The Intern [2015]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (J. Hassenger) review


The Intern [2015] (written and directed by Nancy Meyers) was a GENERALLY very nice -- parents see the end of my otherwise glowing review -- dramedy about 70 year-old, widowed for several years retiree, Ben (played wonderfully throughout by Robert DeNiro in probably his BEST (!) performance in 10 years), who after several years of said widow(er)hood / retirement, decided that he's not yet ready to throw himself on the funeral pyre and/or "just die."

Walking back from a morning of Tai Chi in a park in his native Brooklyn, he comes across a flier posted on a kiosk by a local (fashion) e-commerce startup company called "About the Fit" looking for "Senior Interns."  Interestingly, the flier asks that applicants be seniors (65 and older) but also asks them to submit, electronically, a video clip of themselves talking of their experience / job expectations.  It's an interesting request which seeks to utilize the wisdom of seniors while asking them to be also interested / capable of presenting themselves in a savvy manner in the present.

Ben, like MANY other Seniors (with experiences of following their grandkids on Facebook, et al ;-), acknowledges a little help from said grand-kids, but puts together a pretty good, indeed dead-on, video of himself to submit for the job ... and he gets it.

Now, of course, if his character couldn't do this, there'd be no movie.  But writer/director Meyers, reminds us that we shouldn't be surprised that Ben, a 70 year old retiree, but who had spent 30+ of his 40+ years of working in middle management would probably find the skills to pull this off, which, of course, Ben does.

So then Ben lands the senior intern job and for the first time in years has someplace to (regularly) go to.  But would he be accepted at the job?  This then is the rest of the movie. 

Now the film is NOT harsh, indeed, it is WONDERFULLY KIND.  But still there is that question:

Can a 70 year old, that yes, knows how to know, reasonably well, how to get around a laptop function effectively indeed CREATIVELY in the world of 20-30 something run e-commerce startups?  And his boss Jules (played again wonderfully by Anne Hathaway), said fashion e-commerce startup complany creator isn't particularly convinced, certainly not at the start of this "Senior intern experiment" foisted on her by one of her also late-20 / early-30-something partners.   (Note of course, that earlier in her career Hathaway herself famously played an intern (to Merryl Streep's) in another fashion oriented film called The Devil Wears Prada [2006] ;-).

In the current film, it's clear that "business is booming."  At one point Jules shares to Ben / Viewers that her company had started a few years before with "a group of 12" and now had over 200 employees.  But it was almost booming too much.  "Back in the day" (only said 2 years past...), Jules could be totally engaged / involved in everything from shipping to web design to customer service.  Now with 200+ employees that was untenable.  What to do?  How to get help, quickly, at low cost?  Well that was part of the reason why Jules' partner suggested getting a couple of "senior interns" (who had a lot of experience) and why he also suggested looking into finding even a C.E.O. (not her) to manage the implementation of the decisions of the company (the partners).

But could she let go?  It was "ALL SOOO EASY when things were still small."  Add to the mix the reality that Jules, as a young, vibrant, late-20 / early 30-something, was married, her husband, not at the firm, being Matt (played by Anders Holm) and together they had a cute as a button 5-6 year old Paige (played by Jojo Kushner).

So this was Jules' WONDERFUL but "bursting at the seams" world ... And yet, how does one manage all this, without eventually "crashing and burning(out)."

Enter, of course, wonderfully, 70-year old intern Ben, who can't possibly move anymore as fast as Jules, but has the experience to appreciate what she's achieved and make sense of it (for her) so that it can be sustained.

THIS IS A GREAT MOVIE about the Value of Wisdom.  And who knows, if the film's marketing folks are smart enough, they'll have it available for streaming / DVD purchase come Christmas time for the film's fans' parents and grandparents.

So generally good / great job over all.

HOWEVER, I do have to note to PARENTS OF YOUNG KIDS AND TEENS that I do agree with the CNS / USCCB's reviewer John Mulderig that a couple of the scenes involving the company's late-40-something / early-50 something masseuse Fiona (played by Rene Russo) are needlessly / even stupidly "over-the-top" and take the film that would have been A LOVELY PG movie for the whole family into ARGUABLY R-rated territory.  This is unfortunate and forces me to give the film 3-stars rather than the 4-stars or even 4+ that it would have otherwise deserved.

