Anthropoid [2016]

MPAA (R)  Aktuálně (2 Stars)  ČervenýKoberec (3 1/2 Stars)  ChiTrib/WashPost (4 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (2 Stars)  AVClub (B-)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

IMDb listing
CSFD listing*

Aktuálně.cz (M. Svoboda) review*
ČervenýKoberec.cz (Tereza Šedivá) review*
ČeskáTelevize.cz (M. Vacková) review*
iDnes.cz (M. Spáčilová) review*
Lidovky.cz (M. Kabát) review*
Reflex.cz (D. Křivánková) review*

ChiTrib/WashPost (C. Kompanek) review
RogerEbert.com (G. Kenny) review
AVClub (N. D'Angelo) review

Anthropoid [2014] [IMDb] [CSFD]* (directed and screenplay cowritten by Sean Ellis [IMDb] along with Anthony Frewin [IMDb]) tells the story of the Czechoslovak WW II operation code-named "Anthropoid" [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]*(meaning similar-to but less-than-human) to assassinate then Nazi "Reichsprotektor" of occupied Bohemia and Moravia Reinhardt Heydrich [en.wikip] [cz.wikip]*[de.wikip]*.

The operation had been ordered by the Czechoslovak government in exile in Britain in good part "to prove" to their British hosts that Czechoslovakia was _still_ "willing to fight" Nazi tyranny, something rather rich / ironic because (1) Britain's previous Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was instrumental in _handing-over_ Czechoslovakia _on a plate_ to the Nazis in a vain / deluded attempt of averting war (arguably racially insulting the Czechoslovaks in the process: "This is all about a people we do not even know..."), and (2) despite this Czechoslovak as well as Polish pilots _helped save Britain_ two years later during the Battle of Britain [cs.wikip]*[cs.wikip-2]* when Britain was by then furiously making the planes to send-up to confront the Luftwaffe attacking Britain by that time but didn't have enough trained pilots to fly them.

In any case, the Czechoslovak government in exile ordered agents Jan Kubiš [cs.wikip]* (played in the film by Jamie Dornan) and Josef Gabčík [cs.wikip]* (played in the film by Cillian Murphy) to be parachuted into their Nazi occupied homeland to assassinate quite beastly Nazi governor (er "Reichsprotektor") of the country... hence the name for the operation "Anthropoid" (which means "similar-to but less-than-human"). 

The dangers of carrying-out the operation and its aftermath are presented quite faithfully in the film.  The Nazis, particularly under Reinhardt Heydrich, had largely decimated the Czech Resistance up to that point.  In his first days as "Reichsprotektor of Bohemia an Moravia", Heydrich had apparently ordered the summary execution of the Czech officers (several hundred in number) still detained as POWs from the initial over-running of the country (a massacre not unlike the infamous massacre of Polish Officers ordered by the NKVD in Katyń [en.wikip] [pl.wikip]*.  Captured resistance members were routinely tortured for their information and then shot after they were done.  A characteristic of the Czech resistance became being equipped with cyanide pills to take when capture was imminent so as to at least not reveal further information to the enemy.  A real fear expressed by the Czech resistance on the ground (and expressed quite poignantly in the film) was that an assassination attempt on Heydrich could endanger the very existence of the Czech people.  

Then, when the assassination was carried out, the reprisals _were_ horrific.  My own parents, Czech, lived as children in Nazi Occupied Prague at the time. BOTH had horrific stories to tell (I was convinced as a child that my life would _never be_ nearly as dramatic as theirs had been) about the "Heydrichiada" [cs.wikip]* (translated as "The Heydrich Affair", or more literally and certainly in our time _more evocatively_ as "The Heydrich Games") that followed his death: For days, no Czech in his/her right mind dared to go onto the streets.  The SS would just count-off ten people that they encountered and shoot the 10th one.  TRULY for a week or two after the attempt on Heydrich's life, life in Prague was like that of The Purge [2013] (with the SS given essentially a license to kill at will).  Entire sections of Prague were searched block by block, house by house.  My mom's family _happened to have someone over_ at the time WHO FORGOT HER ID-PAPERS at her home.  The SS had even come into the building where my mother's family lived, though apparently / luckily they left before making it to their apartment.  PEOPLE AND THEIR ENTIRE FAMILIES WERE SHOT IF SOMEONE AMONG THEM DIDN'T HAVE THEIR PAPERS WITH THEM.

