"The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2 And The Week in Reviews

[I review the new movie "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2" and the DVDs "Tomorrowland" and "The Secret in Their Eyes."  The Book of the Week is "Happier at Home," Gretchen Rubin's second "Happiness Project." I also bring you up-to-date with my "1001 Movies I Must See Before I Die" with "Blue is the Warmest Color."]





The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2

The war in Panem continues and Katniss Everdeen seeks to kill President Snow.

This fourth (and thank god, last) installment of "The Hunger Games" films literally begins where the last film ended. And I can't tell you how miffed I was at Mockingjay Part I for leaving me hanging for another year or so. So by the time I saw this one, I had forgotten what went on in the last film.  I am not a fan of having to do my homework before going to see a film.

Anyway, Katniss is still being used as a propaganda tool by the rebels to get the loyalists to drop their weapons and join them to take over the Capitol.  Meanwhile, Peta (Josh Hutcherson) is still suffering from the effects of the brainwashing that took place in the last film and hates Katniss (which was the whole point of the brainwashing), but they still team up with the other members of her squad to get to the Capitol.  As her team members are killed off, Katniss vows to kill Snow.

Speaking of Katniss, Jennifer Lawrence, as good an actress as she is, is just sleepwalking through this thing.  Even she seems to be thinking, "Let's get this thing over with already!" She has one expression throughout - "concerned."

Julianne Moore is a cartoon as President Coin and Donald Sutherland as Snow chews the scenery in his usual competent way.  Woody Harrelson and Philip Seymour Hoffman are wasted and I am not talking about Harrelson's well-known proclivities.

You know how I feel about sequels.  Well, this one is a sequel to a sequel - and that's even worse.  I didn't really like Mockingjay Part I that much and this one is even worse.  It was actually boring.  Part I and Part 2 of Mockingjay could easily have been cut down and made into one movie and that might have been an improvement.  As it is here, they used a lot of close-ups of the actors looking concerned to fill the time, and the film just plodded.  It also turned into more of a horror film than the dystopian thriller that began the series.  There was something interesting and exciting about young people hunting each other.  Now it has all just deteriorated into a combination of horror and war clichés.

Rosy the Reviewer says...I think even hardcore "Hunger Games" fans will be disappointed with this one, despite the fact it ties up all of the loose ends.

Some Movies You Might Have Missed

(And Some You Will Be Glad You Did)!

***Now Out on DVD***

Tomorrowland (2015)

Former boy genius John Francis Walker and teenager Casey Newton defy time and space to find Tomorrowland and save the world.

The film begins with Frank Walker (George Clooney) having a dialogue with an unseen voice.  We see a close-up of Frank saying "This is a story about the future...and the future is scary."

"When I was a kid, the future was different. We were all about the future." 

And that's true.  Who of us of a certain age don't remember the excitement when Disneyland added Tomorrowland to the park?  Growing up in the 50's and 60's, everyone wanted to go into space.  So it's no surprise this is a Disney film.  But the film is not about Disneyland or Disney's Tomorrowland. It's about disappointment, hope and the end of the world.

Flashback to a young Frank at the 1964 World's Fair.  He is a happy, optimistic kid inventor.

Frank goes to the Hall of Invention where  Professor Nix (Hugh Laurie) is a science fair judge.  Nix is blown away by our young Frank's jetpack.  A little girl approaches Frank - her name is Athena (Raffey Cassidy) - and she asks him "Did you make this yourself?  Why?" to which Frank replies, "I got tired of waiting around for someone to do it for me."  Athena leads Frank to a secret part of the Fair where he experiences some robots and other strange futuristic phenomenon and Athena gives Frank a mysterious pin.

And then we hear the grown-up Frank say "And then it all went to hell."

Turns out Frank, now grown up, disappointed and cynical, was talking to someone that circumstance had brought to him.

Enter Casey (Brit Robertson), a badass young woman doing some protest mischief at Cape Canaveral.  The space program has been defunded and her Dad (Tim McGraw) is out of work.  She gets arrested and when she is released and gets her personal affects, there is that same pin that Athena gave Frank.  She checks Ebay to find out about the pin, finds an address and decides to go there. Turns out that pin has magical powers to transport people to Tomorrowland, a place where anything is possible. 

And everyone wants to get in on the action including the Men in Black, the mysterious Athena who makes another appearance and Hugo (Keegan-Michael Key), the owner of a shop called "The Blast from the Past" where Casey is led after her search on Ebay. This last bit is a funny scene that is one of the highlights of the film. 

