Reviews

As "Living With Leopards" (2024 release from the UK; 71 min.) opens, we are in the "Okavango Delta, Botswana", and Brad is following and filming a female leopard named Mothuma. The leopard freefalls from 40 feet high into a tree onto an unsuspecting prey. Why would she take such a risk? Soon we understand as she has 2 cubs to feed and protect, "unknown to the world for the initial 3 months". At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from award nominated British director Alex Parkinson ("Last Breath"). Here, he brings the tale of a group of photographers in Botswana who are following the trace of one leopard family. They spend wees, months, years to capture the incredible footage that this documentary contains (it was filmed over a period of 2 1/2 years). And when I say "incredible footage", I mean this documentary brings to the screen various scenes that I never imagined could be caught on tape. Then again, think of it this way: it took the film makers 30 months to capture this on tape, and we are seeing this distilled into 71 minutes... Kudos also the the top-notch original score for this documentary.

"Living With Leopards" recently started streaming on Netflix, and I caught it last night. So glad I did. If you are in the mood for a top quality nature documentary, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As "The Final: Attack on Wembley" (2024 release from the UK; 82 min.) it is "11th July 2021", and England is set to play in and host the final of the 2020 Euros (delayed by a year due to COVID) against Italy. The movie starts at 8 am (12 hours before kickoff), and people from all over England are descending upon London, already heavily drinking, and many without tickets for the game. What could go wrong? At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: this movie brings a chilling account of the events on July 11, 2021, leading up to the game. A number of factors were heavily at play: first, this was England's fist chance since 1966 to win a major trophy; second, as in 1966, they would also be hosting the event; third, due to COVID delaying the tournament by a year, this was the first time people would be out and celebrating en masse; and last but not least: the English authorities vastly underestimated what was about to transpire. In short: all elements were in place for a massive for a colossal breakdown of security. The footage makes for absolute compelling if revolting viewing. I cannot readily recall having seen anything like this. The movie makers keep a tight pace throughout, and this documentary just flew by in no time.

"The Final" Attack On Wembley" started streaming on Netflix this weekend. Whether or not you are a soccer fan is frankly irrelevant. This is a documentary that shows what happens when an entire country is frenzied, with thousands of people determined to get into Wembley stadium, ticker or no ticket. SHOCKINGLY (not), pure mayhem and chaos ensues... Highly recommended.

As "Unfrosted" (2024 release; 93 min.) opens, we are in "Battle Creek, Michigan, 1963" and the town's two cereal makers, Kellogg's and Post, are fierce competitors. At that year's Bowl & Spoon Awards, Kellogg's sweeps. Meanwhile Post is trying tom come up with a new concoction...

Couple of comments: this is directed by Jerry Seinfeld (directing his 1st feature length)). He also co-wrote the script, co-produced, and for good measure also stars in it. In other words: this is a Seinfeld product. Alas, the best that I can say is that there are a few funny scenes in it but that otherwise the movie is very uneven, and the sense I got was that everyone is trying SO HARD to make this work, you can practically hear Seinfeld yell "and... ACTION!". It's certainly bot for a lack of on-screen talent: besides Seinfeld (as a Kellogg executive), we also have Amy Schumer (as CEO of Post), Melissa McCarthy (as a Kellogg researcher), and Hugh Grant (as Tony the Tiger), among others. Bottom line: this is okay, but just okay, and nothing more than a quick diversion.

"Unfrosted" bypassed the theaters and was released on Netflix last weekend. I caught it a few days ago. This movie is currently rated only 39% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and the movie shows it. If you are a fan of Jerry Seinfeld or the tv show Seinfeld, as I am, I'd readily suggest you check this out, but with lowered expectations, and draw your own conclusion.

As "Enter the Slipstream" (2023 release; 88 min.) opens, it is "August 26, 2020, Nice, France" and the 2020 Tour de France is about to start, after being delayed for almost 2 moths due to the COVID pandemic raging around the world. This is not without risk, and the question is whether the Tour can even make it all the way to Paris three weeks later. We then go back to "Six Months Earlier", before the pandemic even started, to the beginning of the pro cycling season at the Tour of Colombia. The American racing team Education First is there as its top man is Rigoberto Uran and several others are in fact Colombian. Uran is returning from a massive injury he sustained in the fall of 2022... At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: this documentary follows 1 racing team, with seemingly unfettered access, and it is quite interesting to see the cycling season through that particular lens. The bulk of the documentary does focus on the Tour de France, the grandaddy and most important of all pro cycling events. The impact of COVID is palpable throughout the documentary, which only adds to the drama. What a strange year 2020 turned out to be.

