This film is suitable for schools at all levels. It has a clean rich look. Acting is all believable. I could not find any visual errors or obvious compromises in it. It was like a History Channel show. The singing at the end is stirring you will cry! The Nazis were sharp tongued disciplined proud. Dinesh has unfolded the convoluted toxic history of the Democratic Party. The Republicans got woman the vote in 1859 and freed the slaves. This proves the Republicans stand on higher moral grounds than those deceitful Dems who promise to steal money from the creative Republican winners who work for a living. Good show Dinesh.
Reviews
43 Reviews
Detective Chinatown
(2015)
Funny, Inspired, entertaining
16 January 2016
I don't speak Mandarin, but I thought it was a quality movie. 100 gags; the audience was laughing lightly through most of the movie. This movie was produced in China and has similarities to a Jackie Chan movie, except that it is slightly better. It has a silly, comedic timing mixed with some serious, violent scenes.
The audience was filled. I only speak English, but it had subtitles. They spoke rather fast, so I could not keep up with their words, but the scenes told the story. Basically, two detectives are on a hunt for gold and a murderer.
There is everything in this movie: a beauty queen, a tiny amount of sexiness, mobster actors, a straight man comedic partnership, racing scenes, dancing, excellent marital arts fights and beautiful scenes.
The audience was filled. I only speak English, but it had subtitles. They spoke rather fast, so I could not keep up with their words, but the scenes told the story. Basically, two detectives are on a hunt for gold and a murderer.
There is everything in this movie: a beauty queen, a tiny amount of sexiness, mobster actors, a straight man comedic partnership, racing scenes, dancing, excellent marital arts fights and beautiful scenes.
Trumbo
(2015)
Worthwhile as entertainment, but Propagandistic.
23 November 2015
I enjoyed this period film depicting life in the early 50s. For mere entertainment, it plays well to an adult audience. There are no action scenes for the enjoyment of teenagers. I gave it a "6" because it distorts history.
Trumbo was a Hollywood script writer who overtly declared that he was a card carrying Communist. It was not illegal to be a Communist in the U.S. at that time. The movie business executives of Hollywood create a "blacklist" banning certain screenwriters. Trumbo and 9 others are on this list and they become the "Hollywood 10" defending themselves against a contempt charge. They would not answer questions. They are guilty; and they go to prison.
This movie simplifies Communism to such a degree that this movie could be used to convince viewers of Communism's worth. It is explained that Communism is all about sharing food. Capitalism is therefore about not sharing food. This movie is propaganda because it gives an incomplete picture of what Communism is in its entirety. It seems that Communism is just a good natured system that helps people. And this type of message could therefore be placed into a Hollywood script to ease a viewer into a positive view of communism. Why communism could be thought of as some kind of religion of helping people. The negatives of communism are not presented. And this is what Communistic writers of Hollywood scripts did, they placed words and actions and scenes in scripts which gave the viewer an unbalanced, biased view of capitalism hoping to persuade the audience to support communism or socialism.
Capitalism has institutions that share food. These are usually religious institutions. Communism bans all religions. So, here we have a fact that is missing in the movie. Communism gives the right to a guaranteed job; but without a choice as to what that job will be. Capitalism gives the citizen the right and a choice to sell oneself for a job position. With Capitalism, a person may try hard to gain a job position or create a business of his choice.
But there are more facts missing from this "free speech" movie about Trumbo's efforts to continue writing. Trumbo was a propagandist for Stalin. He also supported the Nazi regime. And he supported the North Korean communist regime. He took a pledge to end the American government and to replace it with a Leninist Communist Government. The fact that Stalin starved millions of people was not an issue with him.
Before you see this movie, it would be wise to Google "Trumbo Stalin Nazi". Read around the opinions of many websites that will fill you in on what facts are missing in this Trumbo (2015) movie. I was entertained because it was a trip back to the late 40's and 50's. People seemed more respectful then; and they had real haircuts! But this movie whitewashes, hides the truth about the Communist threat of that era.
The fact is, the Communist Party in Hollywood had enough power to restrict or ban any film that criticized Communism. The communists restricted free speech! Ronald Reagan, John Wayne, Senator Joe McCarthy are therefore patriots because they hit the alarm button on the propaganda threat that these Stalinist writers and actors and producers
could make and did make. All of this is not presented in this film. Remember, when you take over someone else's country, you should command the media. You would then create propaganda messages. And that is what these people were in the act of doing.
Senator Joe McCarthy at least appears here to have his target correctly in his sights. Later he will be discredited for not having proof of a present communist threat. He was seen as a magician who found Communists everywhere. Well, his methods were too blunt. And the Communists were too careful.
I enjoyed this film because it makes the black listing episode a personal experience. This film attempts to bring history to life. But it isn't true history. We see how Trumbo adapts to this threat on this career. The net result of this movie is to make us feel that he is just an American who is fighting for Free Speech and recognition for his creative writing. And his being a Communists is just a "so what" issue.
So, I urge you to read about the real Trumbo at various websites first. You will then see that this movie is a propaganda movie about a propagandist!
There is no violence or ugly language. Hey, this is the 50's. There is a lot of talking, so I don't think younger people will have their attention held by this film.
Another good movie of the same period, is "Bridge of Spies". I think if you could see both movies on the same day you would be solidly in the 1950's all day long.
Some comment on the "respectful attitudes" of people during the 1950's. Well, yes, respect was taught with 100% church attendance. And respect was shown by getting a haircut every two months.
Trumbo was a Hollywood script writer who overtly declared that he was a card carrying Communist. It was not illegal to be a Communist in the U.S. at that time. The movie business executives of Hollywood create a "blacklist" banning certain screenwriters. Trumbo and 9 others are on this list and they become the "Hollywood 10" defending themselves against a contempt charge. They would not answer questions. They are guilty; and they go to prison.
This movie simplifies Communism to such a degree that this movie could be used to convince viewers of Communism's worth. It is explained that Communism is all about sharing food. Capitalism is therefore about not sharing food. This movie is propaganda because it gives an incomplete picture of what Communism is in its entirety. It seems that Communism is just a good natured system that helps people. And this type of message could therefore be placed into a Hollywood script to ease a viewer into a positive view of communism. Why communism could be thought of as some kind of religion of helping people. The negatives of communism are not presented. And this is what Communistic writers of Hollywood scripts did, they placed words and actions and scenes in scripts which gave the viewer an unbalanced, biased view of capitalism hoping to persuade the audience to support communism or socialism.
Capitalism has institutions that share food. These are usually religious institutions. Communism bans all religions. So, here we have a fact that is missing in the movie. Communism gives the right to a guaranteed job; but without a choice as to what that job will be. Capitalism gives the citizen the right and a choice to sell oneself for a job position. With Capitalism, a person may try hard to gain a job position or create a business of his choice.
But there are more facts missing from this "free speech" movie about Trumbo's efforts to continue writing. Trumbo was a propagandist for Stalin. He also supported the Nazi regime. And he supported the North Korean communist regime. He took a pledge to end the American government and to replace it with a Leninist Communist Government. The fact that Stalin starved millions of people was not an issue with him.
Before you see this movie, it would be wise to Google "Trumbo Stalin Nazi". Read around the opinions of many websites that will fill you in on what facts are missing in this Trumbo (2015) movie. I was entertained because it was a trip back to the late 40's and 50's. People seemed more respectful then; and they had real haircuts! But this movie whitewashes, hides the truth about the Communist threat of that era.
The fact is, the Communist Party in Hollywood had enough power to restrict or ban any film that criticized Communism. The communists restricted free speech! Ronald Reagan, John Wayne, Senator Joe McCarthy are therefore patriots because they hit the alarm button on the propaganda threat that these Stalinist writers and actors and producers
could make and did make. All of this is not presented in this film. Remember, when you take over someone else's country, you should command the media. You would then create propaganda messages. And that is what these people were in the act of doing.
Senator Joe McCarthy at least appears here to have his target correctly in his sights. Later he will be discredited for not having proof of a present communist threat. He was seen as a magician who found Communists everywhere. Well, his methods were too blunt. And the Communists were too careful.
I enjoyed this film because it makes the black listing episode a personal experience. This film attempts to bring history to life. But it isn't true history. We see how Trumbo adapts to this threat on this career. The net result of this movie is to make us feel that he is just an American who is fighting for Free Speech and recognition for his creative writing. And his being a Communists is just a "so what" issue.
So, I urge you to read about the real Trumbo at various websites first. You will then see that this movie is a propaganda movie about a propagandist!
There is no violence or ugly language. Hey, this is the 50's. There is a lot of talking, so I don't think younger people will have their attention held by this film.
Another good movie of the same period, is "Bridge of Spies". I think if you could see both movies on the same day you would be solidly in the 1950's all day long.
Some comment on the "respectful attitudes" of people during the 1950's. Well, yes, respect was taught with 100% church attendance. And respect was shown by getting a haircut every two months.
The Perfect Storm in Dallas
9 October 2015
This documentary emphasizes the motives of certain organizations, CIA, FBI, and the powerful people who were negatively effected during the Presidency of Kennedy. The implication is that these people were in a position to become big losers if Kennedy stayed alive. Interviews of people who witnessed certain meetings and the demeanors of those powerful people are included.
Whereas the typical home brew opinionated person tries to pick apart Lee Harvey Oswald as the killer, this documentary lays out the huge reasons that Kennedy was placed in a dangerous "perfect storm" and "suckered" into visiting Dallas Texas. The documentary says it very strongly that having JFK killed solved some very big personal problems for certain people who would have gone to jail, and lost their careers, if he had not been killed. And they just use facts to prove this.
The film features in person interviews of people who were close to the above important people. It gives an actual view of rooms, and places where certain events took place.
Remember that when police perform an investigation, they look for motives not simply the physical evidence. Physical evidence can be changed, polluted, manipulated, fabricated. This film is about motives. The motives displayed here are not easy or possible to refute.
The facts used cannot be argued or manipulated herein. Example: There was a tax loophole available to oilmen in Texas. Kennedy sought to end it. This would have a big impact on the local economy of Texas and anyone owning oil pumping land. Jimmy Carter finally did end it. Kennedy was shortly planning on ending it. He was never able to. More: LBJ disliked the Kennedys; and the Kennedys disliked LBJ. Find out why.
This documentary is riveting. It will help you to place all of the information surrounding the killing of JFK in a believable context with motives clearly laid out. The person Lee Harvey Oswald is hardly mentioned in this particular film.
I am glad that I lived long enough to see this. If you do not see videos on the JFK killing, this is THE ONE to see.
Whereas the typical home brew opinionated person tries to pick apart Lee Harvey Oswald as the killer, this documentary lays out the huge reasons that Kennedy was placed in a dangerous "perfect storm" and "suckered" into visiting Dallas Texas. The documentary says it very strongly that having JFK killed solved some very big personal problems for certain people who would have gone to jail, and lost their careers, if he had not been killed. And they just use facts to prove this.
The film features in person interviews of people who were close to the above important people. It gives an actual view of rooms, and places where certain events took place.
Remember that when police perform an investigation, they look for motives not simply the physical evidence. Physical evidence can be changed, polluted, manipulated, fabricated. This film is about motives. The motives displayed here are not easy or possible to refute.
The facts used cannot be argued or manipulated herein. Example: There was a tax loophole available to oilmen in Texas. Kennedy sought to end it. This would have a big impact on the local economy of Texas and anyone owning oil pumping land. Jimmy Carter finally did end it. Kennedy was shortly planning on ending it. He was never able to. More: LBJ disliked the Kennedys; and the Kennedys disliked LBJ. Find out why.