Athena takes Casey to meet the now grown-up Frank who is disillusioned and predicting the end of the world.  If they want to save it, they must all go back to the future to Tomorrowland where Nix is now the resident misguided baddie.

It took forever for this film to get started - 40 minutes to be exact but once it kicked in, it grabbed me.  However, if you are expecting this to be a full-blown George Clooney film, think again.  It's not.  After the opening sequence, he doesn't show up for another hour.

But it is obviously a Clooney labor of love because he goes on a rant at the end about our civilization being negative and wanting to believe the worst and giving up.  Why bother to save the environment when there is nothing we can do anyway?  It's a bit of a simplistic, heavy handed diatribe on the importance of optimism and hope that was so in your face that it brought the film down a bit. However, it's a good film for kids to see, especially little girls because  Robertson and Cassidy are plucky girls who do a great job showing that girls can be scientists, they can be fearless and they can make their own future.

Written by Brad Bird and Damon Lindelof and directed by Bird, who also did the latest impressive "Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation," this film is reminiscent of "Back to the Future," though it lacked that film's finesse and humor. 

Rosy the Reviewer says...a sci-fi fantasy that budding scientists and their parents will enjoy.






The Secret in their Eyes

A retired court investigator is writing a novel about an unresolved rape and murder case that still haunts him.  As he gets involved in the case once again, he gets in over his head.

This film should not be confused with the film of the same title out in theatres now. The current film starring Julia Roberts is an English language version of this one, which won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film back in 2010. 

Now I feel a bit of a rant coming on.

I always have a problem with English language remakes of foreign language films that were perfectly wonderful films.  The original, the Swedish version, of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" is a case in point. It made Noomi Rapace a star.  Why make it again?  And now this film.  It won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Film in 2010.  Why do we need another version of this starring Julia Roberts?  OK, Americans don't like to read subtitles.  But we even do it with British movies and TV shows, "Broadchurch" being another example.  "Broadchurch" was a wonderful crime drama starring David Tennant that showed on BBCAmerica. We remade it here in the U.S. as "Gracepoint," an American remake of the exact same story that played on the Fox channel and even had David Tennant star in it and it wasn't nearly as good.  Explain that to me when we could have just rebroadcasted "Broadchurch" on Fox.

Anyway, sorry for my rant but I have a thing about that.

But let's get to this original version of "The Secret in Their Eyes."

Benjamin (Ricardo Darin), a retired court investigator in Buenos Aires wants to write a novel about a 25-year-old unresolved rape and murder that still haunts him.  He is secretly in love with Irene (Soledad Villamil), a judge who had been his colleague when the murder occurred.  Two workmen were suspected of the murder but Benjamin was never fully convinced they were the murderers.  He decides to look into the case again as he writes his novel and he meets up with Irene again to tell her about his book and renewed investigation.  He is aided by his drunken partner, Sandoval (the excellent Guillermo Francella).

Benjamin had his own idea about who the killer was after seeing a man in a group picture that included the rape victim.  The man is looking at her in a way that sparks Benjamin's suspicions, as if he can see "the secret in his eyes."  Twenty-five years later we see a similar picture of Benjamin looking at Irene.  Does the first picture reflect the murder in the killer's eyes?  Does the second picture reflect Benjamin's unrequited love?

Director Juan Jose Campanella moves the story back and forth in time from the politically repressed years of the 1970's in Argentina when the murder occurred and when Irene and Benjamin first met to the present (2000) when Irene and Benjamin meet up again.  It's a murder mystery, a political thriller and an unconventional love story with a very Hitchcockian feel.  The love affair aspect can be frustrating at times, because Benjamin is a grown man who loves Irene but never says anything and you can tell she cares for him too.  So why don't they say something and get on with it?

However, that aside, the film is mostly riveting and beautifully acted by Darin and Villamil, whose abilities make us believe them as their younger selves as well as 25 years later. 

So as I said, there was no need to make this film again. 

Rosy the Reviewer says...I have not seen the remake of this but it's difficult to imagine it could be better than this one.  See this one first.
(In Spanish with English subtitles)

***My 1001 Movies I Must See Before I Die Project***

267 to go!

Have YOU Seen this classic film?




Blue is the Warmest Color (2013)

Young Adele meets Emma, an artist with blue hair, and they fall in love.

Adele (Adele Exarchopoulos) is a student with lots of friends and boyfriends, but she is questioning her sexuality.  When she goes to a gay bar she meets Emma (Lea Seydoux, who made a splash recently in the latest James Bond film "Spectre") an artist, an older woman with striking blue hair.  They begin a sexual relationship.