In the end, according to the film at hand, some 5,000 Czechs were shot in reprisal for Heydrich's assassination, including, of course the massacre of all the men (by firing squad) and children (by gas), the women sent to forced labor camps (and told that their children were "sent to the Reich for adoption") of an entire _utterly random_ town, Lidice [en.wikip] [cs.wikip]*, condemned for its "involvement" in the assassination plot (it had none).

The final shoot-out [cs.wikip]*, dramatized in the film, between the Czechoslovak parachutists who had been sent to Prague to carry-out the assassination, and the SS, REALLY DID HAPPEN, and I MYSELF HAVE BEEN TO THE CHURCH - the Byzantine Rite Catholic Church of Cyril and Methodius [cs.wikip]* (who had fascinatingly been the APOSTLES TO THE SLAVS) - where it took place.

All in all, this was an excellent film.  And some of the actors / actresses, notably Aňa Geislerová [IMDb] [CSFD]*, several of whose films [1] [2] I have previously reviewed here) even played in this BRITISH, FRENCH and CZECH coproduction.  And it tells a story worth telling --Reinhardt Heydrich [en.wikip] [cz.wikip]*[de.wikip]*, the "Butcher of Prague", had been the #3 man in the Nazi heirarchy, and was the highest ranking Nazi to die in the War.  Further, despite the many, many Czech casualties following his assassination, _we_ Czechoslovaks GOT OUR GUY and remarkably _only him_, not his wife, not his kids, not even his guard.  WE GOT _HIM_.   And yes, despite the horrific costs that followed, there's something quite impressive about that.

As such, excellent and often deeply moving WW II film.


* Reasonably good (sense) translations of non-English webpages can be found by viewing them through Google's Chrome browser.

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

Florence Foster Jenkins [2016]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
ChiTrib/LATimes (K. Walsh) review
RogerEbert.com (S. Wloszczyna) review
AVClub (K. Rife) review 


Florence Foster Jenkins [2016] (directed by Stephen Frears, screenplay by Nicholas Martin) is a 1940s era period piece that, thematically, really should have been R-rated -- there's flagrant (if to an _adult_ not entirely incomprehensible) adultery in it, fairly frank discussion of the effects of syphilis (back in the day before antibiotics), and it does argue a quite fascinating case _for_ hypocrisy that a 12-13, 15 or even 20 or 25 year old would probably _not_ be able to wrap one's head around.  (Honestly, IMHO most young people would probably _not_ understand this film _at all_ and this is reflected in some of the review citations I offer above).

Florence Foster Jenkins [wikip] [IMDb] (played in the film quite marvelously, of course ;-), by Meryl Streep ;-) was a _rich_ aging New York socialite at the end of the first half of the 20th century, who did apparently have some musical talent early in life (playing the concert piano).  However, her concert piano playing days came to a tragic end due to a very, very, very bad first marriage.  What to do?  Well, she got it into her head that she could sing.  Could she?  Well, no.

BUT ... she was rich.  A second, significantly younger than she, (common law) husband St Clair Bayfield [wikip] (played with admirable heart / complexity by Hugh Grant), who himself was a "never going to be an A-list Broadway let alone Shakespearean stage actor," both _used her_ (she was RICH, remember) _and_, honestly, _protected her_ ... so that her she never really had to confront her limits / delusions.

BUT SHE WAS A TERRIBLE SINGER and HE WAS MORE OR LESS OBVIOUSLY _A USER_ ... Yes, and... ;-)

This is a film that a 35 year old would only _begin_ to understand.

Great and amusingly irritating film.  Just remember folks, when your 75-80 year-old grandmother burns a cake do you tell her that "it sucked"? ;-)


<< 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! :-) >>

Hell or High Water [2016]

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

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
ChicagoTribune (M. Philips) review
RogerEbert.com (P. Sobczynski) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review  

Hell or High Water [2016] (directed by David Mackenzie, screenplay by Taylor Sheridan) is a relatively straightforward "Western" if set in Texas of the very recent past:

Two brothers, "modern day desperados", Toby (played by Chris Pine) and Tanner (played by Ben Foster) go on a crime spree -- holding-up banks (rather than stage coaches) in sleepy little towns dotting the West Texas plains -- hightailing it out of said towns in get-away cars (rather than on horses).   They're doing so to "save the family farm" from unscrupulous bank lenders (rather than "the railroads" of yore).  Of course, two Texas Rangers (played by Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham) are sent out (from their bureau in Lubbuck, TX) to bring them to justice.  At one point, the two brothers even head-up to "Indian Country" (an Indian run casino up in Oklahoma) where they quite ingeniously launder their cash (again, not a ton of cash ... enough to ... well ... possibly "save that farm).