This documentary was released in the early summer of 2023 but I only became aware of it now, as Peacock (where it is now streaming) was pushing it on its sports section. I am not sure what held back the release (3 years after the facts). Better late than never! Interestingly, last summer also saw the release of the documentary mini-series "Tour de France: Unchained", and that is one of the best sports documentaries I have ever seen, period. In the meantime, if you are a fan of pro cycling in general, or of the Tour de France in particular, I'd readily suggest you check out "Enter the Slipstream", and draw your own conclusion.

As Episode 1 of "Under the Bridge" (2024 release; 8 episodes of about 50 min. Each) opens, it is "November 14, 1997" and we are introduced to Reena, a teenage girl of Indian descent. She is trying hard to fir in with other girls her age, but it isn't easy. In a parallel story, we are introduced to Rebecca, who is visiting from New York as she is working on a book about Victoria, BC, where she grew up... At this point we are 10 minutes into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this mini-series is the brainchild of Quinn Shepard ("Not Okay"). Here she brings the book of the same name by Rebecca Godfrey to the small screen. I was mesmerized from the start, lured by the top notch script and strong performances by the cast (led by Riley Keough as Rebecca and Lily Gladstone as Cam). At this point I have seen 4 of the 8 episodes. It becomes clear very quickly who is responsible for the murder of Reena, so I was wondering why the mini-series would need so many episodes. Only tot then find out that more layers are peeled back, as we get the full picture of how the family from India settles in Victoria and tries to integrate. Beware: there are a number of scenes that will make you quite uncomfortable but sometime the truth ain't pretty, and that's being mild. Looking forward to watching the remaining 4 episodes in the weeks to come.

"Under the Bridge" is streaming on Hulu and new episodes are released on Wednesdays. The mini-series is currently rated 88% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and for good reason. If you are in the mood for a riveting true crime drama mini-series, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

As "The Beast" (2023 release from France) opens, we are introduced to Gabrielle, who is at an early 20th century party and while looking for her husband George, she ends up meeting Louis. We then go to "2044" and Gabrielle is being talked into cleaning her DNA from all feelings... At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from French writer-producer-director Bertrand Bonello, best known here in the US for his biopic "Saint Laurent". Here he explores what a world with cleansed feelings might look like. It takes a while to fully understand what is happening, as the movie jumps back-and-forth between 1920, 2044 and 2014. But once the movie finds its groove, this becomes must-see. The movie is helped immensely by the strong lead performance of Lea Seydoux as Gabrielle. Please note that the screen ratio changes often throughout the movie. And then this: when the film ends and fades to black, I was expecting the end credits. Instead, the screen showed a QR code, with the tagline: Credits: Scan Me. First time I've seen this in a theatrical release...

"The Beast" premiered at last Fall's Venice Film Festival to good critical acclaim. The movie is currently rated 85% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and for good reason. I saw the movie at my local arthouse theater here in Cincinnati this past Sunday. The early evening screening was attended so-so (I counted about 10 people). If you are in the mood for a time-warped psychological drama, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As Episode 1 of "The Sympathizer" (2024 release; 7 episodes of about 55 min each) opens, it is 1975 "Four Months Before the Fall of Saigon", and "Death Wish" is playing in theaters in Saigon. We are introduced to Claude, a CIA agent who is working with the General, a high ranking guy in South Vietnam's army. Also in the General's inner circle is the Captain, who is actually a spy for North Vietnam. At this point we are a0 minutes into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this is the film adaptation of the 2015 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel of the same name by Viet Thanh Nguyen, which I have not read. While episode 1 brings us the end of the war, the remainder episodes focus on how the fleeing Vietnamese adjust to life in the US. This is billed as "black comedy", but to be honest I didn't see much comedy in this, black or otherwise. To be honest, I never really connected with any of these characters. That is not to say that this is a "poor" mini-series, though. But I had hoped for more/better than what this mini-series offers. I've seen 2 episodes so far, and I will give it 1 more try with Episode 3.