Emma is clearly the more sophisticated of the two.  She talks to Adele about Sartre, introduces her to oysters and they march in a gay pride parade together. But as their relationship progresses, it becomes apparent that they both come from two different worlds. Adele goes on a journey of sexual exploration and learns the meaning of love, commitment and loss.

This is an adaptation of the graphic novel by Julie Maroh adapted by director Abdellatif Kechiche along with Ghalia Lacroix.  It's beautiful to look at and the acting is first rate.  It won the Palm D'Or at the Cannes Film Festival in 2013.

However, the sex scenes are extraordinarily explicit and one might ask why is this necessary?  Is a movie good because it pushes the limits of explicitness?  And there is lots of it. This is a three-hour movie. Way too long.  Without those extended sex scenes, it might have just been two!  Also, with that fine line between what is pornographic and what is artistic, one can't help but wonder about the prurient being drawn to this film with little interest in the artistic side of it.

Why it's a Must See:  "[This film]...smashed taboos at every turn...[But] to focus on the sex scenes is to betray the extraordinary strength of a writer/director who understands the nature of drama, from how long to show a scene to when to cut...But above all else, it's a study of the complexity of romantic and sexual obsession...[Director Abdellatif] Kechiche's confidence to hold our gaze with sex scenes, breakup scenes, and all the seemingly insignificant moments in between, results in a riveting film that demands and rewards our attention."
---"1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die

What "1001 Movies..." believes is the strength of this film, I'm sorry to say, is its greatest hindrance.  For one thing, it's three hours long which for most films is probably too long unless you are talking about "Gone With the Wind," and some people have an issue with that one too.  But for a film about a romance, it's way too long and those long, lingering shots that are mentioned are the  main problem.  I say Kechiche didn't cut enough.  For example, do we need to see a character walk the entire length of a hallway in real time with absolutely nothing happening except she is walking down a hall?  Or do we need to watch someone sleep for about two minutes?  I usually love French films, but I am not a fan of those long lingering shots of people doing nothing or where they stare off into space contemplating their navels.

What I did like was the cinema verite feel as Adele interacted with her fellow students in a realistic and casual fashion.  It had a "you are there" feel as these young people went about their business at school and at home. So writer/director Kechiche should be congratulated for his screenplay which is realistic and poignant.  However, rumor had it that he was a hard task master as a director on Exarchopoulos and Seydoux and both have vowed never to work with him again.

And speaking of Exarchopoulos and Seydoux, they are both lovely actresses, which could explain why Kechiche used those long lingering close-ups of them so much, but that is not to discount that both are also exceedingly good actresses who make you believe in their relationship.

Rosy the Reviewer says...a poignant coming of age story that could have been an hour shorter.
(In French with English subtitles)

***The Book of the Week***

Happier at Home: Kiss More, Jump More, Abandon a Project, Read Samuel Johnson, and My Other Experiments in the Practice of Everyday Life by Gretchen Rubin (2013)

Rubin continues her "Happiness Project" but this time focuses closer to "home."

Last month I reviewed Rubin's first "happiness project" where she sought to make her life happier by dedicating each month of the year to a theme she could work on- friendship, work, etc.  From that she worked out her "general theories of happiness."  

But now in her second foray into the realm of happiness, Rubin wanted to build on what she had already learned but this time as happiness related to "home:" relationships, possessions, time, body and neighborhood.

In her first project, this is what she learned:

• Accept myself, and expect more of myself
• Give myself limits to give myself freedom
• Make people happier by acknowledging that they're not feeling happy
• Plan ahead to be spontaneous
• Accomplish more by working less
• Happiness doesn't always make me FEEL happy
• Flawed can be more perfect than perfection
• It's very hard to make things easier
• My material desired have a spiritual aspect.
• Hell is other people.  Heaven is other people.

Whew!

(For more on that, go check our her first book from the library).

So she learned all of that.  Why start another happiness project?

She decided that concentrating on happiness was a good thing so why not?

As she had with her first project, she gave herself a goal for each month, starting with "Possessions," which basically involved not becoming a slave to them, keeping those that were important and getting rid of those that no longer served her.  She also learned that if you want your stuff to work right, "read the manual."  As the months went on, she worked on her marriage by kissing her husband more, was a better parent because she chose to "underreact to a problem," and tried acupuncture to help her body.

There are many positive tips here for your own happiness project that concentrates on your home, family and neighbors, but...

Rosy the Reviewer says...for those of us in the glass half-empty club, happiness sounds like a lot of work! 

That's it for this week!

Thanks for Reading!