This documentary is riveting. It will help you to place all of the information surrounding the killing of JFK in a believable context with motives clearly laid out. The person Lee Harvey Oswald is hardly mentioned in this particular film.
I am glad that I lived long enough to see this. If you do not see videos on the JFK killing, this is THE ONE to see.
Mad Max: Fury Road
(2015)
Grinding, Boring, Empty, Cartoonish
19 May 2015
This movie will bore adults who are over 40 years old. They have seen this type of video game before. I could not understand their words, rarely, because of their accents. But I knew and saw of the 2nd "Road Warrior" with Mel Gibson. I liked that movie a lot. It had style; it took me to an odd end of the world idea I had never contemplated.
This movie is similar to "The Temple of Doom". It seems that mountains need to be carved up with skull symbols. What a lot of work for a people who are trying to survive on nothing: Carving up mountains with skull symbols.
The problem here is that the hero is immediately made into a slave. Whereas Mel Gibson had that cool sawed off shotgun to tuck into his belt, this hero has nothing so symbolic.
I will get right down to it. I was bored 1/2 way through. I started to fall asleep in the middle of one of the latter chase scenes. This was because I did not expect to see anything new.
The color of the sands was saturated by photo shop. This gave it an unreal look. So, I felt it was more of an alien planet. But no, this was Earth. I could not understand the plot. They were trying to save a water truck or something.
If you are bored reading this review; just think how bored I was trying to figure out what was going on in this movie. Lots of action to get across the desert. I could see that in spades. But I could not understand why many of the people had white as an egg skin color. They looked like aliens. But this was earth. I could not understand why the cars had to be so layered with do dads. It looked fake.
The first Road Warrior, actually the second film in this series I loved. They have added polish and paint, and do dads, and weird skin paint and wrecked this line of movies.
The one film critic, Mick La Salle gave this movie a "50" out of 100 points. I think I agree with him and with none of the others.
This movie is for kids. It is for people who have only seen a few movies in their lifetime.
This movie is similar to "The Temple of Doom". It seems that mountains need to be carved up with skull symbols. What a lot of work for a people who are trying to survive on nothing: Carving up mountains with skull symbols.
The problem here is that the hero is immediately made into a slave. Whereas Mel Gibson had that cool sawed off shotgun to tuck into his belt, this hero has nothing so symbolic.
I will get right down to it. I was bored 1/2 way through. I started to fall asleep in the middle of one of the latter chase scenes. This was because I did not expect to see anything new.
The color of the sands was saturated by photo shop. This gave it an unreal look. So, I felt it was more of an alien planet. But no, this was Earth. I could not understand the plot. They were trying to save a water truck or something.
If you are bored reading this review; just think how bored I was trying to figure out what was going on in this movie. Lots of action to get across the desert. I could see that in spades. But I could not understand why many of the people had white as an egg skin color. They looked like aliens. But this was earth. I could not understand why the cars had to be so layered with do dads. It looked fake.
The first Road Warrior, actually the second film in this series I loved. They have added polish and paint, and do dads, and weird skin paint and wrecked this line of movies.
The one film critic, Mick La Salle gave this movie a "50" out of 100 points. I think I agree with him and with none of the others.
This movie is for kids. It is for people who have only seen a few movies in their lifetime.
Desert Dancer
(2014)
We Shall Overcome
12 April 2015
This is THE movie Islamic countries don't want you to see. This movie will be banned in Iran. It could not have been filmed in Iran. Everyone would have been arrested! I expect conservative Muslims to give this movie low "1" or "2" scores on IMDb to discourage other Muslims from seeing it. It might give them ideas!
Based upon a true story, it relives the tragic story of a young man and his friends who simply want to practice and perform modern dancing on stage in Iran. Dancing is forbidden there.
This is a "quest for freedom" movie; a universally loved theme by audiences who believe in free speech and freedom to make expressive choices. It will leave you with a satisfying feeling. A few "twists" and surprises in the film heighten the tension you will feel. I thought of Alfred Hitchcock at those moments.
One lone movie critic dismissed this movies' call for Iranian freedom. I say if an African American from the 1950s were to be recorded looking and speaking into a camera saying: "I want freedom; Freedom Now!"; Any movie viewer in America would take this act seriously. Here, this movie critic simply dismisses the Iranian use of "We Want Freedom Now" as a platitude or homily! How sad is that? Who's side is this critic on?
One man gave a description of a beating by the Morality Police; and he spoke about "freedom". The movie critics call this "speaking with platitudes" and to a movie critic this is a no-no for Iranians. Who is this critic?
If a person enjoys beauty and dance, this interest will be a plus to the further enjoyment and appreciation of this story. This movie should win an award for "The Most Worthwhile Film of the Year". With the political motions in the Mid East, this movie sets the viewer straight that Iranians are a modern people, but Islamic rule creates restricting conflicts in the souls of their people. What these people do to cope is laid out in this movie.
Also explored in this film are the social and political aspects. We walk the streets of Iran and visit an underground society that lives out alternative lifestyles. This was an eye opener for me because it is easy to fall into the belief that everyone in Iran goes along with the "party line". Even with the threat of death and imprisonment, there are these brave souls that carve out certain alternative ways of living there.
There is no sex in the movie. Even kissing is prohibited in public in Iran. The movie shows the Morality Police punishing citizens for being members of the Green Movement; of citizens holding hands in public, and other moral violations. I felt relieved to be living in the good old USA.
The direction of the film was well executed. Every scene flowed well back to back. I was never confused. There were no jumbled ideas or flash forwards to make it more complicated. It was all straight forward story telling. The soundtrack was barely noticeable. When I decided to really listen to the soundtrack, it was emotionally appropriate for the scene presented. The acting was natural. I saw no "over acting". I believed every feeling that the actors played out. They were all sincere. The budget for this movie was $4,000,000.
The main stars are Reece Ritchie and Freida Boniad who also starred in "Slumdog Millionaire" winning Best Picture of the Year.
What is freedom worth? This film will make you think again about those freedoms that you take for granted living in America. I would show it to a class of High School students to give them an introduction to life in the Middle East. And, because the story revolves around University level students and their problems and lifestyles, I would think that people in the ages of 19-35 years would most identify with this film. But older people who have followed the Mid East conflict will enjoy it too for this play out of everyday life there. It is for anyone who would like to visit a foreign country (safely) for a short time.
After seeing this movie, I would never, ever want to live in Iran. They have these women who check the female University students as they enter through the front gates of the University for "too much cosmetics" each morning. They will wipe the face of the student with a cotton pad! There are Morality Police that look to see that a student is carrying the "right books" under their arms. They will grab the books out of the arms of the students to take a look! They trespass into student homes and search! How demeaning! They prohibit two people from holding hands in public. Now, this is an eye opener for any High School Student in America. And yet, the Iranians are computer literate and they drive modern cars. These contrasts are great ones for American or European eyes.
I have a critical eye for dancing and professional visuals. When I say that this film is good, believe it. The "wow" in this movie is in the dancing. The "wow" is seen in the conservative customs of this Islamic society.
I got my monies worth and I do recommend this film to anyone. There is no bad language; but there is some violence. There are times when you will be closing your eyes in defense; but there are many more times that you will be experiencing beauty wrapped delicately in a personal and tragic story. It has a heartwarming ending.
Based upon a true story, it relives the tragic story of a young man and his friends who simply want to practice and perform modern dancing on stage in Iran. Dancing is forbidden there.
This is a "quest for freedom" movie; a universally loved theme by audiences who believe in free speech and freedom to make expressive choices. It will leave you with a satisfying feeling. A few "twists" and surprises in the film heighten the tension you will feel. I thought of Alfred Hitchcock at those moments.
One lone movie critic dismissed this movies' call for Iranian freedom. I say if an African American from the 1950s were to be recorded looking and speaking into a camera saying: "I want freedom; Freedom Now!"; Any movie viewer in America would take this act seriously. Here, this movie critic simply dismisses the Iranian use of "We Want Freedom Now" as a platitude or homily! How sad is that? Who's side is this critic on?
One man gave a description of a beating by the Morality Police; and he spoke about "freedom". The movie critics call this "speaking with platitudes" and to a movie critic this is a no-no for Iranians. Who is this critic?
If a person enjoys beauty and dance, this interest will be a plus to the further enjoyment and appreciation of this story. This movie should win an award for "The Most Worthwhile Film of the Year". With the political motions in the Mid East, this movie sets the viewer straight that Iranians are a modern people, but Islamic rule creates restricting conflicts in the souls of their people. What these people do to cope is laid out in this movie.
Also explored in this film are the social and political aspects. We walk the streets of Iran and visit an underground society that lives out alternative lifestyles. This was an eye opener for me because it is easy to fall into the belief that everyone in Iran goes along with the "party line". Even with the threat of death and imprisonment, there are these brave souls that carve out certain alternative ways of living there.
There is no sex in the movie. Even kissing is prohibited in public in Iran. The movie shows the Morality Police punishing citizens for being members of the Green Movement; of citizens holding hands in public, and other moral violations. I felt relieved to be living in the good old USA.
The direction of the film was well executed. Every scene flowed well back to back. I was never confused. There were no jumbled ideas or flash forwards to make it more complicated. It was all straight forward story telling. The soundtrack was barely noticeable. When I decided to really listen to the soundtrack, it was emotionally appropriate for the scene presented. The acting was natural. I saw no "over acting". I believed every feeling that the actors played out. They were all sincere. The budget for this movie was $4,000,000.
The main stars are Reece Ritchie and Freida Boniad who also starred in "Slumdog Millionaire" winning Best Picture of the Year.
What is freedom worth? This film will make you think again about those freedoms that you take for granted living in America. I would show it to a class of High School students to give them an introduction to life in the Middle East. And, because the story revolves around University level students and their problems and lifestyles, I would think that people in the ages of 19-35 years would most identify with this film. But older people who have followed the Mid East conflict will enjoy it too for this play out of everyday life there. It is for anyone who would like to visit a foreign country (safely) for a short time.
After seeing this movie, I would never, ever want to live in Iran. They have these women who check the female University students as they enter through the front gates of the University for "too much cosmetics" each morning. They will wipe the face of the student with a cotton pad! There are Morality Police that look to see that a student is carrying the "right books" under their arms. They will grab the books out of the arms of the students to take a look! They trespass into student homes and search! How demeaning! They prohibit two people from holding hands in public. Now, this is an eye opener for any High School Student in America. And yet, the Iranians are computer literate and they drive modern cars. These contrasts are great ones for American or European eyes.
I have a critical eye for dancing and professional visuals. When I say that this film is good, believe it. The "wow" in this movie is in the dancing. The "wow" is seen in the conservative customs of this Islamic society.
I got my monies worth and I do recommend this film to anyone. There is no bad language; but there is some violence. There are times when you will be closing your eyes in defense; but there are many more times that you will be experiencing beauty wrapped delicately in a personal and tragic story. It has a heartwarming ending.
American Sniper
(2014)
Tight, Elegant, Combat Scenes
17 January 2015
A story of the highly talented Seal Sniper Chris Kyle. This film avoids the complications of the political reasons America occupied Iraq. In its place, we follow the personal motivations of a young man who enjoys physical activity as a cowboy rodeo rider. His personal morality is summed up in just a few sentences: Don't be a bully. Don't be a victim. Be the protector that eliminates the bully. And so it logically follows that as a SEAL sniper he can practice what he preaches.