"The Sympathizer" premiered on HBO a few weeks ago and is also streaming on Max, where I've been watching it. The mini-series is currently rated 88% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, which feels very generous to me. If you are in the mood for what life was like for the Vietnamese feeling their country after the fall of Saigon and coming to the US, I'd readily suggest you check it out and draw your own conclusion.

As Episode 1 of "A Gentleman in Moscow" (2024 release from the UK; 8 episodes of about 50 min each) opens, it is "Moscow 1921"., a few years after the Bolshevik Revolution. Count Alexander Rostov, who has returned from Paris in 1918, is sentenced by a Bolshevik Revolutionary court to a life sentence at the luxurious Hotel Metropol. At this point we are 10 minutes into Episode 1...

Couple of comments: this is a historical drama on what life was like in Moscow in the early years following the 1917 revolution. The cast is fronted by the real life husband and wife team of Ewan McGregor (as Count Alexander) and Mary Elizabeth Winston (as Anna). While the opening premise sounds appealing, and hence I was quite eager to check it out, for whatever reason I could not get into this mini-series,,,, AT ALL. I really can't explain why, other that to say that I never bought into the main characters and hence I really didn't care what happened to them. Other may very well disagree and I fully realize that my take on this is a very personal and hence subjective view of it. I held out for 2 episodes and then bailed.

"A Gentleman in Moscow" premiered in Showtime (which is now part of Paramount+) a few weeks ago, and is schedule to conclude in early May. I was quite amazed to see that this is currently rated 90% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. Wow. Did I see the same mini-series? If you have any particular interest in the early years of communist Russia, or are simply a fan of Ewan McGregor or Mary Elizabeth Winston, I'd suggest you check this out, with lowered expectations, and draw your own conclusion.

As "The Synanon Fix" (2024 release; 4 episodes of about 60 min each) opens, it is "Los Angeles, 1958", and Chuck Dederich, himself a recovering alcoholic, opens Synanon, intended as a drug recovery center with a couple of basic rules: no drugs, no alcohol, no violence. Given the utter lack of drug treatment options offered by the courts in general at that time, it was quite revolutionary, and a success. At this point we are 10 minutes into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from accomplished writer-director Rory Kennedy (yes, the sister of Robert Kennedy Jr., whose presidential campaign she has widely and loudly denounced). Here she look at how Synanon, a 501(c)(3) non-profit started with good intentions and initial great results, slowly but surely descends into a cult. I must admit that I had never heard of the Synanon before watching this mini-series. It reminds us yet again how dangerous these movements can become under the charismatic leadership of one man. The film makers make great use of the thousands of hours of video and audio footage that exists on the Synanon, and were able to snag interviews with plenty of former Synanon members, including those closest to Chuck Dederich.

"The Synanon Fix" premiered on HBO in early April and is also streaming on Max, where I caught it recently. These 4 episodes fly by in no time. If you are in the mood for assessing how a movement that starts with the best of intentions goes off the rails and becomes a cult, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

As "Civil War" (2024 release; 109 min.) opens, POTUS addresses the nation that an important victory over the Western Forces has been achieved. We then get introduced to Lee and Joel, who are reporters for Reuters. Lee is a legendary photo journalist, and she captures a civil unrest in New York City, where a woman detonates a suicide bomb. At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie...

Couple of comments: this is the latest from British writer-director Alex Garland ("Ex Machine", "Annihilation"). Here he brings us what a modern day civil war in the US could look like. On that level, the movie speaks for itself, as we watch how it all plays out. More importantly, Garland made the choice to not explain or give any background or context what events lead to civil war breaking out to begin with. Nor do we know how long the war has been raging already when the movie opens. It's literally watching several sides combatting without any clue as to why. This is a fundamental flaw in my opinion, as we the viewers have no reason to relate to either side or to become emotionally invest. (How is it that Texas and California, two very different states on so many levels, have now joined to form the Western Forces? This movie won't tell you.) Much of the movie is in fact a road movie, until it gives way to the final battle in DC in the last half hour or so. Kirsten Dunst brings an outstanding performance as Lee, and the rest of the main cast is very solid as well. But when all is said and done, I felt disappointed with this movie, because I literally had no idea or clue as to how we got to having a civil war raging in this country.

