Under the Skin

Director: Jonathan Glazer

Cast: Scarlett Johansson

Genre: Sci-fi/Fantasy/Thriller 2013

Running time: 108 mins.

Rating:★★★★

A voluptuous woman (Scarlett Johanson)  of unknown origin combs the highway in search of isolated or forsaken men, luring a succession of lost souls into an otherworldly lair. They are seduced, stripped of their humanity, and never heard from again. Based on the novel by Michael Faber, this film examines human experience from the perspective of an unforgettable heroine who grows too comfortable in her borrowed skin, until she is abducted into humanity with devastating results.

Silence as the opening credits are presented in darkness, then a small light in the distance with the quick strokes of violins. As the light comes closer, it almost seems like a sworm of bees are about to attack and preparing the audience to meet their doom. Curiousity heightens, when a dead girl is carried into a stark white room only for the clothes and the observation of an ant that has been crawling on the corpse. The dark contrast and the ominous soundtrack is absolutely well done. No predictablity, don't know what to expect, or why the main character (Scarlett Johanson) is trying seduce these men. Even with simple dark stage and single spotlight, repeating itself with different guy and it slowly revealing what's happening to her victims. You're left with two things, wow the director must be a huge fan of Kubrick's 2001 Space Odyssey (as far as the cinematography) and what is the ending goal of her seduction? The memories made in a man's life? Why men who alone, lonely, or have no one? Why was the Elephant man set free? Did she only have a limited amount to do what she needed to do and observe "the unknown"?

It's interesting, when she makes an attempt to fit in, but can't so she runs away. Deep into a strange woods, finding what seems to be a friendly stranger, and locks herself in an "abandon" cottage. Who's the lonely outsider now? But is she really alone? 

However, when you stop expecting answers to the plethora of questions in your mind, you can begin to appreciate its beauty. To enjoy the simple things in nature. Perhaps, the film is a commentary to our relationships with people and how it still makes us feels so alone and an outsider, at times. If we aren't careful, we can get hit with how much we're not alone in an unwanted way.

Repentance

Director: Philippe Caland
Cast: Anthony Mackie, Forest Whitaker, Mike Epps, Sanaa Lathan, Nicole Ari Parker
Genre: Suspense/Thriller 2014
Running time: 90 mins.

Rating:★★★★

Years after a drunken car crash that almost took his life, Thomas Carter (Anthony Mackie) has reinvented himself as a therapist/spiritual advisor who advocates a synthesis of world religions and positivity. He's parlayed this vocation into a successful book release that draws the attention of Angel Sanchez (Forest Whitaker), a profoundly troubled man fixated on the untimely death of his mother. When Carter takes on Sanchez as a personal client in an effort to raise funds for his indebted brother Ben (Mike Epps), things quickly take a turn for the worse. Angel needs much more than a simple life coach. Single actions in the past comprise tidal waves of reactions in the present.

The mysterious headlights slowly making its way down the black screen, along with the music score, during the opening credits perfectly illustrates that it could be any other night and the event about to happen is unexpected. All in good fun can change one's life that may seem hard to overcome. Trying to find peace, move on, and not be haunted by something that happened four years ago. However, does a man that Thomas (Anthony Mackie) meets at one of his book signing, by chance or by fate? And when his brother drops by suddenly, what secret, in his near death experience, is Thomas trying to surpress? 

Love the vast difference in atmosphere between the seemly warm and put together of Thomas's house and the washed out, dark, and decaying of Angel's (Forest Whitaker) house. Their work together to aid in Angel's inner demons, will it unearth Thomas's demons instead? A powerful film that hit the audience to the core, relatable to everyone's desire to have the all of the pain, in one's past, to be taken away forever like magic. In turn to be free of its imprisonment, although life is not like that and the frustration, feels as if it's eating us away.

Whitaker plays an amazing mental-unstable man, making all the plot twists totally unexpected, captivating, and scary. The film is very reminent of Misery (1990) and The Collector (1965)

 in whole new level that is fantastic.

The Monuments Men

Director: George Clooney

Cast: George Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett, John Goodman

Genre: Action/Drama/War/Biography 2014

Running time: 110 mins.

Rating:★★

Based on the true story of the greatest treasure hunt in history, the film is an action drama focusing on an unlikely World War II platoon, tasked by FDR with going into Germany to rescue artistic masterpieces from Nazi thieves and returning them to their rightful owners. It would be an impossible mission: with the art trapped behind enemy lines, and with the German army under orders to destroy everything as the Reich fell, how could these guys - seven museum directors, curators, and art historians, all more familiar with Michelangelo than the M-1 - possibly hope to succeed? But as the Monuments Men, as they were called, found themselves in a race against time to avoid the destruction of 1000 years of culture, they would risk their lives to protect and defend mankind's greatest achievements.

Religious paintings are being taken down in a cathedral, a priest is going in hiding with new clothes, and taken away in a truck. But why? Only unnecessary suspense music to make known to the audience that the Nazis are the ones stealing Renaissance artwork. Then you get an overly patriotic cock-a-bullshit art history lesson from George Clooney's character and how it's their duty to make sure the statue of David is still standing. The way of how the beginning series of events are about to prevail before the actual mission is very reminiscent of 1940's films and Sixties' James Bond films, especially in cinematography and dialogue. Which is sort of appropriate for the time period that it's portraying, but it's a little like reinventing the wheel. Cate Blanchett's and John Goodman's porformances seems to be the only thing making the film worth while seeing. Matt Damon and George Clooney's performances are annoying and campy, I rather go through jury duty selection again instead. Prior to going to the theater, I for one second or rather hoped that for once Bill Murray would actual be in a non-comedy role, but naive me was mislead. The film tries to make the horrors of WWII joyful, comical, and the American duty to save the day like Captain America. 