Kyle protects fellow Marines as they enter a war zone and do house to house searches. He has no qualms about killing anyone who is in the area to do harm to the Marines; and this includes women and children. While the viewer may blanch at the thought of killing children; please remember that these children are armed and used to destroy Marines in various ways. So far so good.
We follow Chris Kyle into his family life. Director Eastwood keeps the focus on the protagonist's Post Traumatic Stress. And Eastwood uses manipulative symbols to place the viewer in the shoes of Chris Kyle. Thus, I left the theater with a mild case of Post Traumatic Stress. Someone on the elevator said, "What is that, there?" and I freaked. I was still 'in the movie'; I was still in the war zone. When a movie does this to you, place you in the protagonist's position, it has elevated itself to a remarkable movie. I now understand Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. This movie is not entertainment. Rather, it is a journey in another person's life.
This movie has its references to the American Flag, yet it does not explore reasons why we are occupying other countries. It seems that American values such as the freedom to speak freely, to make personal decisions about religious choices; to make occupational career decisions freely; are enough justification to feel good about America.
Kyle is pictured as an honored legend, a protector of soldiers. He is not referred to as a "hero" in the movie. Certainly to volunteer for combat means he is placing his emotional life in the balance. And this movie follows him and displays the consequences of Post Combat Stress Syndrome. This means his memory will not let go of the combat environment which he has been in when he "comes home".
I have read many of the bad reviews of this movie. It seems that most of them are a personal try at propaganda making, exaggerated, emotional statements that roam from political views to moral views. These people simply damn Kyle for being a sniper. Yet, in Kyle's view, his conscious is clear. He is on a side, and he protects the soldiers of the side he is on. He does not return to the U.S. in any way confused as to his loyalties.
The elegance of these scenes has to do with Eastwood's direction and timing. He manipulates the viewer to live the stress, the wonder of combat in a sandstorm. Every scene follows logically and flows.
Is the movie simply a recruiting vehicle for the Navy? My answer is no. It shows the real life consequences for volunteering for war duty. To be propaganda, we would have to be placed in a state wherein we are making machine decisions using our emotions while the underlying facts are twisted. Since there is a great deal of discussion on IMDb, this discussion will make you "immune to propaganda" before you see the film. Discussion and free speech is what disables the propaganda machine. You won't be volunteering for duty tomorrow, or next week like a robot.
Is the movie true? Probably. The scenes are mostly ordinary incidents which are intensified by the fact that combat happened somewhere, sometime. You will follow Kyle's journey. This movie is not a Rambo movie. Kyle is never pictured making over the top advances towards the enemy. I recommend you see it.
Kyle protects fellow Marines as they enter a war zone and do house to house searches. He has no qualms about killing anyone who is in the area to do harm to the Marines; and this includes women and children. While the viewer may blanch at the thought of killing children; please remember that these children are armed and used to destroy Marines in various ways. So far so good.
We follow Chris Kyle into his family life. Director Eastwood keeps the focus on the protagonist's Post Traumatic Stress. And Eastwood uses manipulative symbols to place the viewer in the shoes of Chris Kyle. Thus, I left the theater with a mild case of Post Traumatic Stress. Someone on the elevator said, "What is that, there?" and I freaked. I was still 'in the movie'; I was still in the war zone. When a movie does this to you, place you in the protagonist's position, it has elevated itself to a remarkable movie. I now understand Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. This movie is not entertainment. Rather, it is a journey in another person's life.
This movie has its references to the American Flag, yet it does not explore reasons why we are occupying other countries. It seems that American values such as the freedom to speak freely, to make personal decisions about religious choices; to make occupational career decisions freely; are enough justification to feel good about America.
Kyle is pictured as an honored legend, a protector of soldiers. He is not referred to as a "hero" in the movie. Certainly to volunteer for combat means he is placing his emotional life in the balance. And this movie follows him and displays the consequences of Post Combat Stress Syndrome. This means his memory will not let go of the combat environment which he has been in when he "comes home".
I have read many of the bad reviews of this movie. It seems that most of them are a personal try at propaganda making, exaggerated, emotional statements that roam from political views to moral views. These people simply damn Kyle for being a sniper. Yet, in Kyle's view, his conscious is clear. He is on a side, and he protects the soldiers of the side he is on. He does not return to the U.S. in any way confused as to his loyalties.
The elegance of these scenes has to do with Eastwood's direction and timing. He manipulates the viewer to live the stress, the wonder of combat in a sandstorm. Every scene follows logically and flows.
Is the movie simply a recruiting vehicle for the Navy? My answer is no. It shows the real life consequences for volunteering for war duty. To be propaganda, we would have to be placed in a state wherein we are making machine decisions using our emotions while the underlying facts are twisted. Since there is a great deal of discussion on IMDb, this discussion will make you "immune to propaganda" before you see the film. Discussion and free speech is what disables the propaganda machine. You won't be volunteering for duty tomorrow, or next week like a robot.
Is the movie true? Probably. The scenes are mostly ordinary incidents which are intensified by the fact that combat happened somewhere, sometime. You will follow Kyle's journey. This movie is not a Rambo movie. Kyle is never pictured making over the top advances towards the enemy. I recommend you see it.
Foxcatcher
(2014)
Money Can't Buy Me Love
9 January 2015
This is a relationship movie. The background action that moves the story forward is about a young man's desire to become an Olympic Champion Wrestler.
If you like "Psycho" you will like this movie. And like "Psycho" it is a true story.
The movie unfolds in a disturbingly subtle and harmless manner. Because of this, the "action movie" theater goers will be lulled into boredom. They won't see that all of this is a "set up" for the horror that is to be.
This film explores the development and motivations of male bonding. And it depicts how males can fall into or reject unhealthy relationships with other men. These relationships can be described as: Brother, Son, Coach, Mentor (Teacher).
It also shows how inherited wealth can rob a person of authentic achievement. And these particular people may then set about to become authentic, goal oriented individuals without going through the school of "hard knocks". The result is empty trophy gathering for these privileged few. So, this movie has a moral and a warning to those who are wealthy.
No, this is not a "Rocky" film. It is rather a tragedy, a true story that will make you think. If you like to analyze relationships; figuring out what motivates whomever; you will like this film.
Go see it.
If you like "Psycho" you will like this movie. And like "Psycho" it is a true story.
The movie unfolds in a disturbingly subtle and harmless manner. Because of this, the "action movie" theater goers will be lulled into boredom. They won't see that all of this is a "set up" for the horror that is to be.
This film explores the development and motivations of male bonding. And it depicts how males can fall into or reject unhealthy relationships with other men. These relationships can be described as: Brother, Son, Coach, Mentor (Teacher).
It also shows how inherited wealth can rob a person of authentic achievement. And these particular people may then set about to become authentic, goal oriented individuals without going through the school of "hard knocks". The result is empty trophy gathering for these privileged few. So, this movie has a moral and a warning to those who are wealthy.
No, this is not a "Rocky" film. It is rather a tragedy, a true story that will make you think. If you like to analyze relationships; figuring out what motivates whomever; you will like this film.
Go see it.
Fury
(2014)
Unreal Hollywoodized Rambo Combat Scenes
27 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
If you would read the reviews that give 5 stars or less, you will obtain a more realistic view of this movie.
The story shows an American tank crew headed across Europe in Germany during the last week of the WWII. It is April of 1945. This crew is multi-racial and it displays some of their conflicts with one another and their surroundings and German survivors of the War.
The tank is disabled by a land mine. Two Hundred Germans, likely SS soldiers are marching towards the disabled American tank. The Americans have time to load up and transfer all of the extra stored ammunition which is hanging carried on the outside of their tank to the inside of the tank before the Germans come. They do not haul inside the ammunition until 200 Germans are shooting at them at close range. Hiding and running would have been a rational choice given that the War is about to end within 5-11 days. But Brad Pitt chooses to stand and fight. I mean, the Americans and Russians are overwhelming Berlin in April 1945. What would you do?
Similar to a Rambo movie, the protagonists in the tank choose to do a stand-off while cowering holed up against 200 enemy soldiers who surround the tank. They could have hidden in the bushes; there was time, but no, they choose to stay in their disabled tank to "stay with the Sergeant" Brade Pitt. This means sure death for them.
The Germans could have starved the Yanks out. Or waited until they wanted to go to the restroom. Then you shoot them with sniper fire as they get tired of smelling "it".
The Germans do not seek cover against the firing machine guns of the tank. Rather, they run back and forth in front of the tank's blazing machine guns. I suppose the Germans are attracted to the firing machine guns like mosquitoes are attracted to heat and light. And this may be why the Germans lost WWII.
The Germans put two hand grenades down the tank's top porthole. There is a hatch at the bottom of the tank for the Americans to escape. There is time for one soldier to wiggle out of the tank before the grenades explode. And he does this. All others, including Brad Pitt, are killed by the grenades. So, why didn't the soldier simply grab the grenades and hurl them out of the tank through the bottom porthole which was wide open? That would have taken 3 seconds per grenade and perhaps he could have made it, saving his team mates. The grenades have about a 5-6 second fuse delay.
Then shortly afterward, an SS officer sees the alive soldier below the tank hiding alive and well. He doesn't shoot him. What does the SS soldier think the soldier is beneath the tank? He doesn't order him away from the tank. The SS soldier just leaves him alive without saying a word to him. I mean, who would be under a tank after a firefight?
There is abusiveness by one American soldier to another who is new to combat. This is a kind of "hazing". Oh boy, adding "realism". He pulls on the ears of this new soldier. This abusive soldier handles the soldier in various ways to aggravate the new soldier. Doesn't it occur to the audience that in combat --you do this to a soldier and you could be "shot by accident" in the next firefight?
Oh, yes, there is a scene with a blown up face sitting on a shelf in the tank. The 1/3 face has no scratches on it, and the eye is perfectly in the socket of the piece-of-face. How could an eye remain the eye socket after the head has exploded from an anti-tank round?
If you will read the criticisms of other reviewers, the ones with 1 or 2 star reviews, they will detail more story errors.
This movie is not a "Saving Private Ryan" level show. It shows soldiers taking unnecessary risks and then making bad tactical decisions. And that is what Rambo did. Rambo stood up to the enemy straight up and fired his machine gun from the hip. In real life he would last 3 seconds. And this is why returning Vietnam veterans were highly critical of Rambo and John Wayne movies. These movies give the viewer a false sense of security. You know what: If you have fears, it may be because you really are in danger. And if you want to live, you might be better off making like a mole.
Yes, the grungy scenery, and the sleazy actor's lines may give this movie a sense of "realism"; a tired soldier's viewpoint. But the macro view of this drama portrays unrealistic command decisions and motivations which may be acceptable in a video game only. To give this show a high rating is a disservice to critical viewers of IMDb ratings.
I recommend movies like "Come and See", "Saving Private Ryan", "Platoon", "Das Boot" for war movies.
I suppose this movie was made without any consultation with real Tank veterans. But one plus of the movie is that it has a real "Tiger Tank" in it being driven around.
So, go see this movie, but don't start thinking about all the unrealistic issues with it. If it makes you feel lucky to live in a Country not at war, then it has a positive purpose in your life. And it might make you feel further grateful to those tank crews that fought during WWII.
So, this movie is 1/2 good, and 1/2 technically bad. It is more "grinding" than inspiring. "B" movie fits the description of this film.
The story shows an American tank crew headed across Europe in Germany during the last week of the WWII. It is April of 1945. This crew is multi-racial and it displays some of their conflicts with one another and their surroundings and German survivors of the War.