"Civil War" premiered at this year's SXSW festival to positive acclaim. The movie opened this weekend in theaters, and I couldn't wait to see it, based in the trailer. The movie is currently rated 82% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, which feels very generous to me. The Friday matinee showing where I saw this at was poorly attended (about 10 people in a very large auditorium). If you are in the mood to find out how a modern day civil war could play out in the US without any further context or background information, I'd suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

As Episode 1 of "Ripley" (2024 release; 8 episodes ranging from 44 to 76 min) opens, it is "Rome, 1961" and we see Ripley dragging a dead body down the stairs. We then go to "Six Months Earlier", with Ripley living in New York and barely getting by. Then one day he gets contacted by a shipbuilder on Long Island, whose son has disappeared somewhere in Italy, and would Ripley want to find him and convince him to return to New York... At this point we are 10 minutes of Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this is written, produces and directed by Steve Zaillian, whose script for Schindler's List won an Oscar. Here Zaiilian revisits Patricia Highsmith's books on the conman that was Tom Ripley. Like many of you, I watched the 1999 movie starring Matt Damon, and quite liked it. But let me state right away that there is zero doubt in my mind that this 2024 mini-series is superior to the 1999 movie. For one, the script for this mini-series is very strong. It may bother some people that this is slow-paced. I for one am very grateful for that, as we get to see the characters fully develop before our eyes. It also apparently bothers some that the mini-series in shot entirely in B&W. I happen to think this works very well, considering the setting (early 60s). (As an aside, Zaillian has stated that the cover of a Ripley book he read had a B&W photo which inspired him to shoot the series in B&W.) Last and certainly not least, the production sets are exquisite (look at all of the details). And quite helpful is the very strong cast, including Andrew Scott as Ripley, Johnny Flynn as Dickie, and an unrecognizable Dakota Fanning as Marge.

"Ripley" started streaming on Netflix last weekend, and I watched it spread over 3 evenings. The mini-series is currently rated 85% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes and that sounds about right to me. If you have any interest in the Ripley character or are simply in the mood for an engaging mini-series about a conman, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

As "Scoop" (2024 release from the UK; 102 min) opens, it is "New York 2010" and a British celebrity photographer shoots pictures of Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein during a walk in Central Park. We then go to "Nine Years Later" and shortly after Epstein is arrested and kills himself, there is tremendous pressure on Prince Andrew to explain his friendship with Epstein. At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from British director Philip Martin ("Hawking"). Based on the 2022 book "Scoops" by BBC Newsnight producer Sam McAlister, the film in essence falls into two parts: how was McAlister able to convince Prince Andrew (and his small entourage) to agree to the interview, and once they agreed to the interview, how did both sides prepare for the interview. The cherry on top of the cake is of course the interview itself, carefully reconstructed and recreated. If there is one common theme in all of it, it is how insanely clueless and completely out of touch Prince Andrew is with reality and with how this would be received by the public at large. Andrew is fully convinced the interview went well. To be clear: the interview could hardly have gone any worse for Andrew. The move benefits enormously from a strong collective performance by the cast, including Billie Piper as Sam McAlister, Rufus Sewell as Andrew, and last but certainly not least, a brilliant Gillian Anderson as Emily Maitlis (the BBC Newsnight interviewer). Bottom line: even though we of course know the outcome before we watch this, "Scoop" makes for a great journalism drama, and ik kept my attention from start to finish.

"Scoop" premiered on Netflix last weekend, and I just saw it the other night. It is currently rated 76% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, which feels about right to me. If you have any interest in the British royal family or in the BBC, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

"Hotel Coolgardie" (2016 release from Australia; 84 min.) brings the story of Lina and Stephanie, two young women from Finland who arrive in Perth looking for a job to earn some money. They are assigned for a 3 month stint at a bar in Coolgardie, a small mining town that is a 6 h. Drive east from Perth, and literally in the middle of nowhere, Upon starting their stint as barmaids, it's not long before Lina and Stephanie are subjected to all kinds of sexism and worse... At this point we are 10 min into the documentary.

Couple of comments: it all starts very innocently, but once the real character of the locals of Coolgardie comes to the forefront, things get ugly pretty quickly. One of the girls comments that "people are either depressed or sad", and that just about sums it up. Except that it is inexcusable what the two Finnish ladies are put through. Apparently sending young females out to bartend in remote places is a flourishing business (because they don't know what they are getting into). This documentary is bound to make you feel deeply uncomfortable, but as a documentary it is priceless, providing a glimpse into something that is out there in remote Australia...