On a positive note, the composition of the countryside, train station, and architecture over in Europe is beautiful as well as reflects the decay of war upon them. The costume design in its muted browns, grays, blues, and crimson wonderfully reflects the hardship that war brings, psychologically and psychically. Finally, the Dirty Dozen rip-off makes the film a bore because again the film seems try to reinvent the wheel. Though, as an artist, this true story is kind of awesome!

Anything Else

Director: Woody Allen

Cast: Woody Allen, Jason Briggs, Stockhard Channing, Danny DeVito, Jimmy Fallon, Christina Ricci

Genre: Romance/ Comedy 2003

Running time: 108 mins.

Rating:★★★★

Jerry Falk (Jason Biggs) is an aspiring writer living in New York City, who falls in love at first sight with Amanda (Christina Ricci) and begins having an affair. He eventually tells his girlfriend about it so that she will dump him, because Falk cannot end relationships. Seeking advice, Jerry turns to an aging struggling artist (Woody Allen) who acts as his oracle — and that includes trying to help sort out Jerry’s romantic life.

It wouldn't be a Woody Allen film, if there wasn't some  jazz, New York City, and  highly intelligent neurotic characters. What more could you ask for. Most of his films begin with a seemingly unrelated verbal story and a short monologue with the audience on how the main character got into his current situation. If you're still not convinced then Allen's role as one of the characters, how the dialogue is written, or the format of the opening, then I can't help ya. It's simply magnificent, because is done too often anymore, when some words of wisdom written on the screen before each new segment of the plot that not only gives a hint of what is about to unfold (similar to a chapter title in a novel), but also reminisces the silent pictures' era.

In this film, the couple, on their anniversary, recall how they first met. Of course, but not always, in true Woody Allen fashion, the two "lovebirds" are already in another relationship, have similar philosophical ideas and interests. Yet, they are still total opposites of one another. Jerry can't not be in a relationship and Amanda can't commit. They begin an affair nonetheless, filled with dark comedic ups and downs. The last lines wrap up the film perfectly, "How strange life is. How full of inexplicable mystery(Falk).....Well, you know. That's like anything else. (Cab driver)."

Overnight Delivery

Director: Jason Bloom

Cast: Reese Witherspoon, Paul Rudd, Christine Taylor, Sarah Silverman, Larry Drake

Genre: Romance/Comedy 1998

Running time: 87 mins.

Rating:★★

Naive college student, Wyatt Trips (Paul Rudd) has it all, a perfect girlfriend, Kim(Christine Taylor), who he is going to spend the rest of his life. That is until he suspects her of cheating on him with a guy named "the Raditch". In the mist of his sorrows, Trips meets Ivy (Reese Witherspoon), a rebellious student at his school. With Ivy's help, Trips writes a letter to end it with his girlfriend before she has a chance to, but quickly finds out that he's wrong! Now he has 24 hours to stop the package, prevent disaster, and save his relationship with his potential wife. The major obstacle is that the delivery man won't stop until the package is delivered.

First of all, it's quite clear that Kim isn't perfect right at the start of the film. She just loves the ego boost that Trips gives her as he acts like an excited little, willing to do anything to keep and win her affection. So, she puts on a facade, that he clearly can't see through because otherwise there wouldn't be a reason for a plot, of being a good girl who wants to wait for the right moment before being allowing guy to deflower her. It is also quite clear that she hasn't broken up with him yet because when she does get her heart stomped on by other men, she can always have Trips run to her side and make her feel like a goddess again. Poor naive and sexually frustrated Trips goes back to his college, that "just so happens" to be miles and miles away from Kim, thinking this girl is the only girl for him. Then, of course, "shit hits the fan" and he meets Ivy, who cuts right through the bullshit, helps him in writing/stopping the letter, and helps him in finally shaking off his attentive puppy-dog mentality. In some ways, Ivy is just as naive as he is, which makes them more of a perfect match.

It's a cute film with all the usual ups and downs that a Romantic-Comedy should. An extreme nineties flick that falls short in charms when compared to other films of the same decade: Never Been Kissed, Empire Records, 10 Things I Hate About You....

I hate Valentine's Day

 Director: Nia Vardalos

Cast: Nia Vardalos, John Corbett, Stephen Guarino, Amir Arison, Zoe Kazan, Gary Wilmes, Mike Starr, Rachel Dratch

Genre: Comedy/Romance 2009

Running time: 98 mins.

Rating:★★

A charismatic florist, Genevieve (Nia Vardalos), who loves to be in love, quick at giving good advice, and LOVES Valentine's Day. She also has 5-dates-limit to enjoy the romance at its finest and  doesn't have to worry about it fizzling out. This usually keeps her happy until she meets a new restaurateur, Greg, who has no problem with commitment, but always seems to get his heart broken. In an attempt to follow Genevieve's rule and "date" her, they may end up wanting more from each other.