So do they succeed in "saving the farm"?   Should they (be allowed to succeed... by the film-makers)?  IMHO, _that's_ what this film is about.

Westerns are generally stark and it's _generally easy_ to see who's "wearing the white hats" and "who's wearing the dark ones."  This is a bit more complicated because the protagonists are clearly breaking the law.  And yet, we in the audience _understand why_.  Still, the law is the the law, right?  And stealing is not merely "against the law" ... it's against the (7th/8th) Commandment -- THOU SHALT NOT STEAL. 

So how is this supposed to end?  And how are the two Texas Rangers supposed to look at this?  Should they just hunt them down?  Should they "try to understand"?  But should it be even part of _their job description_ to "try to understand"?   After all, most criminals _do_ "have a story..."

Anyway, this is a very simple story that should leave the Viewer with a lot of uncomfortable questions.  Again, anyone with a heart would _understand_ BUT ...

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! :-) >>

Sausage Party [2016]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (O)  Fr. Dennis (0 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review


Sausage Party [2016] (directed by Greg Tiernan and Conrad Vernon, screenplay by Kyle Hunter, Ariel Shaffir, Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, story by Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg and Jonah Hill) is a film that I could not bring myself to spend money to see.

First, I'm honestly getting tired of the crudity.  I don't think of myself as a snob and have _generally_ enjoyed the Simpsons and even South Park over the years.  But I find myself getting tired of these after a while: Seriously, there's "more to this world" than puke, farts and dumb sexual jokes...

Then, I _don't like_ confusing _people_ with _things_.  I _don't mind_ personifying animals or even plants.  But I do find it _much more problematic_ when we start personifying cars, planes, and yes even _unduly_ personifying _toys_ (even though as kids we do use (play with) dolls / "action figures" as stand-ins for people).   But a car is _not_ a person.  A hotdog / hotdog bun _aren't_ people ...

And I am concerned that when we start thinking of "a car" as "a person just like you and me" we can start treating _people_ like _things_ as well.

Last week, I wrote exactly about this ... there was a scene in the DC Comics inspired film Suicide Squad [2016] where in preparation for evacuation a "tough as nails intelligence officer" ordered her four assistants to "wipe their hard drives (on their computers)" and as soon as they initiated that task, she proceeded _to shoot_ her four assistants each in the head (to presumably "wipe" _their_ own internal "hard drives" (brains  as well).

PEOPLE ARE NOT THINGS.  And when we start thinking of a _sausage_ / _sausage bun_ as "a person" we can start thinking of PEOPLE as mere "sausages" / "sausage buns" (to be consumed or even disposed of if we don't particularly like them...)

So even the film's crudity aside ... I DID NOT LIKE THE DIRECTION THAT THIS FILM WAS TAKING US.  We are OBJECTIFIED / COMMODIFIED ENOUGH AS IT IS ... we really _don't_ need to go further with that direction.

WE ARE NOT THINGS (and THINGS are not "just like us")


<< 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! :-) >>

Confused ... by Love [2015]

MPAA (UR would be PG-13)  Fr. Dennis (2 3/4 Stars)

IMDb listing


Confused ... by Love [2015] (written and directed by Crosby Tatum) is a small, simple and at times quite poignant African American dramedy that played recently at the 2016 (22nd) Black Harvest Film Festival held at the Gene Siskel Film Center in Chicago.

It's about two college educated late 20-early 30-something couples -- Ferguson and Tiffany Marie Middlebecker (played by Keith Mascol and Jamie Perez) and Reggie Maxwell and Joline 'Jo Jo' Thompson (played by Simba Dibinga and Jordon Lloyd) -- African American, who honestly had trouble believing that they were still (or possibly returning to) the straits that they were in.  All of them knew poverty, _real_ poverty, when they were growing-up.  And all of them believed that their college degrees would have lifted them out of it.  And yet to their horror, they were _all_ staring at failure and being thrown out _onto the street_ ... again.