See you Tuesday for

"My Top 10 Best (and Must See) Films of 2015

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to click on the share buttons to share it on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and LinkedIn, 
email it to your friends and
LIKE me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer.

Check your local library for DVDs and books mentioned.

Note:  Next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). 

Find the page for the movie, click on "Explore More" on the right side panel and then scroll down to "External Reviews."  Look for "Rosy the Reviewer" on the list. Or if you are using a mobile device, look for "Critics Reviews." Click on that and you will find me alphabetically under "Rosy the Reviewer."

Grounds for Divorce

I was sitting on the toilet recently (as I am wont to do) - sorry for the visual - and noticed that the toilet paper was rolling off the roll in the wrong direction.  I am definitely an "up over the top" person when it comes to my toilet roll and I get rather upset when it is rolling from down under, as it were.

Since I was in the half bath water closet, the one Hubby uses the most, I knew it was he who had replaced the toilet roll and replaced it incorrectly.  I was irritated that after 31 years of marriage he would not only put it on the wrong way but that he didn't remember that I preferred it the other way.

Then I thought, after 31 years of marriage, did he do it on purpose?  Was it an act of passive aggression?

So then I got to thinking about other little things like that that can harm a marriage.  I mean, who hasn't heard about people getting divorced because she always squeezed the toothpaste from the top or he never put the toilet seat down?

Grounds for divorce? 

Sounds extreme but then those little things can add up, especially if they are used to irritate the other partner.  And this time of year with all of the stresses of the holiday season, those little things can turn into big things.  I mean, who wants to think their spouse has a New Year's Resolution to kick them to the curb?

So as a public service - and you know I am always here to help - here are some "little things" that could add up for grounds for divorce.

Now I need to preface my list with the fact that I think we get many of our pet peeves from our parents.  So my list is rather heavy with the things that drove my Dad crazy.  Thanks, Dad, they now drive me crazy.

See if you are guilty of any of these.


Never putting something back where it belongs.

Scotch tape, scissors, the stapler...ever have to go looking for those things all of the time, right when you are in the middle of wrapping a gift or needing to open up one of those products that is so well wrapped in plastic only slicing the thing with scissors can help? 

I was brought up to put things back where I found them and woe to me if my father could not find the scissors and they were found in my bedroom (we must have not had much money, because why did we only have one pair of scissors?).  So I am very good about putting things back where they belong.  The Hubby is not.  To avoid divorce, I keep an extra pair of scissors in my office and have my own scotch tape and stapler.



Taking off his shoes and leaving them where I can fall over them and really hurt myself.

This is a serious issue. Did you know that when you get to be a certain age, falling down is such a serious issue that you could die from it?  Well, now you know.

You could say he might be doing it on purpose, but I don't have life insurance so there really isn't any motivation to knock me off so I just think he's not thinking.  Growing up, if my Dad would trip over our shoes, he would have a fit and throw them outside. We were warned.  So I carry on the tradition.  Hubby has been warned.

Going to Costco or the grocery store without telling me

Let's just say that Hubby is a pacer.  He gets bored so he goes off to Costco just for the fun of it or for something to do.  But the problem is, he forgets I HAVE A LIST!  He gets back from Costco with his new winter wardrobe, a gallon of gin and a new TV and I'm out of chicken broth and canned diced tomatoes.



Never hearing his cell phone

Now this could be the ultimate in passive aggression.  For some reason, Hubby carries a cell phone but it is always turned off or he doesn't answer, which is particularly irritating when I actually DO know he has gone to Costco and I remember something else he needs to get that is not on the list.  Funny how he never answers the phone when I need him to, but he has no problem pocket dialing me by accident when he is traveling. 
Hello?  Hellooo?  Helloooooo?  Helloooooo?  HUBBY HANG UP THE PHONE!!!!



Falling asleep


I have always had the suspicion that Hubby was narcoleptic because of his ability to just fall asleep anywhere.  When he used to have long commutes from Silicon Valley, he told me that sometimes he would have to pull over because the hot late afternoon sun was lulling him to sleep. 

His safety while driving home is one thing, but explain to me why, when we are sitting in the living room watching the riveting finale of "The Bachelor" and I say, "Wow.  What did you think of that?" when I look over at him, his head is lolled back, mouth gaping open and there is drool.  Not sure how long he's been out.  Now that is insulting.  Yes, I know he gets up earlier than I do but when we finally have quality time together (watching "The Bachelor" together is considered quality time), I can usually expect that he will fall asleep during some of that time and that implies boredom to me.  "You are so boring you make me fall asleep" is how that makes me feel. 

