço) [2016] [IMDb] [AC]*(directed and cowritten by Marília Rocha [IMDb] [AC]* along with João Dumans [IMDb] and Thais Fujinaga [IMDb]) is a small BRAZILIAN / PORTUGUESE "indie piece" set entirely in the Brazilian city of Belo Horizonte (the third largest in Brazil) about two women, Teresa and Francisca (played by Elizabete Francisca Santos [IMDb] [AC]* and Francisca Manuel [IMDb] [AC]*) in their later-20s from Portugal, one already living in Belo Horizonte for a while, the other just arriving at the beginning of the story, both trying to decide throughout the whole of the story WHERE they'd each like to "settle down."  Now though this film is about two women in their later-20s living together, neither is gay.  Both have boyfriends / reasonably good, caring / sensitive men in their lives.  But neither sees a true / serious / enduring future with any of them.  On the other hand, the "clock is ticking" (not necessarily "the biological clock" but simply _the clock_).  Where does one want ... to grow old?  Each may be in their later-20s, but both are realizing that serious _decisions_ will begin to have to be made.   A very nice, _thoughtful_ reflection worthy of young adult (and even Church) reflection. -- 3 1/2 Stars

* 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! :-) >>