A film that seems that it would be better suited for television than a major motion production. At times, it appears the actors are just reading their lines than embodying the characters that they are suppose to portray. This could be due to the

script or the directing, which is a bit odd coming from the same woman, who gave us My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Nonetheless, this film seems attempt in pulling on the audience's sappy "oh this what romance is", which may be the point as a method for us to easily slip into Genievieve's shoes. The screen, she puts up to hide the psychological issue that explains the 5-dates-limit. However, you don't care or more not interested because of its predictability and lack of really delving into the backstory (giving the explanation of "just take our word for it). All end well, eventually. It is, however, a light-hearted film for those who want; a- something romantic to watch with your significant other or b- a chick-flick that allows your brain to unwind and be happy.

Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events

 

Director: Bill Silberling

Cast: Jim Carrey, Merryl Streep, Jude Law, Timothy Spall, Billy Connelly, Catherine O'Hara, Liam Aikens, Emily Brownings, Kara and Shelby Hoffman

Genre: Adventure/Comedy 2004

Running time: 108 mins.

Rating:★★½ 

Based on the novels written by Daniel Handler, three children; Violet, Klaus, and Sunny (Emily Brownings, Liam Aikens, Kara and Shelby Hoffman), are left in the custody of cousin and stage actor Count Olaf (Jim Carrey) after a massive fire kills their parents. Through a series of unfortunate events, the children must stop Count Olaf from achieve is goal of stealing their parents vast fortune.

Surreal imagery, an all-star cast, and just a delightfully fun film to watch. However, just because it's a "children/family" film, doesn't mean you have to skimp and overreach the big mystery on the children's parents' secret. And the artsy-fartsy rip-off of Tim Burton-esque dark-blue contrasts in costume design, make-up, and set designs, which makes you quite quizzical on the director of the tv show, Judging Amy, on this particular project. Jim Carrey's comedy has gone stale with immature-frat boy-nothing new nor whimsicalness about his performance. Who would I have chosen for the role of Count Olaf then? Not Johnny Depp, even he has unfortunately lost his edge. Merryl Streep, Billy Connelly, Timothy Spall, Jude Law, AND (oh yes! A surprise appearance) Dustin Hoffman are the only reasons that would make the film worth while to see.

I can not help, but to hear the voice of my mother, when she says that "the book is always better than the movie." Although, I have yet to read the series, based on watching this film, my mother maybe right. There is also, Nanny McPhee-esque rip off too, which is odd to say because that film came out the following year. Nonetheless, Nanny McPhee was a much better film than this overachievement. Finally and on a pleasant note, a scene, I did enjoy the most as far as imagery goes, was when the last reminents of Aunt Josephine's (Merryl Streep) house is engulfed by the sea. The hope of a home is yet again lost, unattainable, and seemly without reason. Which the children find, as the audience finds, that home was with them all along, in each other.

Ben-Hur

Director: William Wyler

Cast: Charleton Heston, Jack Hawkins, Haya Harareet, Stephen Boyd, Hugh Griffith, Martha Scott, Frank Thring

Genre: Adventure/Drama 1959

Running time: 212 mins.

Rating:★★★★

During the birth, lifetime, and death of Jesus Christ; comes a story of Judah Ben-Hur (Charleton Heston), a wealthy prince and merchant in Jersulem. A childhood friend, now a Roman tribune, Messala (Stephen Boyd), betrays Ben-Hur into slavery. After many years of struggle, Ben-Hur takes revenge for his people, and triumphs in freedom. 

Oh the good ol' days, when there was still an overture. Not only setting the tone of story about to be told, but allowed any strangling movie goers, who were late in coming, wouldn't miss anything. The set was elaborate, theatrically epic, and breathtakingly beautiful. The script was powerfully poetic, an art form, and unrealistic. The extras and the costume designs aided beautifully in setting the tone along with the music, the struggle of hardship towards the lead characters, and the god-like perfection of other characters. And scenes that gave just enough for the audience to catch wind into the psyche of a character or what is going on and didn't just assume that the audience was too stupid to figure stuff out on their own. This film is a perfect example of what a movie should do, an escape from the viewer's own life and transported into a fantasy and a dream. It speaks for itself. Plus, you have Charleton Heston, what more could one ask for? Nothing.

Dolls

Director: Stuart Gordon

Cast: Ian Patrick Williams, Carolyn Purdy-Gordon, Carrie Lorraine, Guy Rolfe, Hiliary Mason, Stephen Lee

Genre: Fantasy/Horror 1987

Running time: 77 mins.

Rating:★★

A wealthy and nasty couple, David and Rosemary Bower (Ian Patrick Williams and Carolyn Purdy-Gordon), along with the man's daughter, Judy (Carrie Lorraine), get their car stuck in the middle of nowhere during a storm. The Bowers seek refuge in an old mansion, where they are welcomed in by an elderly couple, who make toys. What David and Rosemary want more then anything is to send Judy, who has a very "active" imagination, back with her mother. The surprise they receive, along with the other stranded guests, will make them wish that they were still a child at heart!