Let me confess that I had never heard of this movie, but Amazon Prime suggested it to me based on my viewing habits (I love me a good documentary). Even though the subject matter isn't the easiest, this is currently rated 94% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and for good reason. If you love a good documentary and don't mind feeling uncomfortable at times, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As Episode 1 of "Together: TR3BLE Winners" (2024 release; 6 episodes ranging between 42 and 48 min) opens, it is "24 May 2022" as Haaland makes a decision which team he will join, and the choice is Manchester City. We then go to "22 August 2022" as Pep addresses the players about the upcoming season's challenges and opportunities... At this point we are less than 10 minutes into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: this mini-series is aimed primarily at ManCity fans, to (re)celebrate and remember the extraordinary season that was 22-23. ManCity has fans around the world, and I venture to say that most of them will never have a chance to see the team play live (living in the US, I am one of them--although I did tour the Etihad Stadium in September, 2019). The best bits of this mini-series are the "behind closed doors" scenes. Watch how Pep addresses his players both in great moments (after trashing ManUnited 6-3: "You were brilliant but I push you yo be more perfect") and in low moments (after 2-0 to a low-ranked Southampton that would soon be relegated). In fact I would say that Pep is the central figure of the entire mini=series, and to see him at work is worth every minute of this mini-series. There are also a lot of fun scenes among the players (watch Halland make fun of KDB's fashion sense, to which KDB responds "I don't care"). Perhaps the biggest surprise for me was that the one player who shows the most leadership is not KDB, or Halland, or Silva. No, it is in fact Rodri, who time and again steps up in the locker room addressing his teammates.

"Together: TR3BLE Winners" recently started streaming on Netflix, just as the Premier League, the FA Cup, and the Champions League of 23-24 are "rounding third and heading for home". ManCity is still battling on all three fronts again this year. Can they pull off another treble? If you are a ManCity fan, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion. If you are a football fan but not a Cityzens supporter, I'd give it a shot with the 1st episode and see if you can warm up for it. I'll be honest, if this was a mini-series about Arsenal or Liverpool, I'd pass...

As "Frida" (2024 release; 84 min.) opens, we are introduced to Frida Kahlo, a painter from Mexico from the early-to-mid 1900s. The documentary reminds us that she left a large legacy of writings including an illustrated diary and letters, and that all commentary we hear are Frida's own words. We then go back to "1910" to Frida's earliest years.... At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this movie is a labor of love from editor Carla Guttierez, making her directorial debut. With the help of several animators, Kahlo's life, works and times are presented on a grand and colorful scale. I was generally aware of who Frida Kahlo was, but didn't know many of the personal details that are brought forward in the documentary, including the devastating bus crash that she was involved in (in 1925), which had significant physical consequences the rest of her life. Part of the charm of this documentary is also looking back at what life was like in the 1920's-30's-40's. Check out the footage of when Friday and her husband (the renowned Mexican painter Diego Rivera) visit New York and Detroit in the early 1930's. Not to be picky, but couldn't Guttierez come up with a better film title than the generic "Frida"? That aside, I found this documentary thoroughly enjoyable (and, dare I say, educational) from start to finish.

"Frida" premiered at this year's Sundance film festival, to immediate critical acclaim. The movie is currently rated 905 Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and for good reason. The movie started streaming on Amazon Prime Video 2 weeks ago, and I caught up with it last night. If you have any interest in arts, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

As "To Kill A Tiger" (2022 release from India; 127 min) opens, we are introduced to Ranjit, a father living with his family in remote Jharkhand, India. We learn that his 13 yo daughter was raped by 3 young men, and at his daughter's urging, he decides to file a law suit against the 3 men. This leads to major tensions within the village... At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: the horrible events took place in 2017, and then the film makers team up with the family and with a local women's rights nonprofit. This was filmed over a long, long time as the case worked itself through the Indian legal system. More importantly, we get great insight as to how the remote village where this happened reacts. Let's just say that this does not go well, and I'm being mild. I found myself astonished, if not infuriated, how the villagers act in all this, literally as if it is the 13 yo's fault for being raped. There are no words. Aside from the moral outrage, we get a true picture of what life in rural India is really like on a day-to-day basis. People living on scraps of food, and not knowing how they'll get by a week or a month from now. The MAGA extremists who can't stop whining and complaining on a daily basis how terrible life has become in the US should take a look at this movie, and then drop to their knees and thank their lucky stars they live here and how privileged they are to live here. All that aside, kudos to the 13 yo girl for her (and her parents') bravery to stand up, despite all of the pressures and barriers.