The tank is disabled by a land mine. Two Hundred Germans, likely SS soldiers are marching towards the disabled American tank. The Americans have time to load up and transfer all of the extra stored ammunition which is hanging carried on the outside of their tank to the inside of the tank before the Germans come. They do not haul inside the ammunition until 200 Germans are shooting at them at close range. Hiding and running would have been a rational choice given that the War is about to end within 5-11 days. But Brad Pitt chooses to stand and fight. I mean, the Americans and Russians are overwhelming Berlin in April 1945. What would you do?
Similar to a Rambo movie, the protagonists in the tank choose to do a stand-off while cowering holed up against 200 enemy soldiers who surround the tank. They could have hidden in the bushes; there was time, but no, they choose to stay in their disabled tank to "stay with the Sergeant" Brade Pitt. This means sure death for them.
The Germans could have starved the Yanks out. Or waited until they wanted to go to the restroom. Then you shoot them with sniper fire as they get tired of smelling "it".
The Germans do not seek cover against the firing machine guns of the tank. Rather, they run back and forth in front of the tank's blazing machine guns. I suppose the Germans are attracted to the firing machine guns like mosquitoes are attracted to heat and light. And this may be why the Germans lost WWII.
The Germans put two hand grenades down the tank's top porthole. There is a hatch at the bottom of the tank for the Americans to escape. There is time for one soldier to wiggle out of the tank before the grenades explode. And he does this. All others, including Brad Pitt, are killed by the grenades. So, why didn't the soldier simply grab the grenades and hurl them out of the tank through the bottom porthole which was wide open? That would have taken 3 seconds per grenade and perhaps he could have made it, saving his team mates. The grenades have about a 5-6 second fuse delay.
Then shortly afterward, an SS officer sees the alive soldier below the tank hiding alive and well. He doesn't shoot him. What does the SS soldier think the soldier is beneath the tank? He doesn't order him away from the tank. The SS soldier just leaves him alive without saying a word to him. I mean, who would be under a tank after a firefight?
There is abusiveness by one American soldier to another who is new to combat. This is a kind of "hazing". Oh boy, adding "realism". He pulls on the ears of this new soldier. This abusive soldier handles the soldier in various ways to aggravate the new soldier. Doesn't it occur to the audience that in combat --you do this to a soldier and you could be "shot by accident" in the next firefight?
Oh, yes, there is a scene with a blown up face sitting on a shelf in the tank. The 1/3 face has no scratches on it, and the eye is perfectly in the socket of the piece-of-face. How could an eye remain the eye socket after the head has exploded from an anti-tank round?
If you will read the criticisms of other reviewers, the ones with 1 or 2 star reviews, they will detail more story errors.
This movie is not a "Saving Private Ryan" level show. It shows soldiers taking unnecessary risks and then making bad tactical decisions. And that is what Rambo did. Rambo stood up to the enemy straight up and fired his machine gun from the hip. In real life he would last 3 seconds. And this is why returning Vietnam veterans were highly critical of Rambo and John Wayne movies. These movies give the viewer a false sense of security. You know what: If you have fears, it may be because you really are in danger. And if you want to live, you might be better off making like a mole.
Yes, the grungy scenery, and the sleazy actor's lines may give this movie a sense of "realism"; a tired soldier's viewpoint. But the macro view of this drama portrays unrealistic command decisions and motivations which may be acceptable in a video game only. To give this show a high rating is a disservice to critical viewers of IMDb ratings.
I recommend movies like "Come and See", "Saving Private Ryan", "Platoon", "Das Boot" for war movies.
I suppose this movie was made without any consultation with real Tank veterans. But one plus of the movie is that it has a real "Tiger Tank" in it being driven around.
So, go see this movie, but don't start thinking about all the unrealistic issues with it. If it makes you feel lucky to live in a Country not at war, then it has a positive purpose in your life. And it might make you feel further grateful to those tank crews that fought during WWII.
So, this movie is 1/2 good, and 1/2 technically bad. It is more "grinding" than inspiring. "B" movie fits the description of this film.
Cantinflas
(2014)
Nostalgia for the Old - Film History for the Young
1 September 2014
I attended this movie without knowing anything about Cantinflas. I am pleased to report that this movie is informing and entertaining. The time zone depicted is about 1935-1956 in Mexico.
The production quality is first rate. However, understand that the lighting and camera angles approximate what was being used in the 1940s and 50s. Therefore, this film has a simple look, an historical feel about it. I particularly enjoyed the costumes and fashions of the actresses during the 40s and 50s.
I strongly suggest that you read "Wiki" descriptions of his career before you see the movie. This will cause you to understand the importance of this man to Mexico and to the U.S. In fact, when he died, Mexico had 3 days of mourning; and the U.S. Senate had a moment of silence to honor this actor.
Cantinflas was a Mexican comedian at approximately the level of a Charlie Chaplin or Bob Hope. He started from humble street origins in Mexico and slowly worked his way to Hollywood. He eventually starred in "80 Days Around the World" which featured top stars and won several Oscars.
His name is an invention that may roughly translate in Spanish to, "He who drinks too much in the Cantina".
This film has both English and Spanish subtitles which alternate at appropriate times.
Cantiflas's act might be called "family entertainment" worthy of reaching wide audiences. There is no outrageous violence, no sex, no drug usage, no monsters, no superheros, no flaming car crashes. The story is a predictable rags to riches story which makes for quality and gentle Sunday afternoon entertainment. Religious people should not be offended. This story reinforces the belief that hard focused work may be rewarded with fame and happiness.
This film is more about the events and people which brought Mario Moreno (Cantinflas) to success on stage and film. His performances are not detailed, not lengthy, only suggestions of his talent. If his performances were recreated, I think this movie would gain a higher rating. You will see Marlon Brando, Elizabeth Taylor, Yule Brenner, Charlie Chaplin and others played out in this film as well.
When you read the "Wiki" description, you will understand that he created a kind of humor which allowed him to use a free form style, he was an ad lib artist. Perhaps he could be compared to the late Robin Williams. From what I heard during the show he had a light touch to his truth telling on stage.
Cantinflas is always a respectable story; and you should not be embarrassed to bring any friend to see this film with you. I am not of Mexican heritage. About 95% of those in the audience seemed to be Mexican. So, you now know that you could be broadening your education of film history to see this film. And again, I think that if you grew up seeing his films, you will enjoy this movie more and give it a higher rating here on IMDb. If not, then for you we have a predictable, simple story which may earn a 6.5 or 7.0 on IMDb.
I particularly enjoyed seeing Mexico, the buildings, the fashions, the restaurants at their very polished best. The music is romantic. I felt that if I had seen his film when I was young, this film would have provided me with the "nostalgia effect". Nonetheless, it was a nice visit to Mexico during the 1940s.
The direction of the film was conservative and never confused. There were no "tricks" of the director to distract me from the simple, linear story.
And there is the greatest value of this film: nostalgia. Older folks who witnessed his acts will gain the most benefit from this reenactment of his past. Those older people will no doubt relive their youth as they enjoy seeing Mario Moreno go through his trials to finally appear in theater and film to become a national hero.
There are very few dark moments. And no foul language that I could detect.
Cantinflas was a master comedian. However, I do not think this movie could truly reproduce the comedic timing that Cantinflas used. Therefore, Cantinflas's wit is not displayed in this movie in a manner that I could laugh at most of the time. Subtitles slow down the delivery of his jokes. The effect of surprise in his jokes is muted by the English translation and the use of subtitles. So, as a film goer I am at a disadvantage. His jokes were gentle surprise one liners that entertained families on stage in the Cantinas of Mexico and film. But I am hardly an expert on his career. All I have seen is this movie.
I think that if you wanted to treat a person to a gentle story, with only a few moments of aggressive drama, you would be safe to bring any friend to see this film. This is a "nice film." And if that friend were born around 1940, all the better. And now I want to know more about Mario Moreno's career. And I would like to experience the results of his comedic timing from the master. Charlie Chaplin is said to have considered him the most humorous man in theater. That is quite a compliment.
Mario Moreno upset the Union of Actors in Mexico. He shunned the studio system of Hollywood, too. Yet he rose from the very bottom of Mexican society to become an Oscar winning actor.
This film is safe, gentle entertainment. I feel I broadened my understanding of film history after seeing this movie. I recommend you see it too. I am sure you will leave the theater with a warm, gentle feeling.
The production quality is first rate. However, understand that the lighting and camera angles approximate what was being used in the 1940s and 50s. Therefore, this film has a simple look, an historical feel about it. I particularly enjoyed the costumes and fashions of the actresses during the 40s and 50s.
I strongly suggest that you read "Wiki" descriptions of his career before you see the movie. This will cause you to understand the importance of this man to Mexico and to the U.S. In fact, when he died, Mexico had 3 days of mourning; and the U.S. Senate had a moment of silence to honor this actor.
Cantinflas was a Mexican comedian at approximately the level of a Charlie Chaplin or Bob Hope. He started from humble street origins in Mexico and slowly worked his way to Hollywood. He eventually starred in "80 Days Around the World" which featured top stars and won several Oscars.
His name is an invention that may roughly translate in Spanish to, "He who drinks too much in the Cantina".
This film has both English and Spanish subtitles which alternate at appropriate times.
Cantiflas's act might be called "family entertainment" worthy of reaching wide audiences. There is no outrageous violence, no sex, no drug usage, no monsters, no superheros, no flaming car crashes. The story is a predictable rags to riches story which makes for quality and gentle Sunday afternoon entertainment. Religious people should not be offended. This story reinforces the belief that hard focused work may be rewarded with fame and happiness.
This film is more about the events and people which brought Mario Moreno (Cantinflas) to success on stage and film. His performances are not detailed, not lengthy, only suggestions of his talent. If his performances were recreated, I think this movie would gain a higher rating. You will see Marlon Brando, Elizabeth Taylor, Yule Brenner, Charlie Chaplin and others played out in this film as well.
When you read the "Wiki" description, you will understand that he created a kind of humor which allowed him to use a free form style, he was an ad lib artist. Perhaps he could be compared to the late Robin Williams. From what I heard during the show he had a light touch to his truth telling on stage.
Cantinflas is always a respectable story; and you should not be embarrassed to bring any friend to see this film with you. I am not of Mexican heritage. About 95% of those in the audience seemed to be Mexican. So, you now know that you could be broadening your education of film history to see this film. And again, I think that if you grew up seeing his films, you will enjoy this movie more and give it a higher rating here on IMDb. If not, then for you we have a predictable, simple story which may earn a 6.5 or 7.0 on IMDb.
I particularly enjoyed seeing Mexico, the buildings, the fashions, the restaurants at their very polished best. The music is romantic. I felt that if I had seen his film when I was young, this film would have provided me with the "nostalgia effect". Nonetheless, it was a nice visit to Mexico during the 1940s.
The direction of the film was conservative and never confused. There were no "tricks" of the director to distract me from the simple, linear story.
And there is the greatest value of this film: nostalgia. Older folks who witnessed his acts will gain the most benefit from this reenactment of his past. Those older people will no doubt relive their youth as they enjoy seeing Mario Moreno go through his trials to finally appear in theater and film to become a national hero.
There are very few dark moments. And no foul language that I could detect.
Cantinflas was a master comedian. However, I do not think this movie could truly reproduce the comedic timing that Cantinflas used. Therefore, Cantinflas's wit is not displayed in this movie in a manner that I could laugh at most of the time. Subtitles slow down the delivery of his jokes. The effect of surprise in his jokes is muted by the English translation and the use of subtitles. So, as a film goer I am at a disadvantage. His jokes were gentle surprise one liners that entertained families on stage in the Cantinas of Mexico and film. But I am hardly an expert on his career. All I have seen is this movie.