A Vincent Price-esque-Seventies horror movie flare with some pretty awesome Eighties special effects. However, some of the problems of this film is that it leaves too much assumption that the audience knows what's going on with the personal tensions between David, Rosemary, and Judy, the horridness of David and Rosemary, and the imaginative, innocence of Judy, and the mysteriousness-eerieness of the elderly couple that the film becomes a bit campy. AND, so you don't question their existence/need in the film, the two Mandonna-wannabes almost get run over by the Brewers near the beginning. A LOT! Of the performances were over acted, minus perhaps Guy Rolfe's, Carrie Lorraine's, Hiliary Mason's characters as the elderly toy makers and Judy, that you kind of that someone would swat them with a flyswatter, so that they would either tone it down or actually act! 

The subtle build up to revealing that the Dolls are not only alive, but malicious too is pretty fantastic, as well as, what ends up happening to the not-so-nice people. Yet, the film leaves you with a lot of questions that the director must have thought he made clear. Were all the toys once people? What happens once the people do turn into dolls? Do they continue "the punishment" of any visitors who have lost the child within? Why do they have to die or near to death to become dolls? The dolls are evil, but somehow never harm children because of the "obvious"? Do the toymakers actually make any of the toys non-magically? Nonetheless, the film gives you enough of a scare to want to be nice and appreciate dolls. Bells sot of covered on my end.

Gnomeo and Juliet

Director: Kelly Asbury
Cast: James McAvoy, Emily Blunt, Ashley Jensen, Michael Caine,  Matt Lucas, Jim Cummings, Maggie Smith, Jason Statham, Ozzy Osbourne, Stephen Merchant, Patrick Stewart, Julie Walters, Hulk Hogan, Kelly Asbury, Richard Wilson, Dolly Parton
Genre: Animation/Comedy/Romance
Running time: 84 mins. 2011
Rating:★★★

In the neighboring gardens of Montague and Capulet on Verona Avenue, the red and the blue gnomes are at war with one another. But for Gnomeo and Juliet, in this animated film retelling of William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, it is love that may triumph a new ending.

As probably with the majority of the population, who had seen the advertisements and trailers of this film (when it was released to the silver screen in 2011), an overwhelming feeling of disgust. Here seemed like another perfect example of Hollywood running out of ideas for films. Throughout cinematic history, Romeo and Juliet has been retold several times from Jerome Robbins's and Robert Wise's in 1961 (West Side Story),  Franco Zeffirelli's in 1968 ( which is the only film on the list that should matter, aside from West Side Story, which is neither here nor there), Baz Luhrmann's in 1996 (a vommit-garbage of a shit film... If you're going to do modern adaptation then use modern language and that's only skimming the surface of this horrific monstrosity. Another horrendous element was Leonardo Di-Crap-pio), Alan Brown's in 2011 ( gay cadets in a military? Could be interesting, but then again, I've seen a LGBT-Shakespeare film that tried too hard, it went limp), and Carlo Carle's in 2013 (which might have been a good idea that I didn't know it's existence during it availability in the theaters because I would keil over in more disgust from Hollywood's continuos proof of their lack of new ideas). 

In finally seeing this film, the intial disgust turned into an enjoyable retelling that has similar wittiness as Shrek and Toy Story. Well, depending on how you want to look at, the subtle or not so subtle references to Shakespeare's work. For instance the mailboxes of Capulet and Montague,  2B and not 2B. But overall, a delightful twist that is better than one would intially think, offshoots from the already well known tragedy into the inner-child imagination of what lawn ornaments do when we're not around. Finally, with an all-star cast that makes the film worth seeing, if you still have hesitation or disgust in watching it.

All the Kind Strangers

Director: Burt Kennedy

Cast: Stacy Keach, Samantha Eggar, John Savage, Robby Benson

Genre: Thriller 1974

Running time: 73 mins

Rating:★★½ 

A photojournalist, Jimmy Wheeler (Stacy Keach) is on his way to California for his story. During his journey, in the middle of the country, he passes a seven year old boy carrying grocery bag that is bigger than he is. As the kind stranger that he is, Wheeler offers the boy a ride home. However, unbeknownst to Wheeler that in the middle of nowhere that's in the middle of nowhere, a group of orphan's who plan on making him their "Pa". And he is alone on this particular honor nor the first.

For a television film, it brings a backwards Lord of the Flies quality while dealing with how parents' beliefs and discipline can affect there children. Well, especially if the parents happen to die five years prior and no neighbors around. What is interesting and a huge relief is that it doesn't hold your hand or completely spells it out for you of what happens to Jimmy Wheeler(Keach) or Carol Ann/"Ma" (Samantha Eggar) each time they attempt to escape. You witness the aftermath and this ignorant-savageness with something very wrong about these kids, especially the eldest and leader Peter (John Savage). 

Aside from the eerieness of the orphans, the sometimes a little to vagueness of what exactly happened to their real parents or how they came to decide to lure and imprison adults to become their new parents or why no one came to find these adults or whatever happened to Wheeler's cameras, this film is a pretty good example or taste of a Seventies' Thriller. Stacy Keach is, well, Stacy Keach...enough said (on of the greatest American actors). To have Samantha Eggar (The Collector 1965) as a co-star is all you need as reasons to watch this film.

Angels Crest

Director: Gaby Dellal

Cast: Thomas Dekker, Lynn Collins, Elizabeth McGovern, Joseph Morgan, Jeremy Piven, Mira Sorvino, Kate Walsh

Genre: 2011

Running time: 93 mins.