However, I prefer to think of Hubby as the narcoleptic dog. 




He is so excited to be in my company that he falls asleep. It's an actual phenomenon. I know it's not funny, but this narcoleptic dog gets excited about something like eating or escaping and falls instantly asleep.  I don't feed Hubby canned food and I haven't found him asleep with his head in the dog dish yet but it's close.  So I like to think that that puts "the pleasure of your company" into a whole "nother category."

"I thought"

"I thought" are two of the worst words in the English language when used together as in "I thought it was a good idea to store my six-pack of tonic water on top of the TV" or "I thought you would like a vacuum cleaner for Christmas."  "I thought" is the same as assuming and you know what they say when you assume?

Another bad word is "You."

I know I am guilty of this myself.  My Dad told me long ago that "you" was a bad, accusing word as in "You don't care about anyone but yourself" or "You forgot to buy me a birthday present."  We know we are supposed to say, "I feel bad when you don't care about anyone but yourself" and "I feel sad when you forget to buy me a birthday present."  I guess that's supposed to make saying that stuff better.

Putting his shirts in the dirty clothes without unbuttoning them

Yeah, why unbutton your shirt when someone else is around with no time on her hands who will have to unbutton it for you when it comes time for HER to iron YOUR shirt?! 

Thinking you can just say anything you want to your spouse

...like telling your significant other she looks fat, old or crabby.  Basically, keep your comments to yourself unless they are nice.  Didn't your mother tell you that if you couldn't say something nice to shut the...well, she didn't say that exactly but she said "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."  Probably good advice.  Hubby has never dared say I was putting on weight or that I looked old.  However, "crabby" comes up a lot.

So that is my personal list of possible grounds for divorce. 

It may or may not apply to you.  I am sure you have your own deal breakers where your spouse or significant other is concerned. 

But these things have a way of evening out.  I know I do things that irritate Hubby, too, such as not allowing him to turn on the heat until I get up (the noise bothers my beauty sleep) and he gets up three hours before I do; making him put up a baby gate at the foot of the stairs so the dogs can't come up and whine at the bedroom door, again, robbing me of much needed beauty sleep.  Or my shopping.  Seventy-five jackets and counting.  Or trying too many new recipes and having too many leftovers.  He has mini-meltdowns every couple of days, "Cripes.  Who is going to eat all of this food?!"

I probably shouldn't be dwelling on negatives. This time of year we are supposed to count our blessings.

And I do.  I have Hubby, two successful, happily married children, grandchildren, three dogs who love me very much, we live comfortably, I am enjoying being retired, and I have my health (so far).

I know I probably can't change any of these little irritants on my list.  When we first get into a relationship, we think we can change our partners.  But in the end, we can only change ourselves and how we react to what bothers us.  I can choose to get upset every time I can't find the scissors (most of the time I do) or I can choose to make a fuss every time I have to unbutton Hubby's shirts to iron them (I don't). 

In general, after 31 years of marriage, I realize it's too late to change HIM.  I have to change ME. I have to change how I react to all of those things that irritate me so much.  And I can certainly try to change those things that irritate him about ME.

So what better time of year than now to make some changes, some New Year's Resolutions, if you will?  

No, not to get a divorce over trivial irritants.  But to resolve to not let those everyday issues get in the way of the big picture  and cause marital discord- to realize that I love that guy even if he falls asleep during "The Amazing Race" and leaves his shoes where I could trip over them and die.  And I resolve to work on the issues that irritate him like making so much food and feeling like I need another jacket.

But dammit, that toilet roll better roll off the top!

Thanks for Reading!

 

 

See you Friday

 

 

for my review of the new movie 

 

 

"The Hunger Games:

Mockingjay Part 2" 

 

 

and

 

 

The Week in Reviews

(What to See or Read and What to Avoid)

 

 

and the latest on
  

My 1001 Movies I Must See Before

 I Die Project."

  

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to copy and paste or click on the share buttons to share it on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and LinkedIn, email it to your friends and LIKE me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer

"Brooklyn" and The Week in Reviews

[I review the new movie "Brooklyn" and the DVDs "Southpaw" and "The Stanford Prison Experiment." The Book of the Week is "Becoming Beyoncé: The Untold Story" by J. Randy Taraborrelli.  I also bring you up-to-date on "My 1001 Movies I Must See Before I Die Project" with Werner Herzog's "Cave of Forgotten Dreams."]



Brooklyn 

Saoirse Ronan stars as Eilis Lacey, a young Irish immigrant who finds love in 1950's Brooklyn.  However, when tragedy strikes her family back in Ireland, Eilis must choose between two countries and two loves.