Yes, no doubt. that pretty much all of them had made some bad decisions, some worse than others:

Ferguson a writer, _may_ have procrastinated with his current manuscript, perhaps blaming it too much on writers' block (though it does happen).

Tiffany Marie, his wife, who _had_ spent time as a child literally on the streets _homeless_, now a "radio personality" on some local radio station, had been something of a spendthrift (even as Furgeson was _not really writing_ ...)

Reggie saw himself as "an entrepreneur" and had been taking all kinds of chances "in the media business" -- movies, records, commercials, radio sound spots, whatever -- doing _anything_ to keep afloat and (perhaps) scrape ahead, including having stolen a story from Ferguson a few years back that he had converted into a successful credit on some film (without acknowledging that the idea had come from Ferguson).

Jo Jo was probably the most sensible of them all, but she had been Ferguson's girlfriend "back in college" before breaking-up for reasons unclear and ... was now returning into Ferguson's world ... by Reggie's side (who already wasn't necessarily in Ferguson's best graces because of the "stolen story" affair).

Yet now they all needed each other especially Ferguson and Tiffany Marie who stood to lose their house.

Again, this is a _very simple story_ ... but there is a _lot of pain_ and a _lot of painful truth_ being faced.  So while this is a film that will often make you laugh, it will also make you cry.

Honestly a pretty good job for a "small indie 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! :-) >>

All the Difference [2016]

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

IMDb listing
PBS POV program listing

Chicago Reader (L. Picket) interview w. director


All the Difference [2016] (directed by Tod Lending) is a documentary that followed two students who were among the first graduating class of the Urban Prep Charter Academy for Young Men operating in the Englewood neighborhood in Chicago through their years in college.  The film played recently at the 2016 (22nd) Black Harvest Film Festival held at the Gene Siskel Film Center in Chicago and will play nationally on PBS' POV program in Sept 2016.

The documentary sought to explore what could be done to increase the chances of African American males of attaining college degrees.  Currently only 1/2 of African American males attain a high school diploma, only 1/2 of those who do choose to go onto college and only 16% of African American males actually finish a bachelor's degree in 4-6 years following high school graduation.

The strategy that Urban Prep seems to be taking is above all _raising expectations_ making going onto college the presumed goal of every single student attending their Academy.  Then the Academy provides a good deal of mentoring support and perhaps above all teaches their students to not be afraid _to ask for / seek out help_ when they they needed it.  

Both of the students followed -- Robert Henderson who went on to Lake Forest College a predominantly white. classically "small liberal arts college" in northern Illinois, and Krishaun Branch who chose to go to Fisk University a historically black university in Nashville, TN -- faced enormous challenges when they arrived at their respective college campuses for their freshmen years.  Robert had been raised by his grandmother after his mother had died in a car accident when he was 12.  Krishaun had flirted with gang activity before his mother put him in the Urban Prep Academy.  Both were from the Englewood neighborhood in Chicago, one of the toughest, most crime ridden neighborhoods in the city.  Yet Robert had come to Lake Forest College with good grades and great hopes that he could make it through its pre-Med program.  Krishaun with lesser grades had hoped to get a degree from Fisk and become a Federal Marshall.  Both came to their respective colleges depending _entirely_ on grants, work-study programs and student loans.  Their grants depended on maintaining reasonably high (or even very high) grade point averages.  They also came with the burdens of their entire families, community and even their former Prep School _counting on them_ to finish / succeed.

This last motivating force -- that all kinds of people, from their families, community to their former Prep School depending on them to succeed -- really could not be underestimated in helping them do so.  One of the two students followed in the documentary, Krishaun, attended the screening and _flatly admitted_ (to the knowing acknowledgement of the Audience) that he _really_ DIDN'T WANT to be "a failure" in this documentary or to his former school.  And honestly RAISING THE BAR like this -- making failure (by-and-large) _an unacceptable option_ -- MAY have made ALL THE DIFFERENCE to these young men.

Now the two were _not_ thrown simply "thrown to the wolves."  They were prepared quite well in their Prep School.  They graduated with legitimately good grades, were taught skills, study habits, and above all _the importance to ask_ when they needed help -- be it with school work OR with working out finances.  But the Academy's "raising the bar" and making "easy failure" _unacceptable_ (despite the self-evident challenges) SEEMED TO WORK.