Rating:★★

The small working-class of Angels Crest is a tight-knit community resting quietly in one of the most vast and stunningly beautiful valleys of the Rocky Mountains. Ethan (Thomas Dekker), one of the town's residents, is a young father but not much more than a kid himself. He has no choice but to look after his three year old son Nate, since Nate's mother, Cindy (Lynn Collins), is an alcoholic. Then one snowy day, Ethan's good intentions are thwarted by a moment of thoughtlessness, resulting in tragedy. A local prosecutor (Jeremy Piven) haunted by his past pursues Ethan, and the ensuing confusion and casting of blame starts tearing the town apart.

With an "apartment" in what seems to be an old factory with a "Peter Pan"-esque appearance. Childlike drawings on the walls, birthday party decorations, windows cracked with holes, and Ethan and his son, Nate sharing a bed. No mother around, just a couple of Lost Boys about to play Indians and make snowmen in the snow. The first question that comes to mine is why do they need to drive up part of a mountain and into the woods to make snowmen? The Ethan character tries to points out the majestic view of the clouds surrounding the icy mountain ahead of them to his son, yes, but it seems a bit foolish. Especially, when it's quite clear that he has enough trouble taking care of himself, let alone his improperly dress son. Then again, there wouldn't be a film or a plot if Ethan was sensible. It would be sensible not to leave your sleeping son (locked or not) in the freezing cold to witness the quiet peacefulness of pure nature, just saying. Geez Louise, when the mother is introduced, she's a fucking wild alcoholic whore of a woman who only seems to own up to her motherly duties or love is when Nate goes missing. 

Wow, what a winning pair they must have made. Both having major issues with their gender-parental role models. They both realize that they're going to have to leave Neverland and grow up...if they can. Overall, it's a meh film. You know what the plot is, but it isn't captivating enough to care that the sequences were poorly and predictably piece together. There really wasn't much character development. Yes, you understand and empathize the tearing of the soul kind of remorse the two parents are going through, but, but it was so vapidly executed as a whole that the producers and director can mask their major failure with pulling on the audience's emotions. 

The Night They Raided Minsky's

Director: William Friedkin

Cast: Jason Robards, Britt Ekland, Norman Wisdom, Bert Lahr

Genre: Comedy 1968

Running time: 99 mins. 

Rating:★★★

Rachel (Brit Ekland), a beautiful young Amish woman who leaves her Pennsylvania home and comes to New York City in hopes of becoming a dancer and ends up doing something quite different: inventing the striptease! Raymond Paine (Jason Robards), the somewhat sleazy star of Minsky's burlesque show, who takes an interest in Rachel's many charms. But his admiration is challenged by Chick Williams (Norman Wisdom), Raymond's comedy partner for the past ten years. And when Rachel's dress is torn accidentally, she plays it up and finds herself the object of even more affection- from the very appreciative audience! The leader of an anti-vice group has everyone arrested, but not before Rachel becomes the toast of the town.

Burlesque, where one can come view society being made fun of and girls are a bit vulgar. Now, where does that leave a pious, shy, and naive Amish young woman like Rachel (Brit Ekland)? Especially, when she has runaway from home and her father is looking for her. Well, what starts out as a clever ploy to fool the newspapers and police becomes a battle of morals and the most glorious sensuous striptease!

This film is definitely an example of the kind of comedy made in the late sixties, but is far from being timeless. There's a predictability in its comedic realness. Two guys falling for the same girl, who holds tight to her beliefs and is more aware of the things that are strange to her than the men's affection. She is also naively unaware of the role she is playing in the overall scheme until discovers a new (sometimes dangerous) confidence in herself. The original 1968, The Producers, with a slightly similar theme, is timeless (probably, as in definitely, due to it being a Mel Brooks' film - enough said)! The film does have one of the most beloved character actor, Denholm Elliott (Trading Places, A Room With A View, Raider's of the Lost Arc), so that works to its favor. It also a demonstrates the era from which burlesque was born with vaudeville qualities plus sex that conflicted with Puritan ethics impressively. The clips of actual daily city life, burlesque, and forties flapper music, to give the film a more "historically" real base, can be a little overdone.

The Bird Can't Fly

Director: Threes Anna

Cast: Barbara Hershey, John Kani, Tony Kgeorge, Yusuf Davids

Genre: Drama 2007

Running time: 89 mins.

Rating:★★★★

Melody (Hershey) returns home to Fairlands for the funeral of her estranged daughter June. But the town has almost disappeared under the encroaching desert. She also has to confront the fact that she has a 10 year-old grandson, River, whose existence she knew nothing about prior. Melody decides to take River away with her but he is resistant. He has worked out an ambitious plan to survive, by breeding the ostriches he and his mother used to feed. His father, Scoop, an idle musician and the town's postman, wants her to leave because he has a secret to hide. A series of confrontations ensues until Melody discovers the truth. It's only when a sandstorm forces Melody and River to take shelter together, that Melody faces some painful facts about her past, which allows both of them to reach an understanding and begin a new future together.