Eilis is a shy, sweet Irish girl who makes her way to New York to try to make a new life for herself.  There was nothing for her in Ireland, so her sister Rose arranged with a priest in Brooklyn, Father Flood, for Eilis to have a job and a place to live in Brooklyn so she would have a better life.  Eilis has a rough crossing on the boat to New York and is befriended by an experienced traveler who gives her tips on how to look presentable when entering the country and advice on making a go of it. 

Eilis moves into an Irish boarding house for young women run by Mrs. Kehoe (Julie Walters, who also was stunning in the recent first series of "Indian Summers" on "Masterpiece Theatre" ) and works in a high end department store.  However, Eilis is not comfortable interacting with customers and has a difficult time adjusting to her new life.  She becomes very homesick and depressed. She meets with Father Flood (Jim Broadbent), who counsels her and gets her into a bookkeeping class because Eilis wants to be an accountant like her sister Rose. Then she meets Tony (Emory Cohen), a charming Italian "fella" at a dance and they fall in love.  What better antidote to homesickness than to fall in love?

But all is not peachy keen for our lovers. A tragedy back in Ireland forces Eilis to return and the pull to stay in Ireland threatens their future.

Ronan first made an impression in a small part as the young girl who set off a series of tragic events in "Atonement (1997).  Now Ronan is all grown up and this film is all about her.  She beautifully captures what it would be like to be a young girl in the pre-Internet age of the 1950's struggling to make a life for herself all alone in a new country far from everything she had known. Ronan's performance is lovely and spectacular in its sublety.  She starts out shy and uncertain and slowly Eilis grows into a strong woman.  She carries this film in an Academy Award-worthy performance. 

All of the other actors are also first rate. Julie Walters as Mrs. Kehoe, the landlady of a boarding house for young ladies who runs a tight ship, brings humor and a bit of edge in a lovely nuanced performance to this otherwise romantic film. Emory Cohen, who you might remember from the TV show "Smash" is adorable as Tony. Who wouldn't want to be his girlfriend?  But there is another suitor in the picture back in Ireland played by Domhnall Gleeson, who we were first introduced to in the Harry Potter films and who was able to show his romantic side in "About Time."  I even liked the kid actor, James DiGiacomo, who plays Tony's wise-cracking kid brother.  And you know how I feel about kid actors.

This is a lovely romantic film. And who doesn't love a good romance?  This film beautifully directed by John Crowley with a script by Nick Hornby (based on the novel of the same name by Colm Toibin) has all of the bells and whistles that makes for a dreamy love story. The cinematography by Yves Belanger creates that dreamy feel and you will be transported to another time and place as you take this journey to Brooklyn with Eilis.  Bring your hankies.

Early Oscar prediction:  Ronan will get a Best Actress Oscar nomination for this (she just won the New York Film Critics Circle Best Actress Award).

Rosy the Reviewer says...This movie is a must see!  One of the best performances of the year.  You will thank me!

Some Movies You Might Have Missed

(And Some You Will Be Glad You Did)!

***Now Out on DVD***

Southpaw (2015)

Things don't look good for boxer Billy Hope after a tragic accident.

The ironically named boxer Billy Hope (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a tough guy who grew up in foster care in Hell's Kitchen.  It doesn't get much tougher than that.  His wife, Maureen (Rachel McAdams), had a similar background and is also a tough cookie.  The two were childhood sweethearts and are clearly in love and in an "us against the world" relationship. Billy fights and Maureen keeps Billy together. 

When the film begins, Billy and Maureen are doing well.  Billy is an undefeated light heavy weight championship boxer and they live in a nice home with their daughter Leila (Oona Laurence).  But unfortunately, tragedy strikes early on at a charity event when Billy gets into a brawl with a rival boxer's entourage, Maureen gets shot and then things all fall apart for Billy.

Billy is not an easy guy to relate to.  He's not very smart and makes a lot of his own problems.  He goes on a binge, making one bad decision after another until he loses everything, including his manager (50 Cent) and custody of his daughter. Nobody wants anything to do with him. But he finally pulls himself together and approaches Tick Willis (Forrest Whitaker), a local gym owner and trainer and begs him to let him train.  With Tick, Billy learns that he needs to train his mind as well as his body if he is going to win in the ring and in life.

In Rocky-like fashion, Billy starts over and trains to seek his redemption.  We've seen this film before many times but Gyllenhaal's, Whitaker's and McAdams' performances, and the relationship between Billy and his daughter, make for an emotionally satisfying film.  And Director Antoine Fuqua shows us the gritty world of professional boxing with impressive "you are there" fight scenes.