In any case, this is definitely a worthwhile documentary for _all people_ interested in helping young people (especially young people at risk) to succeed and ought to promote good discussions among parents, educators, community leaders and even / above all among _young people themselves_ about the tools and skills that our young people need to learn / come-to-have-access-to in order to do so.

An excellent thought / discussion producing piece!


<< 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! :-) >>

Indignation [2016]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (L)  ChicagoTribune (3 1/2 Stars)  RogerEbert.com (4 Stars)  AVClub (B)  Fr. Dennis (4 Stars)

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

Indignation [2016] (screenplay and directed by James Schamus based on the novel [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] by Phillip Roth [wikip] [GR] [WCat] [Amzn] [IMDb]) is an appropriately R-rated movie that along with Walter Sellas' still recent cinematic adaptation (2012) of Jack Kerouac's celebrated "beat generation" novel On the Road (1951-57) could help Viewers, both young (in their 20s) and of my 50-something age, better understand how we got, culturally, from the post-WW II Era to the Present Day.   For this film presents an American college experience, that while certainly believable would seem almost "of another world" to most Viewers today:

The story, set in 1951 (a year into the Korean War), centers on Marcus Messner (played by Logan Lerman) a butcher's son, Jewish, from Newark, NJ, and the _first of his family_ to be able to go (on scholarship) to College.   Now there's _so much_ in that sentence that seems distant from the present day.  Yet in talking to one of our older (though still movie going) friars, he could relate.  That is because he too grew-up in a _then_ mixed (Irish, Italian and Jewish) _blue-collar_ neighborhood (in his case on Chicago's West Side near our Basilica of Our Lady of Sorrows) that with the exception of faint echoes of said distant past -- the (Italian) Shrine to Our Lady of Pompei as well as at least the legacy of the hustle and bustle of the once legendary Maxwell Street -- is as "lost to time" as the (heavily Jewish) Newark neighborhood recalled in Roth's novel / this film. 

Then a good part of Marcus' "indignation" in the current film / story centered on the requirement (still at the time) of attending a once every 2 weeks "Chapel Service" at the (Ohio) Liberal Arts College where he was attending where one or another of the College's professors would give an already quite watered-down non/interdenominational lecture on "civics" / "ethics."  Marcus, Jewish by ethnicity, atheist by conviction, found these still _mandatory_ lectures both offensive and a waste of time.  Other Jewish students at the school (there was already a Jewish fraternity at the school at the time) found creative ways to ditch said lectures while still being counted at attending them.  But Marcus was uncomfortable with these methods of going around said rule.  Instead, he objected to -- and clashed with the College's Dean (played very well in the film by Tracy Letts) over -- the rule itself.

Finally, Marcus got confused (and on multiple levels) by a similarly misfitting student named Olivia Hutton (played by Sarah Gadon) from a very WASPy if divorcing family from relatively nearby Cleveland, OH, who on their first date surprised him by, well ..., "blowing" him.  In 1951, that would surprise most people ;-).  Marcus comes to explain for himself (and perhaps even correctly) her apparent impetuosity (it also becomes revealed by a scar on her wrist that she had previously tried committing suicide...) on her parents' divorcing.  But the _larger question_ was perhaps why would her parents have divorced in the first place.  And indeed the question of divorce comes home to Marcus' family as well, as Marcus' mom (played very well by Linda Emond) seriously contemplates at one point (and for the first time) leaving Marcus' dad (played again superbly by Danny Burstein) for a tragic (if fascinating discussion-producing) mix of both outward anxiety (_not_ being "quite enough of a man" in/to the outside world) and inward / at-home abusiveness (trying "to compensate" for this at home). 

And over the whole story loomed the Korean Conflict and the larger Cold War.  Would Marcus' precious "indignation" over being _forced_ to go to "chapel services" that he _didn't want to go to_ become so great that it would cast him out of the school and thus into the Service and off to Korea?  On the flip side, should mere (youthful?) stubbornness over "not wanting to go to chapel" be just reason to send someone arguably to his / her death? 

The story arguably becomes its own metaphor:  Everything in this film seemed to be slow moving and even so trivial ("Okay, you have to go to 'chapel services' ... once every two weeks ... so what?") and yet as Olivia herself intimates to Marcus at one point, everything's also _about to explode_ (she tells him that she has "8000 emotions running through her head every second").

About to explode indeed ... excellent / thought-provoking 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! :-) >>