Mourning and embalming of a woman by a group of women who obliviously love the recently deceased. Though no words are spoken, there in the darkness of the night with only the candles beacon this brief initial encounter from the loving community of women giving the audience an intuitive sense of the emotions being endured. Then in a quick switch of pace, we view a no-nonsense-cold-private chief, Melody (Barbara Hershey), who likes things are certain way, has worked hard to be in the position she's in, and seems to be damned if anyone will do anything to bring her off her high horse. Except for the phone call relaying her estrange daughter's, June, death. The chaos of the pouring rain and the rush of people in the night mixed with the multitude of transportation issues through the deserts of Africa, and the hauntingly lack of civilization in a dying villiage illustrates the psychological termoil Melody is struggling with. And it is clear that Melody has forgotten how to put herself in others' shoes, to trust in others' judgement, and compassion for others, when she first attempts to interact with River (Yusuf Davids). In River is where she has met her match, for he is a natural born leader, stubborn, curious, and a vast imagination, which makes the development of the two's bond more desirable to watch develop. The flies that constantly swarm River's father, Scoop (Tony Kgeorge), seems to symbolize either death or deadly secret that he is not telling Melody. 

But is the symbolism behind the ostrich and the egg? Why, like The Lord of the Flies, does River have his "followers" trying to catch one? Why is the name of the hotel, where Melody use to work, disappearing into the desert? Perhaps, the life she thought she knew or never got a chance to know, especially with her daughter, will be long gone and forgotten if nothing is done to keep it alive. You learn that there were many misunderstandings and misguided hatred between River, Melody, and Scoop that when they are finally able to connect with the love they shared towards June, a rebirth and new freedom occurs. The ostrich is the free spirit and a rare beauty, which was June in River's mind. Perhaps it was the same for Scoop and that is why he kept the letters from being given or sent to/by June. Scoop was trying to tame and caged her in all the wrong ways that it unintentionally killed her, therefore leaving him with regret and a desire to fix his mistakes with River.  Melody, herself, tried to cage June in a way that made June rebel and unable to tell her own mother that she was pregnant. The ostrich egg was River waiting to be hatched and cared for, loved, and tamed. 

This film has so many underlining themes that it is impossible pick them up or fully understand in one sitting, which makes it a more beautiful and powerful film. Though the TV quality in the cinematography gives the illusion  that it is going to suck major, at least intially, it becomes more apparent that it is a well thought out tool to allow the audience to bare witness (a fly on the wall, if you will) to the events that unfold throughout the film. 

Hello Herman

Director: Michelle Danner

Cast: Norman Reedus, Martha Higareda, Garrett Backstrom, Rob Estes, Andy McPhee

Genre: Drama 2012

Running time: 88 mins.

Rating:★★★

Sixteen-year-old Herman Howards (Garrett Backstrom) makes a fateful decision. He enters his suburban school and commits a terrible act violence. Seconds before his arrest he emails his idol, infamous journalist Lax Morales (Norman Reedus), telling him, "I want to tell my story on your show." Haunted by his own past, Morales is forced to confront the troubled teenager, now an inmate with an uncertain future.

"If we hope to heal the pain, we must first discover the cause." -Ancient Proberb. This opening quote is the theme to how the stage is being laid out and the events that unravel into plot. Though, some of the more recent films that I've seen in which the "act" or the end scene is shown to the audience first, in an attempt to intice the audience to immediately fixated on how the character's got that point that they choose not to avoid, have annoyed the shit out of me because of the way the film presents it. Films like The Scenic Route, a man having crazied stare with a Mohawk , sitting down in the middle of nowhere, covered in blood, his buddy dead on the ground, and that's it! Hardly a " Oh my God, Dude! This film is gonna be badass! I gotta see what happened!" This film, however, touches a base with everybody. Similar events that we have either experienced first hand or stories reported on the news, but we never thought that much on how or why it came to this point, where adolescents commit such violence.

Indeed, we all have issues and demons or even a troubled past, but never result in murder and violence. Lax Morales (Norman Reedus), a journalist and this boy's idol, definitely seemed to demons or skeletons in his closet that he desperately trying to surpress.  Why, exactly? We're not sure yet. Now, when the two characters start doing their dialogues, Morales brings up an interesting subject ( one that has been on parental and political minds as to it having any affect on the youths' morals) of video games, where the objective is to shoot as many people as you can, in order to score more points. He also asked the typical question as to if Herman (Garrett Backstrom) was bullied at school by other students and/or teachers. Herman seems overly cocky (as usual with this age group, they don't know shit because there's still a lot they haven't dealt with. For the most part, many of them are still in the safety of their parent's money and household), asking personal questions about Morales' past violent actions that can never be taken back. A past that may have been for a story, but doesn't make Morales feel almost just like Herman. It is a bit frightening, what can be found on the internet: like downloading shooting games that made it "easier" for Herman to do what he did and instructions on how to make your own pipe bombs. Psychological issues that bring up Morales's question as to why his mother didn't suspect anything or figure it out. Things don't just happen, there are always psychological and physical elements or interactions taking affect that can intertwine further back than one is consciously or unconsciously aware of. Parents or other people can sometimes be so wrapped up in their own business, unresolved psychological issues, or say/do something to that person that they maybe unaware on how that person may interpret or be affected by it. Again, things don't just happen! Oooo you can find things in the internet that doesn't mean you know everything because you haven't experienced everything first hand. Ignorance will always come back to haunt you eventually. "I didn't do anything," can still make a person of fault to a tragic outcome. By the end of the film, both characters come to finally deal with their own demons and come back to their humanity. 