Still this is a lovely film that 20-somethings and above should be able to appreciate and view with their parents / grandparents.


<< 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! :-) >>

Meet the Patels [2015]

MPAA (PG)  ChiTrib/Variety (3 Stars)  RE.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (C+)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDb listing

ChiTribune/Variety (A. Barker) review
RogerEbert.com (O. Henderson) review
AVClub (T. Robinson) review


Meet the Patels [2015] (codirected and cowritten by Geeta Patel and her bother Ravi Patel, with additional writing credits given to Matthew Homachek and Billy McMillian) is a _kind-hearted_ and well-crafted comedic documentary about late-20 something American born-and-raised Ravi Patel's quite sincere attempt to please his kind (but increasing, ahem, "concerned" ;-) Indian immigrant parents and "just find a nice Indian girl" (and preferably _another_ Patel ;-) to marry. 

Wait a minute, "another Patel?"  Wouldn't that be a bit strange?  No not really.  Ravi explains that "Patel" is like "Smith", and there's an entire state in India -- Gujarat -- where pretty much _everyone's_ last name is Patel.  And further, to avoid too much consanguinity, there are "rules":  If you're a Patel whose family descends from "this or that" part of Gujarat, you look for / marry someone from another part of Gujarat ("across the river," say ...). 

THIS MAKES SURPRISING SENSE TO ME.  My dad's family (actually, more specifically, my paternal grandmother's family) originates from a small village in south-central Bohemia.  Now thanks to Hitler's Nazi-era race policies, during Nazi occupation, all Czechs (and really everyone "in the Reich" or under occupation, the Nazis preferring to call their occupation of the Czechlands a "Protectorate" ... but "I digress" ;-) had to document their ancestry back five generations.  Well, among what we discovered, (IMHO quite amusingly ;-) was that NEVER did any of my ancestors "marry from the same village."  It was always that one married someone from "across the hill" in the next village or even two-or-three villages down.   So even if one's general horizons were limited back then to perhaps a 20 mile radius from where one was born (remember, one's talking about "regular village folk" in the 1800s or even late 1700s), the gene pool remained quite mixed. 

So that's what the (arguably) _nation_ of Patels basically do in the Bohemia-sized Indian state of Gujarat ;-)

Now, of course, there are specific cultural particularities at work as well.  The Patel "family" is large enough in number to be a small nation, and yet it is definitely _more familial_ than simply a nation.  To illustrate the point, Ravi shares with viewers the story about how when he was young, his (immedtiate) family (mom, dad, sister Geeta and he) were driving on a vacation in the United States, and at the end of the day they stopped at an Indian, PATEL-run motel somewhere in (say) "Tennessee." 

Well since the Ravi's family were Patels and the motel was run by OTHER PATELS, their one night stay included being invited over the the motel-running Patels' living quarters, sharing, indeed cooking a meal together and spending the rest of the evening exchanging stories in a manner that one would share with well, "one's cousins."  FOR EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD NEVER MET EACH OTHER BEFORE (or quite possibly since) THEY WERE FAMILY FOR AT LEAST THAT ONE NIGHT.  And to the outsider it would have seemed that the very purpose of Ravi's family's travel through Tennessee was precisely to visit that other Patel family (who they had not met before the trip) at whose model they stayed.  The story describes a remarkably closeness that certainly stretches the bounds of most Westerners' conceptions of even extended family!

And so this is then the kind of _nice_ familial "magic" that American born-and-raised, but Indian indeed Patel-descended Ravi had difficulty letting-go of. 

To many Americans, the quaintness of "ways of the past" may be difficult to fathom.  But if one's born into it, experienced it, and one does appreciate some of the beauty of it, it is hard to let go of, and _certainly_ one does not want to let go of it all.

So this then is the story of Ravi, again American-born-and-raised, trying _really hard_ not to disappoint his parents, while at the same time recognizing that he's not living (for the most part) in India anymore (though the family does go to visit) or, for that matter, in more "traditional times."  How does one negotiate the current with the past, respecting and indeed _loving_ both?