"To Kill A Tiger" premiered at the 2022 Toronto International Film Festival but it didn't get shown in the US until the summer of 2023, reason why it wasn't eligible for Best Documentary Oscar consideration until this most recently cycle. Indeed it was nominated. It's currently rated 100% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and for good reason. "To Kill A Tiger" is now streaming on Netflix, where I caught it last night. If you have any interest what life in rural India is like, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As "Freaknik: The Wildest Party Never told" (2024 release; 82 min.) opens, rapper Killer Mike reflects on how Atlanta reflects on how Atlanta has become a Mecca" for black arts, culture and everything else. We then go back in time to "1983" when the first Black College Spring Break (later renamed Freaknik) was organized by Atlanta HBCU's. At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie...

Couple of comments: this is the latest from producer-writer-director P. Frank Williams. He has recruited a slew of talking heads that were there to witness it all (or in part if they were late comers), with many of them also serving as executive producers, including Luke Campbell, Jermaine Dupri, 21 Savage, Geraldine Porras, and others. I was generally not familiar with Freaknik and was curious to check this out. As with many organically grown events that as some point evolve into something much bigger, there are some good things and some not so good things, but it is a fascinating look into Black America, not unlike, say, the Oscar-winning "Summer Of Soul" documentary was a few years ago. To be fair, "Freaknik" suffers a bit when compared to "Summer of Soul", which was just magical from start to finish. "Freaknik" is magical for a while, and then suddenly it isn't anymore, before becoming ugly altogether.

"Freaknik: The Wildest Party Never Told" premiered at this year's SXSW film festival and then started streaming on Hulu last weekend, where I caught it last night. If you have any interest in either Atlanta or in Black history, I'd readily suggest you check it out and draw your own conclusion.

As "Shirley" (2024 release; 118 min) opens, we are reminded that Brooklyn's Shirley Chisholm was the first Black woman elected to the US Congress, in 1966, among a sea of white males newcomers. We then go to "December, 1971" as Chisholm decides to run for the US presidency in a crowded field and with little chance of actually winning.... At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from writer-director John Ridley (best known for his script for "12 Years A Slave"). Here he looks back at what basically amounts to a footnote in US political history. Question: who was the first Black woman elected to US Congress? Answer: Shirley Chisholm. Question: who was the first Black woman to run for president? Answer: Chisholm again. This film focuses solely on her 1972 presidential run, and hence this is NOT a biopic of Shirley Chisholm. We are given no background or context, none whatsoever, on how this woman got elected to Congress in the first place, or what she did in Congress. As to the movie itself, it struggles to get off the ground, although there are some good moments, in particular towards the end. The movie benefits enormously from the strong lead performance by Regina King ("If Beale Street Could Talk"). Lucas Hedges plays Robert, a national student representative. Bottom line is this: we all know the outcome of Chisholm's 1972 presidential run before we even watch this, so the assumption is that we watch this for the journey, rather than the end result. Turns out that journey isn't all that interesting, even if the concept itself (a Black woman running for president? In 1972? She is DEACDES ahead of her time) is momentous. I'd rather have watched and learned how Chisholm raised to prominence to begin with by getting elected to Congress in the first place. As a complete aside, I must point out that significant chunks of the movie were filmed in Cincinnati (where I live), standing in once again for New York of the 1960-70s (see also Todd Haynes' "Carole"). Also this: couldn't the film makers come up with a sharper movie title than the lame and generic "Shirley"?