This film is one to question the audiences own life and decisions as well as the decisions made in society. We are not as alone as one may think of themselves. 

The Majestic

Director: Frank Darabont

Cast: Jim Carrey, Bob Balaban, Brent Briscoe, Jeffrey DeMunn, Amanda Detmer, Allen Garfield, Hal Holbrook, Laurie Holden, Martin Landau, Ron Rifkin, David Ogden Stiers, James Whitmore

Genre: Drama 2001

Running time: 154 mins.

Rating:★★

Peter (Jim Carrey), a Hollywood screenwriter who stumbles into tiny Lawson, California, with his memory blanked out by an auto accident. There, he's mistaken by the citizenry to be a long-lost war hero....an identity that Peter also comes to believe while restoring the town's shuttered movie palace and romancing the girl (Laurie Holden) he supposedly left behind. It's the perfect life and, perhaps, the perfect lie. But the truth is bound to surface.

A movie lover in the 1950's, living what he thinks is a perfect life in a city that's glamorous  Hollywood. B-movie screenwriter, whose work gets changed by higher ups and he doesn't haven't the courage to stand up for himself. His perfect wannabe actress girlfriend leaves him and lastly, he's being accused of being a Communist, making the studio wanting to do with him until it clears up. If it clears up. Some perfect life. It isn't until the accident and he lands himself on the shore in a small town with no memory that he finally finds genuine kindness and acceptance. However, he's being confused for someone else. With Martin Landau as your father, hell who cares.

It becomes apparent that prior to the accident, Peter was slowly losing the pure joy for moving pictures and his sense of self. Post accident, he is surrounded by people who still carry that joy in their hearts that is going remind Peter why he wanted to become a screenwriter in the first point. The latter, is getting a little ahead of myself because the Peter character lost his memory. Nevertheless, aiding in reopening the town's palace of a theater, The Majestic. Heartwarming as the film is and has an organically subtle story with continuity; the film is predictable. One could argue that similar to a great deal (not all mind you, I'm not implying that) of the films of the 1950's had a predictable formula. Therefore because this film is set in the fifties and it's plot is surrounded by the pure joy of movies that the predictability of the plot is reminiscent of that era in a modern way and shouldn't matter. Well, it matters to me, GOD BLAMMIT!

As a child, I loved Jim Carrey. When the Mask came out, I was like "yeah this man is the shit!" Now, he's up there with Will Ferrell, where if I never see another one of their films again, I'd be okay with that. There would have to be a really well casted group of actors working with them for me to possibly to reconsider. And this film does has a well-casted group of actors, it hardly changes my opinion on Jim Carrey.

The Help

Director: Tate Taylor

Cast: Jessica Chastain, Viola Davis, Bryce Dallas Howard, Allison Janney, Octavia Spencer, Emma Stone

Genre: Drama 2011

Running time: 146 mins.

Rating:★★★

A story about very different, extraordinary women in the 1960's South who build an unlikely friendship around a secret writing project- one that breaks society's rules and puts them all at risk. 

Though, the audience is easily transported back to the South and the Sixties, but isn't clear what the connection between the hired help being the glue of these Southern housewives, the ladies who desperately want to have children, and the one Southern lady who would rather be a serious writer than a "Stepford Wife." Black and white etiquette, overly polite, bigotry, racism, and always dressing to the nines is what Aibileen and Skeeter (Emma Stone) are fighting against to be themselves. The connection of the three groups is the novel Skeeter wants to write on what it's like to be maid, how it feels to be a black woman raising white children, and the prejudices of black maids using their white employer's toilet. With a little courage, maybe frustration, and spiritual guidance that Aibileen agreed to tell her story to Skeeter. Illegal it maybe and initial disapproval from other maids, but the courage to do what's right is one of the driving force to finish. It's disheartening to witness these black maids compassion, brains, and having more dignity that the white women and having to unwillingly submit to the unwritten law of the white world.

However, as the story continues to unfold, that there are even some white women having to abide by these unwritten law just to keep themselves from being shunned. When the book is finally published, stirs up trouble, but also brings forth the what needed to happen in their world. It's never to late to find courage in oneself, love your enemies, and to tell the truth.

Howl

Director: Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman

Cast: James Franco, David Strathairn, Jon Hamm, Bob Balaban, Alessandro Nivola, Treat Williams, Mary Louise-Parker, Jeff Daniels

Genre: Biography/Drama 2010

Running time: 84 mins.

Rating:★

Allen Ginsberg (James Franco) recounts the road trips, love affairs, and search for personal liberation that led to the most timeless, electrifying, and controversial work of his career: Howl. Pushing the limits and challenging the mainstream, the passionate, and provocative poem Howl and it's publisher find themselves on trial for obscenity, with prosecutor Ralph McIntosh (David Strathairn) setting out to have the book banned, while defense attorney Jake Ehrlich (Jon Hamm) fervently argues for freedom of speech and creative expression. The proceedings veer from the comically absurd to the passionate as a host of unusual witnesses (Jeff Daniels, Mary Louise-Parker, Treat Williams, Alessandro Nivola) pit generation against generation and art against fear in front of conservative Judge Clayton Horn (Bob Balaban). 