Great 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! :-) >>

Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials [2015]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. McAleer) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (C. Lemire) review
AVClub (T. Robinson) review


Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials [2015]  (directed by Wes Ball screenplay by T.S. Nowlin based on the novel [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by James Dashner [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is the second cinematic installment of the dystopian teen-oriented Maze Runner [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] series, the first cinematic installment The Maze Runner [2014] having been released last year.

As one would assume, this second installment takes-up the story from where first one left-off. However, if one was hoping for clarification, despite a number of fairly significant reveals during the course of the second installment, one will still leave with many questions awaiting answer (maybe ;-) in the third.   This MAY initially seem frustrating to many viewers.  However, remember Viewers / Readers that the central metaphor in this story is A MAZE.

So even though main characters of the story Thomas, Teresa, Minho, Frypan, Winston, Newt (played by Dylan O'Brien, Kaya Scodelario, Ki Hong Lee, Dexter Dardan, Alexander Flores and Thomas Brodie-Sangster respectively) emerge at the end of the first installment from the STRANGE, LARGE / DANGEROUS, physical MAZE that they found themselves in at the story's beginning, it really _shouldn't_ surprise ANYONE that a great deal of _monumental_ uncertainty, confusion and intrigue would await them in the new "world" outside of said MAZE that they found themselves (re)entering.  AFTER ALL, it was THAT "outside world" (or at least its elders, leaders, "powers that be") THAT PUT THOSE TEENS INTO "THE MAZE" TO BEGIN WITH.

So much of the second installment is about getting a sense of the world, indeed, GETTING A SENSE OF THE STATE OF THE WORLD that would have put these teens into that strange awful Maze to begin with.  And it should not be surprising that the STATE OF THE WORLD, OUTSIDE, WAS ... PRETTY MESSED-UP: the outside world presented in this installment is pretty post-Apocalyptic, on the dystopic continuum between that of the Divergent [2014] [2015] series and that of Mad Max [1979, 1981, 1985, 2015], definitely closer to Mad Max.

What happened?  Well (trying really, really hard here to avoid Spoilers) something awful enough that would require children/teens to "play a role" in its resolution, something awful enough to presumably justify (to some) putting (some?) kids/teens into that strange awful Maze of the first installment.  Why?

Well ... watch the movie(s) or go read the books ;-)

As convoluted as the story may come to seem to many viewers by the end of this second installment, it actually would reflect quite well the confused / convoluted / desperate nature of a society that would resort to treating (some of?) its kids in the way that it did in this story.

If nothing else this remains a quite intriguing and (I think this is key) a QUITE ALLEGORICAL tale ;-).  I will certainly look forward to the next installment.


<< 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! :-) >>

Black Mass [2015]

MPAA (R) CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RE.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (B)  Fr. Dennis (0 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChicagoTribune (M. Phillips) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Zoller-Seitz) review
AVClub (J. Hessenger) review


Black Mass [2015] (directed by Scott Cooper screenplay by Mark Mallouk and Jez Butterworth based on the book Black Mass: The True Story of the Unholy Alliance between the FBI and the Irish Mob [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Dick Lehr [GR] [Amzn] [IMDb] and Gerald O'Neill [GR] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is another "mob film."  From perhaps a historical point of view, it'd be an interesting one to see.

But IMHO it has a needlessly provocative title and like other "mob films" it can not but glorify the mob or otherwise organized crime.  And I just don't believe that the mob / criminality needs any more glamorizing publicity.  These films make people start to think that "organized crime," while perhaps conceding that it is Evil [TM], is also somehow "quite normal."

We don't need people -- young, middle aged, or old -- to be seduced into believing that acting like "Little Sopranos" is normal, let alone the way things should be.

Zero 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! :-) >>

The Visit [2015]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J.D. McCarthy) review
ChicagoTribune (C. Darling) review
RogerEbert.com (S. O'Malley) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review  

The Visit [2015] (written and directed by M. Night Shyamalan) feels honestly like a modern Grimm Fairy Tale [wikip] (Little Red Riding Hood [wikip] and Hansel and Gretel [wikip] definitely come to mind) with all its original creepiness that subsequent storytellers, including Disney, et al often sanitized.