"Shirley" received a one week limited theatrical run in Mid-March and then starting streaming on Netflix last week. "Shirley" is currently rated a respectable 70% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. That feels a little high to me. "Shirley" is well-meant, for sure, but I'd rather have watched a biopic of this barrier breaking woman. If you have any interest in politics, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As "The Persian Version" (2023 release; 107 min.) opens, we are introduced to Leila, a twenty-some yo living in Brooklyn whose parents immigrated from Iran to the US in 1967. Leila had been told that they moved because there was a shortage of doctors in the US (her dad being a doctor). Then one day Leila's grandmother tells her that there is another (Persian) version why they moved, to escape a scandal. Leila is determined to get to the bottom of this...

Couple of comments: as the movie opens, we are reminded that this is "A True Story... Sort Of". The movie is written and directed by Maryam Keshavarz and is more or less based on her own family's story. At its core, the movie reflects on Leila's uneasy relationship with her mom. Then in extended flashbacks we learn the background story of her mom, growing up in arch-conservative Iran in the the 60s. Watching the movie, I couldn't help but think back on "My Big Fat Greek Wedding", even if the latter is outright more comedy than is "The Persian Version", which is more reflective and introspective. The two leads, Layla Mohammadi as Leila, and. Niousha Noor as her mom, are outstanding, and a joy to watch.

"The Persian Version" premiered at last year's Sundance film festival to immediate critical acclaim and was promptly acquired by Sony Pictures Classics. There is good reason why this is currently rated 83% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. After a brief US theatrical run last Fall, the movie is now streaming on Netflix, where I caught it last night. If you have any interest in understanding one family's transformation and adaptation coming from Iran to the US, I'd readily suggest you check this out and draw your own conclusion.

As "Dream Scenario" (2023 release; 102 min.) opens, we are introduced to Paul, a professor at the local university. After a theater outing, Claire, an old friend of Paul's runs into Paul and his wife Janet. Claire confesses that Paul is routinely pooping up in her dreams. Next things we know, this is happening with many other people as well (but not with his wife or daughters). What is going on here? At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: "Dream Scenario" is the brainchild of writer-director Kristoffer Borgli (a native of Norway). Here he comes up with the off-kilter idea: what happens to a guy who is popping up in people's dreams? The movie is plot-heavy so the less said of that, the better. Just watch! What I can say is that good chunks of the feel like an out-0f-body experience. I also was reminded of "Requiem For a Dream", even though "Dream Scenario" is NOT a drugs-related movie. And then there is Nicolas Cage, as Paul. Cage brings a performance that is one of the very best of his career, I'm not kidding. Michael Cera plays the head of a digital marketing company. Upon-and-coming Dylan Gelula has a nice role in Molly (also at that marketing company). For me the movie was very, very good until about three-fourths of the way through, Then it seems Borgli wasn't sure how the wrap things up.

"Dream Scenario" premiered at lsat Fall's TOronto International Film Festival to immediate acclaim (and buzz about Cage's "comeback"). The movie played in theaters in December (and earned Cage an Golden Globe nomination). The movie is currently rated 92% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, and for good reason. The movie is now streaming on Max, where I caught it last night. If you are in the mood for an off-center and original psychological drama starring an outstanding Nicolas Cage, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As "Democracy On Trial" (2024 release; 142 min.) opens, Trump returns to Washington, DC for the first time since leaving office, to face a criminal indictment for what happened on January 6, 2021. It is the first time in our country's history that a former president faces criminal consequences for his actions while in office. We then switch to the Select Committee of January 6, which was formed following the Republicans' refusal to form a bipartisan committee to investigate what happened on that fateful day. Never before in the history of our country has there been a failure to constitute a bipartisan committee following such momentous moment... At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: this is directed by Michael Kirk, a veteran of the long-running PBS Frontline franchise (and now in its 42nd season). There are many, many programs and documentaries out there on various aspects of what happened in the 2020 presidential election and its aftermath, culminating in the January 6 insurrection. But I don't recall there being on single documentary that summarizes it all so clearly in one fell swoop. And when you see it laid out like it is in this documentary, the inescapable conclusion one is left with is how chilling and how so(m)ber it all is. This wasn't just an accidental outburst. Trump and his lackies knew very well what they were doing, and chose to pursue a path, at whatever the cost, to cripple our democracy and retain power. The crowd that shows up on January 6 was called there by Trump, and then sent down Pennsylvania Avenue "to fight like hell". Also made clear is how Trump's never-ending lies and gaslighting has real life consequences, destroying people's lives along the way (cue: Ruby Freeman, the election worker in Georgia). But THE moment of this recounting of the 2020 election for me comes when the Arizona Speaker of the House meets with Rudy Giuliani. Who had promised to provide bullet-proof evidence of voter fraud, only to hear Giuliani admit that "We have a lot of theories, but we don't have the evidence". Wow, just wow.