What an existential beginning? "Every word in this film was spoken by the actual people portrayed. In that sense this film is like a documentary. In every other side, it is different." In case you had any doubt it was 1955, it tells you and gives you footage, music, and photos of that time. The film is also begins in black and white. This is the world that Allen Ginsberg lives and writes about. This "documentary" and the way James Franco portrayed Ginsberg makes him seem like an typical egotistical artist. The surreal-impressionist, graphic novel animation of one of his poems is over the top. In fact the film's illustration of the events is as scattered as jazz, which may be the point, but it hardly keeps my attention. The past is in black and white, the "interview" with Ginsberg in washed out-dark contrast-blue undertones, and vibrant reds for the court trial. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!!! I'm coming to this film not knowing anything about this writer and leaving it with a artsy-fartsy-root cannal drilling- bore of a film that made me turn it off 18 minutes in. I went to art school, I don't need bare witness to someone who reminds me of people I knew while in school on screen. I can walk out the door and do that in person. This film is like "OK I GET IT! NOW GET ON WITH IT!" Franco narrating Ginsberg's Howl is like listening to the adults of the Peanuts' cartoon: Waaah, Wah, Waaaaah. Shut the fuck up! If I was interested in reading Howl, I would read it for myself not be lectured about it! It's ashame to turn it off so soon because it's wonderfully casted. Indeed, the majority of the films today hold your hand through the whole film, so that you understand what's going on without having to think at all! However, there are ways (not black and white guidelines or anything set in stone) to be subtle and allow the audience to ponder and understand what is going on under the surface of the plot. This film does not. It's a film that took too many drugs, drank to much coffee, and hasn't slept in days. 

Blue Sunshine

Director: Jeff Lieberman 

Cast: Zalman King, Deborah Winters, Mark Goddard, Robert Walden, Alice Ghostley, Stefen Gierasch

Genre: Horror/Thriller 1978

Running time: 90 mins.

Rating:★★

At a party, someone goes insane and murders three women. Falsely accused of the brutal killings, Jerry is on the run. More bizarre killings continue with alarming fruquency all over town. Trying to clear his name, Jerry discovers the shocking truth...people are losing their hair and turning into violent psychopaths and the connection maybe a drug all the murderers took a decade before. Soon, if Jerry can't stop it, the horror will become uncontrollable... the horror caused by Blue Sunshine!

Headaches, hair falling out, irritability, nightmares, and complete delirium with the full blue moon as the "guide" to each character being introduced until it finally comes to the party, where our hero Jerry shows up to the film. Then after the initial three murders and havin read the synopsis, I can help but wonder, if all this is happening because of a drug that people took a decade ago, what was the original intent of the drug? Was it an antibiotic? A vaccine? Or just the new drug to get off on? As Jerry continues to try to clear his name of the party murders, he breaks into the house of another murder scene with a similarity to the one he witnessed. He relives that murder in his mind, almost making wonder if he's starting to suffer the symptoms of the drug too. 

An acid drug, Blue Sunshine, sold by Ed Flemming, running forCongress candidate, back in his college years at Stanford ten years prior. You find that the people, who are suffering from the drug and are going on a killing spree, went to Stanford the same time Flemming did and bought from him. Why is this Flemming guy claming up then, when hearing the name of the drug (aside from the obvious)? The film never answers that and leaves the audience with Jerry tranquilizing Flemming's right-hand man with text on the screen about what was medically discovered about Flemming's guy and what the U.S. Government is doing to control the matter. Leaving the audience a bit frightened that this kind of thing could happen and no satisfying conclusion. 

Fantastic seventies' red undertones, dark contrasts, and magnificent make-up artwork! Kind of wish there were more violence, just so I can bear witness of the creatively inventive era in the special effects/ make-up. But at last, there wasn't and with its ending too, it left me a bit dissatisfied. It could have been pushed a bit further.

Ghosts of Mississippi

Director: Rob Reiner

Cast: Alec Baldwin, Whoopi Goldberg, James Woods, Craig T. Nelson, William H. Macy

Genre: Drama 1996

Running time: 130 mins.

Rating:★★★★

In 1963, Myrlie Evers (Whoopi Goldberg) worked for the conviction of the white supremacist who murdered her husband, heroic civil rights leader Medgar Evers, through two hung juries and over 30 years. 

As much as there has been great deal of people fighting for civil rights and as much as we have progressed in carrying out such equality, it is historical events as this film illustrates that reminds us two things. One, we haven't really progressed toward true equality and how much fear and ignorance will bring the true horror of mankind can lash out on each other. How can a woman, like Myrlie Evers, keep her dignity and her strength when racial prejudice is working against her? As well as many don't see the point rehashing the past through another trial when it's the past? Is it too late to do right thing? It is when it was a political crime, a loss of a beloved husband, and the murder still roams free. Determination and passion can achieve the goal in mind, but it takes patience too. 

But with most of the witnesses dead and most of the evidence gone, the only chance, lawyer, Bobby DeLaughter (Alec Baldwin) has in winning this case is to resurrect the dead! It becomes all too clear that THAT is easier said than done. "Legally integrated, but emotionally always segregated." Now, isn't that bit of truth hard to swallow and heartbreaking, even looking at the society we live in today.

But after justice was finally served, a feeling of overwhelming joy! It just goes to show that it is never too late to do the right thing! A compelling film from beginning to end!