As such, while there are DEFINITELY aspects of this film that I don't like -- I think it goes out of its way to present "old people" as "scary people" / "people to avoid" (hence flies in the face of everything I've tried to do in this blog (promote understanding between people rather than provide (often cheap) excuses for people to fear / hate each other) -- if one is honest, the Grimm Fairy Tales [wikip] often portrayed "grown-ups" and "recluses" as dangerous / murderous wierdos.  So ... I have to grudgingly admit that this film captured quite well the feel of some of the creepier Grimm Tales [wikip] while putting the story in a contemporary setting:

So ... as is the case in many of the Grimm Fairy Tales [wikip], 15 year old Becca (played by Olivia DeJonge) and her 13 year old brother Tyler (played by Ed Oxenbould) find themselves growing-up in a very dysfunctional situation.

Their mother (played by Kathryn Hahn) had left home at 19, having fallen in love with one of her former high school teachers, never talking to her parents again.  Initially, mom had been angry at her parents for opposing her involvement with her former high school teacher (They warned her that a guy like him was not going to stick around).  Later she was embarrassed because they proved to be right (the guy abandoned her and Becca / Tyler some years afterward when "someone 'better' / 'hotter' came along").

The result was that Becca and Tyler were growing-up without a father, and without ever knowing their grandparents (and presumably any of their other relatives).

At some point, Becca's / Tyler's grandparents made contact with them (finding their grandchildren on the internet) and Becca convinces her mother, who by then had a new boyfriend to go spend quality time with him (on a cruise) and allow her and her brother to visit the grandparents that they never knew for a week in the meantime.

With all the optimism of a 15-year old coming from a dysfunctional family full of secrets, Becca's convinced that she can "figure out what was wrong" and and "make things right" between her mother and her grandparents.  And to do so she, a budding (15 year old) "film maker," was going to "document" everything that happened on her / Tyler's trip to their grandparents.

Sigh ... when Becca / Tyler meet their grandparents who they initially wish to call endearingly Nana (played by Deanna Dunigan) and Pop Pop (played by Peter McRobbie), they turn out to be decidedly strange.  Initially, they believe that they seem that way simply because they are "old" and hence at least at some level "ill." However, as the week progresses, Nana and Pop Pop seem to get stranger and stranger, and more and more dangerous.  What's going on?

It all becomes a pretty creepy story.  I think it does play on people's fears of "old people" ... but it does follow quite remarkably well the story arc of an old time Grimm Fairy Tales [wikip].  Hence, while I _don't_ necessarily like the story, I have to accept that it's pretty clever at what it attempts to do.  So grudgingly ... good job. ;-)


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

Meru [2015]

MPAA (R)  ChicagoSunTimes (3 1/2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDb listing
ChicagoSunTimes (R. Roeper) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (M. D'Angelo) review  

Meru [2015] (directed by Jimmy Chin and Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi) is a spectacularly shot documentary about a team of three experienced climbers -- Conrad Anker [IMDb], Jimmy Chin [IMDb] and Renan Ozturk [IMDb] -- seeking to become the first team to climb Meru Peak (elev. 21, 810 ft / 6,660 m) in the Himalayas by way of a fabled 1200 ft / 400 m rock-wall "shark fin" at the top.  Previous climbers of the "shark fin" had either given-up completely or ended up taking a simpler path up the peak away from this enormous, legendary (and extremely high altitude) rock wall.

It's an exhilarating film that had me shaking my head repeatedly especially during the first half of the film which documented the three's first attempt to scale the "shark fin" back in 2008.  Were these people "just INSANE" ?? ;-) -- They spent THREE DAYS in a snowstorm in pup-tents nailed VERTICALLY (like BATS...) to said rock wall waiting the storm out.  Then just as their provisions were at a critical level, the storm passed ... what now?  Do they continue up or do they go down (as they would have if the storm had lasted only a day longer)?

Their second attempt in 2011 had its own challenges.  After spending the first hour of the film, explaining to viewers how important it was to for the members of a mountain climbing team to have absolute trust in each other in the months leading up to this second climb both Chin and Ozturk suffered significant injuries from other climbs / skiing expeditions, Ozturk having suffered signficant head and neck injuries from a fall.  Yet, the three decided to "go for it again" together.