I think that if you wanted to treat a person to a gentle story, with only a few moments of aggressive drama, you would be safe to bring any friend to see this film. This is a "nice film." And if that friend were born around 1940, all the better. And now I want to know more about Mario Moreno's career. And I would like to experience the results of his comedic timing from the master. Charlie Chaplin is said to have considered him the most humorous man in theater. That is quite a compliment.
Mario Moreno upset the Union of Actors in Mexico. He shunned the studio system of Hollywood, too. Yet he rose from the very bottom of Mexican society to become an Oscar winning actor.
This film is safe, gentle entertainment. I feel I broadened my understanding of film history after seeing this movie. I recommend you see it too. I am sure you will leave the theater with a warm, gentle feeling.
Get on Up
(2014)
Singer performance lifts a below average drama
25 August 2014
I have read every review on this movie on IMDb. Every review seems to be accurate whether the review is 10 star or 1 star. So, I will sum up what everyone is saying.
The opening scene is confused and points or connects to nothing. Immediately, we are derailed. The writer is trying to say that Brown's life all added up to the opening scene. But this doesn't work; the audience doesn't agree.
Time sequences jump around. Flashbacks don't modify or articulate with the present. Flashbacks seem like a distraction. It would have been better to have scenes in time sequence. The director is "embellishing" the story using "techniques" that don't work.
Performances by the lead actor of James Brown are extraordinary. It is this feat and the 8 or so performances that actually make this movie entertaining. He should be nominated for an Oscar.
Due to the 50 years time span of the story, areas of James Brown's life are lightly explored.
Personally, I would have enjoyed a longer movie which concentrated on the Civil Rights era and James Brown's contribution to the black nation as a leader. Remember, "I'm Black and I'm Proud"? If this movie could have concentrated on the finer, more positive parts of his life, this movie could have been inspiring for everyone. Instead, it spends time on illustrating trivia wherein James Brown fined his band members for not shining their shoes for example. And at times he could not pay his band members on time. Well, I would have enjoyed an additional performance in their places. His candid comments about racial problems in the South during 1960 would have been interesting. Why reduce this topical figure to his small daily business problems?
As one reviewer wrote, possibly this is an "R" movie biopic that is thinned out to become a PG13.
I recommend to anyone to see this movie if only for the performances value of a James Brown on stage. But I feel that a subsequent movie could eliminate the negatives and accentuate the positives of a World celebrity.
The opening scene is confused and points or connects to nothing. Immediately, we are derailed. The writer is trying to say that Brown's life all added up to the opening scene. But this doesn't work; the audience doesn't agree.
Time sequences jump around. Flashbacks don't modify or articulate with the present. Flashbacks seem like a distraction. It would have been better to have scenes in time sequence. The director is "embellishing" the story using "techniques" that don't work.
Performances by the lead actor of James Brown are extraordinary. It is this feat and the 8 or so performances that actually make this movie entertaining. He should be nominated for an Oscar.
Due to the 50 years time span of the story, areas of James Brown's life are lightly explored.
Personally, I would have enjoyed a longer movie which concentrated on the Civil Rights era and James Brown's contribution to the black nation as a leader. Remember, "I'm Black and I'm Proud"? If this movie could have concentrated on the finer, more positive parts of his life, this movie could have been inspiring for everyone. Instead, it spends time on illustrating trivia wherein James Brown fined his band members for not shining their shoes for example. And at times he could not pay his band members on time. Well, I would have enjoyed an additional performance in their places. His candid comments about racial problems in the South during 1960 would have been interesting. Why reduce this topical figure to his small daily business problems?
As one reviewer wrote, possibly this is an "R" movie biopic that is thinned out to become a PG13.
I recommend to anyone to see this movie if only for the performances value of a James Brown on stage. But I feel that a subsequent movie could eliminate the negatives and accentuate the positives of a World celebrity.
Jersey Boys
(2014)
Loved it. This movie will leave you with a great feeling!
28 June 2014
Hardly an extra word spoken in this movie. Actors did portray the feeling of the 1960s. I know, I lived through them. You will see America in haircuts and fashions before America went long hair.
This movie with leave you with a good feeling when you leave. I love how they dressed, Classy.
This film will be especially poignant for Baby Boomers. They will be able to remember their 'teen days, before the long hair fashions appeared. Also, Baby Boomers will no doubt be amused as to how polite people are to one another oftentimes in this movie, which is another aspect of the 1950s. The 1950s were dominated by parents who taught their children to have respect.
It is no surprise to me that women who are over 45 scored this movie the highest on IMDb of all other groups. This movie is a trip down lover's lane, holding hands, pony tails, poodle skirts, and Frankie Valle tunes about adoration, caring, walking like a man, and twist parties. This was the 50's as I knew it, too.
And one of the codes of the 1950s is that boys should "walk like a man". And men should adore their women. They should give their date attention and respect. Another "code" is that debts should be repaid. And friends should be loyal even during rough times; keep a clean appearance. Be respectful to authority. To a reviewer, this may make the movie ordinary, bland, uneventful. But to a Baby Boomer, these culture traits of the 1950s will be fondly remembered especially compared to the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s.
Now, what makes this film more interesting is the understanding that the Four Seasons had connections to the mob. This fact makes their story a surprise. Note that there is minimal violence in this movie. Sexuality is muted, just as it was in movies of the 1950s. So, this movie will not titillate for this reason; rather it is a musical bringing back memories and scribing a history of the success of the musical singing group, "The Four Seasons."
This is not a movie for the modern man of 2014 who needs porn, burning cars, outrageous behavior, computer graphics, monsters, super heroes, toilet humor, and scenes with drug use to enjoy the movie. This movie has none of that.
There are some mild stereotypes used which simply add humor to this show. The language accents of the "Jersey Boys" may be of the 1950s, but not now. (Maybe New Jersey has had its accent diluted by Mid Westerners moving in over the years.)
These young men had beginnings as occasional thieves and burglars but at some point decided to capitalize on their talents so they went "straight". This story is not a "Goodfellas" story. They were never members of the mob. And they never did anything more serious than steal in their early years.
This is an adaptation of a Broadway musical by the same name. The same actors are used for this film that appeared on Broadway. And they sing in person without lip syncing on the film set. The tunes are sentimental, rock n' roll, happy tunes. A time or two the lighting is actually "stage set lighting". This type of lighting is not meant to create realism, rather it is used to simplify the scene and place the actors "on a stage" front and center. And this set=up can then be used for an actor to sing! Well, yes, they sing! So, IF YOU LIKE THESE TUNES THAT ARE SUNG, YOU WILL LIKE THIS MOVIE ALL THE MORE.
The direction of the movie is nearly flawless. I have directed stage, and I am a pro photographer. Everything he has stage blocked in this movie flows well. The timing was "on" for actor's movement every word of the way. Eastwood is a good director.
This movie has a "good message" about perseverance, being loyal to friends, honor, working hard towards success, becoming a more upstanding individual, and of course, enjoyment of romantic music. Now, how it does all this in a New Jersey "1950's culture format" is for yours to see.
The audiences I have been with are mostly gray haired Baby Boomers. I have enjoyed it equally the two times I have seen it, even after reading all of the critical reviews made by IMDb members. I wondered where these critical reviews and negative comments could come from. So, I have sorted out the comments and it seems that there are groups of people who: (1) Want a more unusual, freaky movie; (2) They cannot enjoy the movie because to them the Broadway musical is superior, (3) They are not familiar with the 1950's and have no fond memories of it to re-live, (4) They just wholesale write that everything is bad about the movie despite the fact that other people love it.
Do not have any high expectations before you go in. This is light entertainment which is funny in a clean manner. There is some disrespect thrown around. The dark side of the movie balances out the lighter parts. Eastwood did not want to make a "fluff piece". There are some serious moments of drama in the film. Do not be offended if the "f word" is used 3-4 times. This is the sole reason that it earned an "R" rating.
This is a date movie. The tunes are all "up"; good feeling music awaits you.
Now don't think about it. Just do it! Go see it!
This movie with leave you with a good feeling when you leave. I love how they dressed, Classy.
This film will be especially poignant for Baby Boomers. They will be able to remember their 'teen days, before the long hair fashions appeared. Also, Baby Boomers will no doubt be amused as to how polite people are to one another oftentimes in this movie, which is another aspect of the 1950s. The 1950s were dominated by parents who taught their children to have respect.
It is no surprise to me that women who are over 45 scored this movie the highest on IMDb of all other groups. This movie is a trip down lover's lane, holding hands, pony tails, poodle skirts, and Frankie Valle tunes about adoration, caring, walking like a man, and twist parties. This was the 50's as I knew it, too.
And one of the codes of the 1950s is that boys should "walk like a man". And men should adore their women. They should give their date attention and respect. Another "code" is that debts should be repaid. And friends should be loyal even during rough times; keep a clean appearance. Be respectful to authority. To a reviewer, this may make the movie ordinary, bland, uneventful. But to a Baby Boomer, these culture traits of the 1950s will be fondly remembered especially compared to the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s.
Now, what makes this film more interesting is the understanding that the Four Seasons had connections to the mob. This fact makes their story a surprise. Note that there is minimal violence in this movie. Sexuality is muted, just as it was in movies of the 1950s. So, this movie will not titillate for this reason; rather it is a musical bringing back memories and scribing a history of the success of the musical singing group, "The Four Seasons."
This is not a movie for the modern man of 2014 who needs porn, burning cars, outrageous behavior, computer graphics, monsters, super heroes, toilet humor, and scenes with drug use to enjoy the movie. This movie has none of that.
There are some mild stereotypes used which simply add humor to this show. The language accents of the "Jersey Boys" may be of the 1950s, but not now. (Maybe New Jersey has had its accent diluted by Mid Westerners moving in over the years.)
These young men had beginnings as occasional thieves and burglars but at some point decided to capitalize on their talents so they went "straight". This story is not a "Goodfellas" story. They were never members of the mob. And they never did anything more serious than steal in their early years.
This is an adaptation of a Broadway musical by the same name. The same actors are used for this film that appeared on Broadway. And they sing in person without lip syncing on the film set. The tunes are sentimental, rock n' roll, happy tunes. A time or two the lighting is actually "stage set lighting". This type of lighting is not meant to create realism, rather it is used to simplify the scene and place the actors "on a stage" front and center. And this set=up can then be used for an actor to sing! Well, yes, they sing! So, IF YOU LIKE THESE TUNES THAT ARE SUNG, YOU WILL LIKE THIS MOVIE ALL THE MORE.
The direction of the movie is nearly flawless. I have directed stage, and I am a pro photographer. Everything he has stage blocked in this movie flows well. The timing was "on" for actor's movement every word of the way. Eastwood is a good director.
This movie has a "good message" about perseverance, being loyal to friends, honor, working hard towards success, becoming a more upstanding individual, and of course, enjoyment of romantic music. Now, how it does all this in a New Jersey "1950's culture format" is for yours to see.
The audiences I have been with are mostly gray haired Baby Boomers. I have enjoyed it equally the two times I have seen it, even after reading all of the critical reviews made by IMDb members. I wondered where these critical reviews and negative comments could come from. So, I have sorted out the comments and it seems that there are groups of people who: (1) Want a more unusual, freaky movie; (2) They cannot enjoy the movie because to them the Broadway musical is superior, (3) They are not familiar with the 1950's and have no fond memories of it to re-live, (4) They just wholesale write that everything is bad about the movie despite the fact that other people love it.