Gyllenhaal lost weight, learned to box and trained for this role and once again shows his versatility as an actor.  He seems to like the loner roles, like his nutty rogue photographer in "Nightcrawler" and characters on the edge.  McAdams is always lovely to watch and here plays an edgier character than we are used to.  Whitaker and 50 Cent also put in impressive performances.

I almost didn't review this one because I had decided I was only going to review films I really liked and wanted to recommend (with the occasional review to warn you off something). The film itself has issues and I am not a big fan of boxing films, but Gyllenhaal's performance is noteworthy.  He plays a character you don't like, a not very smart punch drunk guy, but when you think of all of the various characters Gyllenhaal has played: the sensitive Jack Twist in "Brokeback Mountain," the creepy Louis Bloom in "Nightcrawler," to name just a couple, it is worth seeing how he transforms himself here. 

Rosy the Reviewer says...See it for the performances and if you like boxing films, you will like this one.






The Stanford Prison Experiment (2015)

 



In the summer of 1971, 24 male students took part in a proposed two-week mock prison experiment in the basement of a building at Stanford University.  Each was randomly assigned to be prisoners and guards and let's just say, the "guards" took their roles very seriously.

This is a dramatic reenactment of what took place during that real life experiment.

Dr. Philip Zimbardo (Billy Crudup), a psychology professor and researcher at Stanford University, placed an ad in the newspaper to recruit 24 male students to participate in an experiment to study the psychological effects of being a prisoner or a prison guard and "the effects prisons can have on human behavior." Since it was summer, the school would be deserted so classrooms and hallways of one of the buildings on campus became the prison. The students were offered $15 per hour to participate and as the film unfolds, we see that each student had his reasons to participate and many of them needed the money.

At first, each student thought he wanted to be a prisoner. No one wanted to be "the man," a guard. The prisoners and guards were chosen randomly and the guards wore uniforms and sunglasses to establish their authority.  All were told that once the experiment started, they were not to refer to it as a study or experiment and no one was allowed to get physical.

At first the guards used a script and got a kick out of play acting as they picked up each prisoner from their home, blindfolded him and made him strip so they could "delouse" him.  Each prisoner was given a number and addressed as such and had to wear a uniform that was more like a dress, also part of the dehumanizing process meant to strip away their individuality as part of the experiment.

It only took one day for everything to get very out of hand and for the experiment to become a harrowing exercise of the haves and the have nots.  As things would unfold, the guards would step up their punishments and the prisoners would start to rebel.

The prisoners created their own hierarchy:  those who wanted to do what they were told and just get through this thing and those who rebelled. Likewise, some of the guards took their guarding more seriously than others.  When the guards realized that the prisoners would do whatever they told them to, including participating in humiliating acts, the guards continued to step it up.  They would wake them up in the middle of the night to do jumping jacks and push-ups and it quickly became clear that you don't have to use physical violence to terrorize people.  One of the most vicious of the guards (Michael Angarano) loved the film "Cool Hand Luke" and adopted a southern accent to mimic one of the nasty characters in that film.

What do you do when you sign on for some role playing but no one stops playing and you begin to question your own sanity? Why didn't the students playing the prisoners quit?  Why did all of the guards go along with the torture when they didn't really want to?  And, you keep asking yourself, why doesn't Zimbardo step in and stop it?

Zimbardo was always torn between protecting the students and protecting his own research. Today watching this film, one can't help but be struck by its timeliness in light of recent reports of police brutality and what happened at Abu Ghraib. 

This dramatization, directed by Kyle Patrick Alvarez with a script by Tim Talbott, is an excruciating exercise in the darkest side of human nature.  But the film showed that goodness still existed, too, even in the most torturous of situations.

Crudup is the only big name here and he is one of our most underrated actors. I have never forgotten him in "Waking the Dead." Not sure why he failed to make it to superstardom, but he certainly has been a working actor, which, I guess is what most actors wish for. He has been in at least one feature film every year since his first one in 1996. Here he puts in a wonderful performance as Zimbardo, a good man who made some bad decisions in the name of research.  All of the performances from the ensemble cast of young actors are also believable and memorable.

It's difficult to imagine that the real Zimbardo would be happy with this film as it does not paint him in a very good light.  However, when this film first came out, he appeared to be endorsing the film as he made the talk show rounds but when asked what he would have done differently, he replied that he would have stopped the experiment sooner. Duh.