The discernment / decision-making process chronicled was remarkable and portrayed very, very poignantly: Yes, all three were professionals, all three were veterans of other very, very difficult climbs (and precisely because they were sober, no-nonsense professionals they WERE STILL ALIVE TO TALK ABOUT THEM).  But professionalism aside, they were ALSO HUMAN / "HAD A HEART" and so were LOYAL (!) to each other.  In the end, the heart won out over the head, and loyalty trumped actuarial tables / cold reason.

Did they succeed?  Go see the movie ;-)

A great, great, spectacularly shot, heart thumping film, chronicling a story that also REALLY HAPPENED! ;-)

Wow, if this film does not get nominations for Best Documentary and even Best Cinematography at the Oscars this year, I'll be disappointed ;-)


<< 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 Gift [2015]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  ChicagoTribune (3 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (3 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (3 Stars)

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


The Gift [2015] (written and directed by Joel Edgerton) is a psychological thriller whose catch phrase could be the saying: "You may be done with the past, but the past may not be done with you..."

A late 30s / early 40-something couple, Simon and Robyn (played by Jason Bateman and Rebecca Hall), return back to Southern California (where Simon had grown up) after some 20 years.  After a miscarriage and some other stressors (some becoming clear, others not particularly so) back in Chicago where the couple had previously lived, using some past connections, Simon, an "Type-A" personality sort of a guy, landed himself a very good job with a Los Angeles based computer security firm, where his quite impressed buddy / boss Kevin 'KK' Keelor (played by Tim Griffen) was promising him rapid advancement.  Mission accomplished / (not entirely clear) problem solved.  Or ... was it?

In the first scene of the film as recently returned to L.A. Simon and Robyn are shopping for housewares, they run into Gordo (played by Joel Edgerton), Simon's age, indeed, as we find out, Simon's former high school classmate.

The encounter is decidedly one-sided.   Simon does not appear to even see Gordo much less recognize him initially.  It's Gordo, who immediately strikes one as 'a bit off' in a 'beaten down by life' sort of way who recognizes Simon and comes up to him: "Hi Simon!  Don't ... you recognize me?  Gordo, from High School.  Can't believe you don't recognize me.  What you doing back in Southern California after ALL THESE YEARS?"

Simon tries to be calmly dismissive and end the encounter quickly, but ... Robyn comes by and Simon still (pretending to be?) unsure of who exactly Gordo is, has to take Gordo for his word and introduce him to Robyn as 'someone' from his old high school.  Gordo tries to get the two's phone number which Simon tries to play-to-an-out (NOT give it to him ...).  So Gordo gives his to them.  "Hey, we gotta get together ..." "Yea, sure, yea..."  Simon is _really happy_ that eventually Gordo leaves them to do whatever they were going, yes, shopping ... and that was that ...

... 'Cept, Gordo shows up at their house a few days later.  "Hey, Simon NICE HOUSE!" WTF, how'd he find it?  Unclear. "Thanks."

Gordo's bearing _a gift_.  A bottle of wine or whatever.  "Thanks!  You shouldn't have (you really shouldn't have...)."  Robyn who kinda likes Gordo's 'puppy dog'-like behavior asks him to "come on in."  Simon's signaling NO! NO! NO! ... But it's too late ... Sooo.... 'sad eyed' Gordo's soon sitting at the kitchen table and some pleasant if quite unwanted (certainly from Simon's perspective) conversation follows.

Who is this Gordo?  Why is he there?  Why does he come by?  Each time he comes by, he comes bearing a gift.  He seems like 'a nice guy' he's clearly-'off'.  And it's ALSO absolutely clear that Simon really doesn't like him.  Why? 

Any number of scenarios come to mind as one tries to guess how the story will proceed.  To it's credit, the story spun here does keep one guessing.  Who is this Gordo?  Why is he so (if vaguely) 'messed up'?  Who is Simon?  Why does he hate the guy so much?  Who indeed is Robyn?  Why did they have to leave Chicago?  And if there were 'problems' why exactly did they 'stay together' (but also _move_ to L.A.)?

All in all, the film becomes an exploration of the phrase: "You may be done with the past, but the past may not be done with you."  It becomes clear that all three seem to be fighting demons from the past.  But what demons and why?

Altogether, it's not a badly spun tale ;-)


<< 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! :-) >>