Do not have any high expectations before you go in. This is light entertainment which is funny in a clean manner. There is some disrespect thrown around. The dark side of the movie balances out the lighter parts. Eastwood did not want to make a "fluff piece". There are some serious moments of drama in the film. Do not be offended if the "f word" is used 3-4 times. This is the sole reason that it earned an "R" rating.
This is a date movie. The tunes are all "up"; good feeling music awaits you.
Now don't think about it. Just do it! Go see it!
Bears
(I) (2014)
Family Entertainment
21 April 2014
I was delighted to find "Bears". What was so amazing about this movie were the close-up shots of many personal moments for this bear family. I just wondered throughout the entire movie how the film makers could have this repertoire with these wild creatures. Being a pro photographer myself, I could tell that the lenses they used were not extremely long telephoto lenses. This was better, more personal than a National Geographic documentary. The images were so sharp and colorful, it just lead me to want to visit, or live, in Alaska. The panoramas were huge, majestic, post card perfect. The narrative was helpful; I needed to know what motivated the bears through their journey; the narrative answered that. Violence between bears was muted compared to what I know they can do to one another. So, this movie is safe for little children I feel. Yes, they eat Salmon fish in the river, but I eat Salmon fish too, on a plate. Did you know that bears live at the top of the peaks of mountains? I didn't know that. They carve themselves out of their hiding place from the very top of a high mountain! This movie goes into the details of a bears life from its infancy. So, your heart will be touched and warmed up by their cute behaviors. Your city life woes will all melt away when you follow them through all of the problems that bears encounter during a year's time. Yes, I do feel that "Sky", the mother bear, should be nominated for an Oscar. If Snow White and her 7 Dwarfs were winners for the Oscar, "Sky" & "Scout" & "Amber" should also be considered. This movie has its villains and its funny friends. DisneyNature is a wide eye opening presentation. There was applause from the audience at its conclusion. I felt that this movie "brought me back" to a good feeling after I had been "crashed" by a scifi movie I had seen earlier. "Bears" is good family entertainment, and as I said, it will transport you to lush, clear and clean adventure in Alaska. Now I understand why people live there.
The Broken Circle Breakdown
(2012)
Warning!
30 November 2013
This is not a "date movie". This is a movie you should see alone.
The title of the movie hints at something being "broken". The "circle" is a symbol of infinity; it is also a symbol of a wedding ring. A "broken circle" is a broken wedding ring; a broken love affair. (2) and, a "Circle of Friends". Thus, when a friend dies, "The circle is broken" when the friend "departs". The writer is clever to use this symbol which in turn comes from a famous blue grass tune name: "May The Circle Be Unbroken." The "Breakdown" part comes from another Blue Grass tune, "Foggy Mountain Breakdown". But "breakdown" could be applied to their relationship, too.
The blue grass music is good, but don't expect the movie to be uplifting. Blue Grass songs often have references to "The Lord". They are like hymns. Conversely, this movie trashes references to "The Lord", magical thinking, or a spiritual relationship to a higher order. Yet, the movie uses the blue grass music as a replacement for a spiritual presence.
The political message in the film is conveyed by yelling and ranting out a list of complaints against religion. This is a cheap, unsophisticated way to write a movie script, but it gets the job done in the same way that a sledgehammer "gets the job done".
This movie will be therefore appreciated by people who are Atheists.
American religious people will have problems agreeing with the political messages in it.
Some reviews say this is a "beautiful movie". But these people show themselves in unromantic sex scenes which are soft porn: up and down and with her toes in the air! Lust; but where is the love? Where is the beauty, the magnetism? Do we really need to see everything? And this appeals to whom?
The body tattoos shown are ugly; no beauty there; more tasteful, flowing tattoos on women I have seen. The bearded man appears more "bohemian" than "country" in appearance. I cannot help but see a "Charles Manson" in his appearance; and this is disturbing. The use of an American truck, and a stars and strips bikini does not validate this couple as "American style country"; a confusing use of symbolism for the viewer. Maybe he hoped to lure $$$ from the USA. But it didn't work. Total USA receipts were $7,000 according to IMDb. It was shown in San Francisco where we have all kinds of definitions (smile) of what is "Country".
So the beauty may be in their relationship to their family. You decide if this is a 'beautiful family.' I say the use of the word "beauty" is misapplied.
The best review by Meta Critic is by the San Francisco Chronicle author who gives this movie a "50". He says the movie changes from using dramatic movie scenes then "loses its way" and ends with a spiral down to ranting anger. The ranting and complaining is a cheap way of 'getting the message out there' without using longer dramatic scenes to explain this dated political viewpoint which would cost more film expense.
I was hoping this movie might pull me through a sad voyage; and then it would lift me up in triumph at the end. No, not this movie. It dumped me down with a sad worthless, helpless ending.
I should have walked out when the projectionist of the theater personally stood before the audience and warned the audience that "the movie is really sad" before he projected it. Boy, was he right. There were only 3 people in the audience he was speaking to.
So, in short, you have Blue Grass Music; and Country symbolism from the U.S.A., Pain, Death, Failure, Anger, and accusations of trickery and helplessness at the end. This movie wrecked my whole day.
If you are rich and this is how you experience sadness and tragedy through attending movies, then you can go see it. You can brush off the movie as another experience; and you can go back to your wealth and separation from the masses. But if you are not happy, and having some problems in your life, this movie will dump your sensitive spirits on the ground and it will trample any reserved, beautiful, spiritual feelings you might have for a higher being or Savior or "magical leader" or method.
I gave this movie a lower rating because I wanted to warn others of the negativity of this movie. The poster represents "sex affair". But this movie is really about "death by cancer" and "who is to blame." The Blue Grass music is just a device to try to entertain the viewer while tragic events unfold; and those events are all a spiral downward.
You should also know that in San Francisco, there are new facilities for stem cell research built as of 2014.
One person in the audience, of only 3 persons in total, said he really liked this movie. He was smiling. Now how could you be smiling after a movie like this. I believe that the angry message directed towards religions is what made this man smile. He's happy that "someone had to say it" I believe. So, he was likely feeling triumphant. But I didn't have an ax to grind towards religions on a Holiday. I wanted to feel better after seeing a movie, not feel worse for it.
You have been warned. Make your decision. And have a nice day!
The title of the movie hints at something being "broken". The "circle" is a symbol of infinity; it is also a symbol of a wedding ring. A "broken circle" is a broken wedding ring; a broken love affair. (2) and, a "Circle of Friends". Thus, when a friend dies, "The circle is broken" when the friend "departs". The writer is clever to use this symbol which in turn comes from a famous blue grass tune name: "May The Circle Be Unbroken." The "Breakdown" part comes from another Blue Grass tune, "Foggy Mountain Breakdown". But "breakdown" could be applied to their relationship, too.
The blue grass music is good, but don't expect the movie to be uplifting. Blue Grass songs often have references to "The Lord". They are like hymns. Conversely, this movie trashes references to "The Lord", magical thinking, or a spiritual relationship to a higher order. Yet, the movie uses the blue grass music as a replacement for a spiritual presence.
The political message in the film is conveyed by yelling and ranting out a list of complaints against religion. This is a cheap, unsophisticated way to write a movie script, but it gets the job done in the same way that a sledgehammer "gets the job done".
This movie will be therefore appreciated by people who are Atheists.
American religious people will have problems agreeing with the political messages in it.
Some reviews say this is a "beautiful movie". But these people show themselves in unromantic sex scenes which are soft porn: up and down and with her toes in the air! Lust; but where is the love? Where is the beauty, the magnetism? Do we really need to see everything? And this appeals to whom?
The body tattoos shown are ugly; no beauty there; more tasteful, flowing tattoos on women I have seen. The bearded man appears more "bohemian" than "country" in appearance. I cannot help but see a "Charles Manson" in his appearance; and this is disturbing. The use of an American truck, and a stars and strips bikini does not validate this couple as "American style country"; a confusing use of symbolism for the viewer. Maybe he hoped to lure $$$ from the USA. But it didn't work. Total USA receipts were $7,000 according to IMDb. It was shown in San Francisco where we have all kinds of definitions (smile) of what is "Country".
So the beauty may be in their relationship to their family. You decide if this is a 'beautiful family.' I say the use of the word "beauty" is misapplied.
The best review by Meta Critic is by the San Francisco Chronicle author who gives this movie a "50". He says the movie changes from using dramatic movie scenes then "loses its way" and ends with a spiral down to ranting anger. The ranting and complaining is a cheap way of 'getting the message out there' without using longer dramatic scenes to explain this dated political viewpoint which would cost more film expense.
I was hoping this movie might pull me through a sad voyage; and then it would lift me up in triumph at the end. No, not this movie. It dumped me down with a sad worthless, helpless ending.
I should have walked out when the projectionist of the theater personally stood before the audience and warned the audience that "the movie is really sad" before he projected it. Boy, was he right. There were only 3 people in the audience he was speaking to.
So, in short, you have Blue Grass Music; and Country symbolism from the U.S.A., Pain, Death, Failure, Anger, and accusations of trickery and helplessness at the end. This movie wrecked my whole day.
If you are rich and this is how you experience sadness and tragedy through attending movies, then you can go see it. You can brush off the movie as another experience; and you can go back to your wealth and separation from the masses. But if you are not happy, and having some problems in your life, this movie will dump your sensitive spirits on the ground and it will trample any reserved, beautiful, spiritual feelings you might have for a higher being or Savior or "magical leader" or method.
I gave this movie a lower rating because I wanted to warn others of the negativity of this movie. The poster represents "sex affair". But this movie is really about "death by cancer" and "who is to blame." The Blue Grass music is just a device to try to entertain the viewer while tragic events unfold; and those events are all a spiral downward.
You should also know that in San Francisco, there are new facilities for stem cell research built as of 2014.
One person in the audience, of only 3 persons in total, said he really liked this movie. He was smiling. Now how could you be smiling after a movie like this. I believe that the angry message directed towards religions is what made this man smile. He's happy that "someone had to say it" I believe. So, he was likely feeling triumphant. But I didn't have an ax to grind towards religions on a Holiday. I wanted to feel better after seeing a movie, not feel worse for it.
You have been warned. Make your decision. And have a nice day!
Rush
(I) (2013)
Glorious Obsession
27 September 2013
One of the BEST MOVIES OF THE YEAR for sure. This movie is about friendship, marriage, attaining goals, perseverance. I was kept on the edge of my seat throughout the movie. Never a dull moment. Lovely vintage race cars. This movie will motivate you to get off your ass to "do it".
The sex scenes in this movie are as wild as the racing.
Yet, this movie has a beating heart; a heart that beats at 10,000 rpm. You absolutely must see this movie. One of the best racing and friendship movies of all time. Why as I write this, it is rated in the top 100 movies of all time.
The sound track is strong. The visuals make you feel you are actually racing. You care about these characters through their all dilemmas and triumphs. I am exhausted after seeing it. And I have seen it 7 times. Go to U-Tube and look over videos which are 1 hour long regarding the rivalry between Niki Lauda and James Hunt. View the entire length and marvel at the authenticity of this movie; and notice how closely the real people resemble the actors in this movie.
Take a date to this movie. How it is that anyone could criticize it in any technical or dramatic fashion is beyond me. Every scene is finely crafted. I am a professional photographer and I admire the direction and choices the screenwriter and director have made. Sure, there are those that want more racing track time, but this is a deeper story about friendship and rivalry. You must see it in your lifetime.