"Democracy On Trial" premiered on PBS about a month ago, and I just now caught up with it. If you have any interest in politics in general, and in the events of the 2020 elections specifically, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As Episode 1 of "The Outreau Case: A French Nightmare" (2024 release; 4 episodes of about 45 min.) opens, we are reminded of the vast scope of this tragedy: 18 kids having endured sexual crimes allegedly committed by 17 adults in the norther France suburb of Outreasu, near Bologne-sur-Mer. We then go back in time to "February 22, 2001", when an investigation is opened and we hear from the Examining Magistrate how it all started... At this point we are 10 minutes into Episode 1.

Couple of comments: let me admit that I had never heard of this case before. It shook all of France, and we understand why as the events unfold in Episode 1 and later on. The crimes truly shock the conscience. Unless the crimes were not committed? This documentary mini-series exposes the French judicial system. Without spoiling anything, there are things happening in the trial that will leave you incredulous. If not infuriated. Even though these 4 episodes fly by quickly, I must admit that it makes for overall grim viewing, so you have been warned!

"The Outreau Case: A French Nightmare" recently started streaming on Netflix. If you are interested in true crime documentaries and can put up with the overall grim nature of this particular mini-series, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As "Stormy" (2023 release; 110 min.) opens, it is "March 30, 2023" as Trump is criminally indicted for the hush payment made in Fall of 2016 to Stormy Daniels to cover up his affair with her in 2006. In 2018, the Wall Street Journal reports on the hush payment, and all hell breaks loose. We then go back in time as we learn of Stormy's troubled youth in Baton Rouge, LA... At this point we are 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: let me state upfront that while of course I am aware of the hush payment and Trump's subsequent lying about it, I was not aware of all the details. Much of the footage in the documentary comes from 2018, detailing with the fallout after the WSJ's report. With Trump's and the White House's machination in full force and effect, it is literally a David v. Goliath battle: the President of the United States v. A porn star. Along the way we get almost unfettered access to what that felt like as it plays out in real life. Check out the media frenzy, and the enormous pressure Stormy faced (and still faces) from the MAGA world. It's absolutely insane. Meanwhile Trump continues to deny, deny, deny. But soon (in mid-April or so) the chickens are coming home to roost for Orange Jesus... Please note that the overall rating of this documentary here in IMDb (currently 5.2 stars) is grossly misleading, as there are hundreds of ratings but less than 10 reviews so far. Almost certainly much of these ratings have come from white trash Let's Go Brandon MAGA folks who have not seen the documentary, and are too dumb to recognize a quality documentary if it hit them in the face. ("Stormy" is currently rated a very respectable 71% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.)

"Stormy" started streaming on Peacock earlier this week, and I caught it last night. I was quite surprised how effective this documentary turned out to be. If you are interested in politics, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

As "Love Lies Bleeding" (2024 release; 104 min) opens, we are introduced to Lou, who manages a gym. Visiting the gym is Jackie, who is making her way to a bodybuilding competition in Vegas. Lou and Jackie immediately click and hit it off. In a parallel story, we get to know Lou's sister Beth, who is married to J. J., an up to no good loser. At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is the second film by up-and-coming British director Rose Glass ("Saint Maud"). Here she dives head-on into a crime drama the likes if which you have not seen much before. The movie is super plot-heavy so the less said about that, the better. I will comment that the movie benefits tremendously from the strong lead performances by Kirsten Stewart (as Lou) and Katie O'Brian (as Jackie). Stewart couldn't be further away from the Twilight movies, and couldn't be happier. Ed Harris has a smaller but still juicy part as Lou's father. But in the end the credit for this film must go to Rose Glass, who brings us something off-kilter, but with great result.

"Love Lies Bleeding" premiered at this year's Sundance film festival, to immediate critical acclaim. There is good reason why this movie is currently rated 92% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. The Sunday matinee screening where I saw this at today was not attended well. Exactly 1 other person besides myself (a "half private" screening). If you are in the mood for an off-kilter crime drama with strong lead performances, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.