Rosy the Reviewer says...a harrowing but incredibly compelling ensemble piece about the abuse of power.

***My 1001 Movies I Must See Before I Die Project***

 

270 to go!

Have YOU seen this classic film?




Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2010)

Auteur Werner Herzog gained unprecedented access to film inside the Chauvet Cave which was discovered in 1994 and is considered one of the "greatest discoveries of the history of human culture."

German film director, producer, author, and actor Herzog is considered one of the greatest figures of the New German Cinema with such classic films as "Aguirre, the Wrath of God," "Fitzcarraldo" and "Grizzly Man" under his belt.  He has directed as many documentaries as he has feature films.

Here he directs yet another documentary, this time turning his camera to the Chauvet Cave in southern France.  The cave contains immaculately preserved cave paintings dating back over 30,000 years, the oldest in existence. It was unprecedented that he was given access to film inside the cave as only a small group of scientists had ever been inside.  Because a rock face had fallen and sealed the cave, it provided a perfect time capsule and today it is still sealed off from the general public.

Written, directed and narrated by Herzog, he used a tiny, non-professional camera rig, minimal lighting and could only film four hours per day, but he was still able to add his artful direction to produce what appears to be a labor of love for him.  As he films, he asks the scientists questions and comments on the paintings, wondering who these people were, why they drew these pictures, what their hopes and dreams might have been and drawing a parallel between those ancient humans and ourselves.  We are all the same. The paintings are amazingly drawn, not what you would expect from ancient people who lived over 30,000 years ago.

Why it's a Must See:  "All of the hallmarks of Herzog's work are present, but 3-D technology allowed the filmmaker to explore motifs of landscape, mythology, and the eccentricities of his subjects with new guile... [This film] provides a critical milestone for those with reservations about 3-D technology and 'serious' cinema."
---"1001 Movies I Must See Before I Die"

Not sure how this film would appeal to the general public, but artists and history and archaeology buffs would be in heaven here as the cinematography is amazing, even though I didn't see it in 3-D.

Rosy the Reviewer says...a chance to see something that few have ever seen.

 

 

 

***Book of the Week***

Becoming Beyonce: The Untold Story by
J. RandyTaraborrelli (2015)

How Beyoncé became Beyoncé - in 400+ pages.

I was drawn to this book for two reasons:  One, I realized I knew nothing about Beyoncé other than her fame, and since she is one of our biggest superstars, that wasn't good for a pop culture queen like myself.  And two, I knew that J. Randy would tell me more than I ever wanted to know about her.  And he delivers.  He is, in fact, one of my favorite biographers.  You can count on him to do his research and find out every fact possible about the celebrity he is writing about.

It's all here from Beyoncé's early years as a child pageant winner growing up in a middle class community with her successful Dad, Mathew, glamorous mother Tina and her sister Solange (who has become a celebrity in her own right), to her first singing success at the age of eight followed by big success in Destiny's Child at the age of 16.  That was followed by her highly successful solo career, her marriage to rapper Jay Z and the birth of their little girl, Blue Ivy, to Beyoncé being named by Forbes Magazine as the #1 wealthiest celebrity in 2014.

However, her success was not without hard work, sacrifice and single-minded focus.  And I'm talking about her Dad, Mathew.  He gave up a lucrative career as a tech salesman to spend all of his time promoting Beyoncé.  But that's not to diminish Beyoncé's own drive, which she had from a very early age.  Her talent at delivering a song was recognized early and belied her shyness in real life.

Taraborrelli's strength and the reason why I enjoy his books so much is his extensive research (24 pages of acknowledgements and notes) and attention to detail as well as his ability to tell a compelling true story and make it as exciting as the best fiction.

Want to know what really happened in that elevator when sister Solange went off on Jay Z or if Jay Z really had an affair with Rhianna? Then you will just have to read this book!

Rosy the Reviewer says...a fascinating look at just what it takes to make it BIG and stay there!

That's it for this week!

Thanks for reading!

See you Tuesday for

 

"Grounds for Divorce!"

 

If you enjoyed this post, feel free to click on the share buttons to share it on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and LinkedIn, 
email it to your friends and
LIKE me on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosythereviewer.

Check your local library for DVDs and books mentioned.

 

Note:  Next time you are wondering whether or not to watch a particular film, check out my reviews on IMDB (The International Movie Database). 

Find the page for the movie, click on "Explore More" on the right side panel and then scroll down to "External Reviews."  Look for "Rosy the Reviewer" on the list. Or if you are using a mobile device, look for "Critics Reviews." Click on that and you will find me alphabetically under "Rosy the Reviewer."