The sex scenes in this movie are as wild as the racing.
Yet, this movie has a beating heart; a heart that beats at 10,000 rpm. You absolutely must see this movie. One of the best racing and friendship movies of all time. Why as I write this, it is rated in the top 100 movies of all time.
The sound track is strong. The visuals make you feel you are actually racing. You care about these characters through their all dilemmas and triumphs. I am exhausted after seeing it. And I have seen it 7 times. Go to U-Tube and look over videos which are 1 hour long regarding the rivalry between Niki Lauda and James Hunt. View the entire length and marvel at the authenticity of this movie; and notice how closely the real people resemble the actors in this movie.
Take a date to this movie. How it is that anyone could criticize it in any technical or dramatic fashion is beyond me. Every scene is finely crafted. I am a professional photographer and I admire the direction and choices the screenwriter and director have made. Sure, there are those that want more racing track time, but this is a deeper story about friendship and rivalry. You must see it in your lifetime.
Storm Surfers 3D
(2012)
Too polished
18 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I am a surfer of the 60s. I highly respect the courage and skills of the surfers presented in this movie. I do agree that this film could be improved; and so I offer a constructive critique as follows: The audience needs to feel the fear and anguish of failure a large percentage of the time in order to feel victory. These surfer chaps are so professional, so skilled as presented that we rarely feel defeat. Perhaps this film could have presented some intermediate surfers trying and failing at lesser waves. Then the movie could build to the "pros" whom have paid their dues. These pros are smiling and laughing much of the time and so they seem more than fearless, they are masters whom are no longer taking huge risks. From my own experience, I respect anyone who can surf such huge and dangerous waves. I can remember what it feels like just to stand before waves 1/2 the size depicted in this movie. But other viewers don't have this personal experience of being in awe. Adding on 3D and camera headgear is a nice touch; adding polished, well framed interviews is, ah...professional, slick, chrome plating. But "chrome plating" isn't speed, fear, pain, suffering. We need to see more suffering, a larger percentage of suffering vs. success. Success after success after success is boring. We need the cars to break down; get flat tires. We need to see more exhausted surfers; we need to see blood on the forehead, arguments, conflicts with police...well...we need to see more drama. Yes, I am aware that there already are a few scenes that talk about pain and risk. But where is the real worry in their eyes? Most of the time these pros are laughing and showing how really relaxed they are before they undertake surfing huge waves. And that relaxes us, the audience, too. Nothing to fear here. It's a beautiful waves, a beautiful day, day after day. Beauty can become boring, even if you live in paradise.
There is a small attempt to define a surfer as a person who has a special interest in nature, risk taking. He may be a person who is an endless teenager. But is this character development to say these things? It's a meek attempt to be sure. As a result, we do not end up "close" to these surfers. We see a little of their history and still we do not find special insights here. They have a "need for speed" the movie attempts to convey.
I remember "Endless Summer" from the 60s. At that time, I felt stimulated by this movie to "take off" and to follow the sun. This movie as I recall featured music by Dick Dale or a replica musical group. The music, the promise of an "Endless Summer" lead to a feeling that surfing was a kind of romantic sea challenge that one would tell to one's grandchildren. In this movie, the surfers have children, and they have gray hair. The children here are not in awe of their parents, surfing is an everyday affair for them. So, while it is a fine accomplishment for a 50 year old man to surf huge waves, we are missing out on the romance of the ocean.
So, I will say this: I think the music could be more "Spanish" or harken to foreign lands through presentations of dancers, music, parties with foreigners, etc. Doing this will add romance and give the audience a new (foreign) travel experience. As the movie is, we are looking at a polished movie with little failure evident. Watching a golf movie with all "holes in one" can be repetitive, boring. We need to see defeat. When we watch baseball, football, soccer, complete success rarely happens during the game. Yet, the audience is glued to every little defeat and partial success.
Making good movies requires more than a template with polished interviews and cuts to action scenes. The writers, producers of movies of this kind need to go to the "next level" to provide the audience with a channel to feel every heart beat. Using a special action camera does add some small percentage of this personal fear experience. But we need much more. We need to see personal defeat.
I recommend this movie as light entertainment which is worth the fee to go in especially if you have been a surfer. But for others, I feel you will be bored in the center of the movie by the repetition of perfect waves.
Sometimes too much perfection can be boring.
There is a small attempt to define a surfer as a person who has a special interest in nature, risk taking. He may be a person who is an endless teenager. But is this character development to say these things? It's a meek attempt to be sure. As a result, we do not end up "close" to these surfers. We see a little of their history and still we do not find special insights here. They have a "need for speed" the movie attempts to convey.
I remember "Endless Summer" from the 60s. At that time, I felt stimulated by this movie to "take off" and to follow the sun. This movie as I recall featured music by Dick Dale or a replica musical group. The music, the promise of an "Endless Summer" lead to a feeling that surfing was a kind of romantic sea challenge that one would tell to one's grandchildren. In this movie, the surfers have children, and they have gray hair. The children here are not in awe of their parents, surfing is an everyday affair for them. So, while it is a fine accomplishment for a 50 year old man to surf huge waves, we are missing out on the romance of the ocean.
So, I will say this: I think the music could be more "Spanish" or harken to foreign lands through presentations of dancers, music, parties with foreigners, etc. Doing this will add romance and give the audience a new (foreign) travel experience. As the movie is, we are looking at a polished movie with little failure evident. Watching a golf movie with all "holes in one" can be repetitive, boring. We need to see defeat. When we watch baseball, football, soccer, complete success rarely happens during the game. Yet, the audience is glued to every little defeat and partial success.
Making good movies requires more than a template with polished interviews and cuts to action scenes. The writers, producers of movies of this kind need to go to the "next level" to provide the audience with a channel to feel every heart beat. Using a special action camera does add some small percentage of this personal fear experience. But we need much more. We need to see personal defeat.
I recommend this movie as light entertainment which is worth the fee to go in especially if you have been a surfer. But for others, I feel you will be bored in the center of the movie by the repetition of perfect waves.
Sometimes too much perfection can be boring.
Fruitvale Station
(2013)
Stream of Consciousness Docu-drama
15 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
As I left the theater I realized that I had not been hard pressed by the writer/director to come to a conclusion of "what the film meant". So, if I were positioned to come to any conclusion, it would be "somewhere in the facts". Is every moment factual? Yes or no. I cannot say. However, I do feel that the hip hop criminal crowd is not known to be kindly and respectful to the police. And as such they attract hostility from others. Live by the sword; you can die by the sword. Oscar Grant did not earn my full sympathies for the admitted cheating that he did, for example. A scene wherein he seems to give up the drug selling life did not seem believable to me, though he was a "casual seller". This is a conflicted young man who is still trying to live in an alternative culture and struggling to find success in a more work-a-day environment as a butcher. It shows how blacks are trapped by an adolescent be-cool, kick back, criminal culture. They are not easily permitted into the more successful conventional culture of society until they give up this popular hipster cool cat hip hop kickin' way of life. And Oscar Grant seems to be inside this personal struggle for employment. So here we have some deeper issues to ponder about. It seems to me that both the police and the hip hop crowd have a kind of inflexibility, a kind of hostility for each other. Each side hates the other's attitudes; I believe, although the film does not overtly state this. The viewer is left to fill in details not shown through his own experience of life. Nonetheless, Oscar Grant did not seem to be a lethal threat. He had no weapon. I cannot believe that the policeman mistakenly drew the wrong weapon. I do believe that the young hip hoppers antagonized the police. If you antagonize a German Shepard, God help you. If you antagonize the police, God help you. If you antagonize any stranger, God help you. If there is any lesson to be learned by this movie, it is that antagonism, arrogance, deceit and lack of respect for any person of authority can attract trouble to oneself. The Oakland black criminal crowd needs to grow up and become a worthy member of society. Until this happens, only God and an expensive attorney can help them. The police won't. It isn't their job to provide a rational father figure to model their lives from. No doubt these two groups, the police and the criminal hip hop crowd will clash again and again. Perhaps this is the unstated message of the movie. Go see it. You decide.
This film has a acting which seems quite natural and believable otherwise. The movie flowed from scene to scene in a logical time sequence. It is not a "High Noon" with increasing tension and sympathies for the protagonist however. If it could do that, then it could earn a "9" in my book. Failing that, I give it a "7". The professional "metacritics" have graded this movie too highly. The movie simply tries to "follow facts" in a natural feeling fashion. The actors are to be commended for their believability and skills. However, the facts presented do not lead me to any new break through moments of insight. What we have here are moments of antagonism that may incite feelings in some but not I.
This film has a acting which seems quite natural and believable otherwise. The movie flowed from scene to scene in a logical time sequence. It is not a "High Noon" with increasing tension and sympathies for the protagonist however. If it could do that, then it could earn a "9" in my book. Failing that, I give it a "7". The professional "metacritics" have graded this movie too highly. The movie simply tries to "follow facts" in a natural feeling fashion. The actors are to be commended for their believability and skills. However, the facts presented do not lead me to any new break through moments of insight. What we have here are moments of antagonism that may incite feelings in some but not I.
Twenty Feet from Stardom
(2013)
Historic and satisfying
6 July 2013
At the conclusion to this film I felt as though I had learned something intimate about the music industry. And this gave me a satisfied feeling. I got satisfaction. The audience gave applause during the performance and after wards, at the conclusion of the movie. The house was packed owing to good reviews. Top stars reveal their feelings in this film and you will see some greats. If you follow singer talent, you have found one of your pet movies here. This movie is edited tightly and it just flows well from scene to scene. There are so many examples of talent in this movie that I felt completely satisfied, "filled up". This movie is suited for taking a date to it. Generally the theme of the movie is "How to become personally successful with yourself." It uses the stories of stars seen and unseen to explore personal success. This movie could be used in a classroom to present some Laws of Life. Like a Disney movie, it is worthwhile entertainment that explores untold stories in the music industry. I got my monies worth.
The Sapphires
(2012)
You are gonna' feel so good if you see this movie
26 April 2013
This is a gem. I feel so-o-o-o goo-o-d when I left this show. Lots of soul singing; lots of 60s performing.
There are going to be the purists who will look at this technical fact; and that technical flaw, disregard them. This movie has a beating heart.
Sure, it's a homespun story with some backyard friends; and this makes it just more real...a real story. I loved the dancing. I loved the singing.
The backdrop is sad, war, but without some sadness, sister, you got no soul. You must see this movie. You are going to feel so, so, so good.
Just do it.
There are going to be the purists who will look at this technical fact; and that technical flaw, disregard them. This movie has a beating heart.
Sure, it's a homespun story with some backyard friends; and this makes it just more real...a real story. I loved the dancing. I loved the singing.
The backdrop is sad, war, but without some sadness, sister, you got no soul. You must see this movie. You are going to feel so, so, so good.
Just do it.
Sound City
(2013)
Historically Important
3 February 2013
Everyone gave applause at the end of this documentary. It actually has relevance to anyone who enjoys popular music. However, musicians who see this movie will find a special message imparted to them.
During the 1970s, there was Disco. At this time, music became more repetitive, even boring to some listeners. The soul was being manufactured. Then another assault on soul or the "human element" began with the computer processing of tunes. What then makes that special element that says to the ears; "This music is created by humans with a heart!" This movie attempts to answer such a question. And it answers it through the many examples of artists who called this special recording studio "home". You will be surprised by the top names and albums that were recorded in this studio.
I saw this movie in San Francisco at a small theater; but the audience was packed. I felt that I had a more realistic grasp of the music industry and its unvarnished history as a result of seeing this film. I left with a good feeling; and, I would recommend this movie to others. There is no outrageous behavior that would offend very sensitive or religious people.
The quality of this movie sometimes approaches a "home movie" given that they are using real historical footage and personal pictures from the past; but it never seems scattered. It's always entertaining. There is a message to be told; and a history to be seen. It has been edited well. It was enjoyable to hear real confessions of top people in the industry on film. Another film of this same type or category, a combination "home movie with pro editing," would be "MAGIC TRIP" with Ken Kesey. IN THIS PARTICULAR CATEGORY of "historical home movie documentary" I gave it a "10". This movie has the stars, the unique history, and a beating heart.
I got my monies worth.
During the 1970s, there was Disco. At this time, music became more repetitive, even boring to some listeners. The soul was being manufactured. Then another assault on soul or the "human element" began with the computer processing of tunes. What then makes that special element that says to the ears; "This music is created by humans with a heart!" This movie attempts to answer such a question. And it answers it through the many examples of artists who called this special recording studio "home". You will be surprised by the top names and albums that were recorded in this studio.
I saw this movie in San Francisco at a small theater; but the audience was packed. I felt that I had a more realistic grasp of the music industry and its unvarnished history as a result of seeing this film. I left with a good feeling; and, I would recommend this movie to others. There is no outrageous behavior that would offend very sensitive or religious people.
The quality of this movie sometimes approaches a "home movie" given that they are using real historical footage and personal pictures from the past; but it never seems scattered. It's always entertaining. There is a message to be told; and a history to be seen. It has been edited well. It was enjoyable to hear real confessions of top people in the industry on film. Another film of this same type or category, a combination "home movie with pro editing," would be "MAGIC TRIP" with Ken Kesey. IN THIS PARTICULAR CATEGORY of "historical home movie documentary" I gave it a "10". This movie has the stars, the unique history, and a beating heart.
I got my monies worth.
Django Unchained
(2012)
I walked out.
6 January 2013
This is not a spaghetti western. Django is not a superhero. It's a comedy trying to use the foil of slavery, torture, KKK to fool us into laughing. We are to laugh at the KKK.
The actors seem listless at times. It reminds me of a sitcom in that way; they are sometimes deadpan waiting for the canned laughter to roll in.
Richard Pryor could make white people laugh at themselves. His satire was timely. This movie is not timely. It's too late.
I heard some audience members laugh. So, it may be the mood I am in. I wanted to laugh. I didn't laugh; I walked out.
The actors seem listless at times. It reminds me of a sitcom in that way; they are sometimes deadpan waiting for the canned laughter to roll in.
Richard Pryor could make white people laugh at themselves. His satire was timely. This movie is not timely. It's too late.
I heard some audience members laugh. So, it may be the mood I am in. I wanted to laugh. I didn't laugh; I walked out.
The Impossible
(2012)
Most painful movie of the year
4 January 2013
I cannot see this movie as "entertainment". It is a trip through hell and 15 kinds of human pain and suffering. How can I say that I got nothing from this movie except to say that I feel lucky to live where I do.
I do not want to see this movie again. It is more than a horror movie. I had to shield my eyes many times just to decrease the painful input. There was only one small moment during the movie where someone was slightly smiling. This movie is 3 times more painful than "Zero Dark Thirty" and "Zero Dark" had torture in it.
I now have more fearful respect for consequences of a Tsunami. Every painful thing that can happen to a person in such a disaster is presented in this movie. It overwhelmed me and I wanted to walk out. But I stayed. My day was slightly ruined by this movie. My mood was muted and somewhat dark all day afterward. If that is how you want to feel afterward, then you must see this movie.
Perhaps it will someday become a Cult Film. As in: Wanna' know how it feels to be drowned, really? I am tired and beat just remembering it as I write this review. I do not want to see it again, ever.
I do not want to see this movie again. It is more than a horror movie. I had to shield my eyes many times just to decrease the painful input. There was only one small moment during the movie where someone was slightly smiling. This movie is 3 times more painful than "Zero Dark Thirty" and "Zero Dark" had torture in it.
I now have more fearful respect for consequences of a Tsunami. Every painful thing that can happen to a person in such a disaster is presented in this movie. It overwhelmed me and I wanted to walk out. But I stayed. My day was slightly ruined by this movie. My mood was muted and somewhat dark all day afterward. If that is how you want to feel afterward, then you must see this movie.
Perhaps it will someday become a Cult Film. As in: Wanna' know how it feels to be drowned, really? I am tired and beat just remembering it as I write this review. I do not want to see it again, ever.
Zero Dark Thirty
(2012)
Jessica Chastain is too beautiful.
4 January 2013
I wish I could believe that one person was doggedly responsible for maintaining the focus on the manhunt (womanhunt?) for Osama. But I cannot. Jessica Chastain says in her IMDb biography that the facts are real, its a real story about this woman. I cannot. Maya, the Heroine is too beautiful to be believable. She's a "10" in beauty and a "10" in persistence.
The soldiers are likable and loyal. They are heroes and all of this action will attract more recruits to the Army. I cannot find any fault or criticism in the way the Director portrayed them.
Because this movie does not touch the heartstrings, it is sort of gritty all of the way through, it left me speechless. I watched a one dimensional story with a already known ending. Another dimension could have been portrayed with the (false) story of some lovers. This heroine does not have any friends the movie says. Think of "Titanic", an action/drama movie that had a 2nd dimension regarding some lovers tucked into the story. Here we only have persistence and action.
I wonder how Muslims view this movie.
To be sure, Karen Bigelow is a master crafts-women of action movies. But movie of the year? "Lincoln" gave me time to reflect on moral issues, law, the character of Lincoln and other historical facts. This movie "Zero Dark Thirty" seems to try to gain something by showing us "how to torture". Take the towel, take the water, pour it on the towel. We've learned how to torture.
In Lincoln, on the other hand, we saw the manner in which moral gray areas were decided upon. Here in Zero Dark, we see there is a procedure to torturing somebody. Step 1, 2, 3. Pretend to be their friend, then torture them if they don't tell the truth. I think this movie could have had more depth if the moral issue of torture were attended to.
I cannot agree that this is movie of the year. It never hit my "revenge button" because this is old history. I liked how well it was paced with no slop. It is a well crafted one dimensional action movie that uses a heroine who is too beautiful to be believable. Please, Hollywood, please stop using these gorgeous women to always take our attention away. In this case, it disallowed me to focus on the revenge motive. It glamorized the heroine for her persistence; yet it was the soldiers who were the heroes.
I felt that "The Impossible" was a more painful movie to watch. I feel that "Lincoln" should be a a more likely pick for movie of the year. Sorry audience.
The soldiers are likable and loyal. They are heroes and all of this action will attract more recruits to the Army. I cannot find any fault or criticism in the way the Director portrayed them.
Because this movie does not touch the heartstrings, it is sort of gritty all of the way through, it left me speechless. I watched a one dimensional story with a already known ending. Another dimension could have been portrayed with the (false) story of some lovers. This heroine does not have any friends the movie says. Think of "Titanic", an action/drama movie that had a 2nd dimension regarding some lovers tucked into the story. Here we only have persistence and action.
I wonder how Muslims view this movie.
To be sure, Karen Bigelow is a master crafts-women of action movies. But movie of the year? "Lincoln" gave me time to reflect on moral issues, law, the character of Lincoln and other historical facts. This movie "Zero Dark Thirty" seems to try to gain something by showing us "how to torture". Take the towel, take the water, pour it on the towel. We've learned how to torture.
In Lincoln, on the other hand, we saw the manner in which moral gray areas were decided upon. Here in Zero Dark, we see there is a procedure to torturing somebody. Step 1, 2, 3. Pretend to be their friend, then torture them if they don't tell the truth. I think this movie could have had more depth if the moral issue of torture were attended to.
I cannot agree that this is movie of the year. It never hit my "revenge button" because this is old history. I liked how well it was paced with no slop. It is a well crafted one dimensional action movie that uses a heroine who is too beautiful to be believable. Please, Hollywood, please stop using these gorgeous women to always take our attention away. In this case, it disallowed me to focus on the revenge motive. It glamorized the heroine for her persistence; yet it was the soldiers who were the heroes.
I felt that "The Impossible" was a more painful movie to watch. I feel that "Lincoln" should be a a more likely pick for movie of the year. Sorry audience.
End of Watch
(2012)
Never a dull moment
1 October 2012
This is a "handy cam" movie. There is never a dull moment. It will make you appreciate the work the police do. And it will make you think twice about starting a police career in L.A.
I am a pro photographer and I am very critical of movies. This show scores high. It is edited tightly.
You end up liking the main characters, the police. And the supporting police all have interesting, hard boiled personalities.
I would see this movie again. I would recommend this movie to anyone over 16 years old. It certainly shows the hard side of the drug trade. Just go see it. It's good guys against the bad guys.
I am a pro photographer and I am very critical of movies. This show scores high. It is edited tightly.
You end up liking the main characters, the police. And the supporting police all have interesting, hard boiled personalities.
I would see this movie again. I would recommend this movie to anyone over 16 years old. It certainly shows the hard side of the drug trade. Just go see it. It's good guys against the bad guys.
Courage and Heart
25 June 2012
Being a photographer, I look at the technical aspects of movies. I felt this movie was easy to follow and understand at the first viewing. It reminded me some of the professional movies from Disney. It could play to a wide audience as a result. The scenes were short and clear to understand and so I thought of the movie "High Noon" as a comparison. I enjoyed the romantic display of the Mexican heroes on horseback. They seemed invincible and I knew every motion of their arms and head position was carefully chosen and directed to make them picture perfect. John Wayne would have taken acting lessons from them. Surely, this is a movie to make all Mexicans proud of their morality and courage.
Since my heart was touched by this movie, I rate it highly. I believe it is one of the best movies of the year.
Technically, I could not believe that the Federal soldiers would stand up so straight at times to fire their shots. I mean, I would be hiding more than they did in this movie. But you know, Rambo didn't do a lot of hiding either. This movie displays "John Wayne" courage wherein people do stand up shooting.
I rarely understand all that a movie has to give at the first viewing. But this movie was so clear, so unambiguous, that I do not need to see it again. Again, I really enjoyed the romantic display of Mexicans draped in bullet belts, shooting from horseback with big full grins peaking through 2 week old old scrabble beards.
I now understand who and how Mexicans see their heroes.
I could not help but see a parallel with the Muslim and Jewish fight to preserve their religious cultures. Religion is here to stay; and the reasons and motivations are given in this film.
This movie will connect you with your heart and soul. It was well worth what I paid.
Since my heart was touched by this movie, I rate it highly. I believe it is one of the best movies of the year.
Technically, I could not believe that the Federal soldiers would stand up so straight at times to fire their shots. I mean, I would be hiding more than they did in this movie. But you know, Rambo didn't do a lot of hiding either. This movie displays "John Wayne" courage wherein people do stand up shooting.
I rarely understand all that a movie has to give at the first viewing. But this movie was so clear, so unambiguous, that I do not need to see it again. Again, I really enjoyed the romantic display of Mexicans draped in bullet belts, shooting from horseback with big full grins peaking through 2 week old old scrabble beards.
I now understand who and how Mexicans see their heroes.
I could not help but see a parallel with the Muslim and Jewish fight to preserve their religious cultures. Religion is here to stay; and the reasons and motivations are given in this film.
This movie will connect you with your heart and soul. It was well worth what I paid.
Tell Your Friends