jjedif

Maybe not worth an Oscar nomination, but the French singer SoKo did a great job with this role (not unlike the young actress, Quvenzhané Wallis, who did a great job in an otherwise a painfully flawed "Beast of the Southern Wild"). "Augustine" does a great job of highlighting the attitudes and practices that existed during the 19th century as psychiatry was trying to become a science. And as backward and ignorant as the beliefs of Charcot will appear to many, who lack a sense or knowledge of history, it is even sadder to think that Charcot was actually a genius compared to most of the people of his era, and that he was a definite improvement over the entire rest of human history that preceded the 19th century. At least Charcot tried to break out of the ignorance that enveloped (and still envelops much of) humanity when it comes to the "mentally ill" and the epileptic. The worse part of the movie is the ending, that final encounter between Charcot and Augustine after Charcot's presentation of Augustine to a group of French scientists; it just didn't make sense. But overall "Augustine" is better than average...and nowadays that's a lot since even better-than-average films are so rare.

Mikkel Boe Følsgaard, who plays the somewhat addled King Christian VII, almost deserves an Oscar, in my opinion, for his performance. He reminded me a lot of Tom Hulse in "Amadeus", who lost out to his co-star F. Murray Abraham (who also did a great job as Salieri).

History pieces that are worth seeing don't come along very often any more (and no, "Les miserables" is not a good novel, much less a good movie).

All in all, the story hangs together well, in spite of the fact that we all know, even if we aren't history buff, what will happen.

I think the director/screen writers should have put more into showing how the crazy kings edicts transformed lives and how Frederick came to power. There were a lot of "spaces" in the film where not much was happening.

And as a person with a Danish branch in my family and a visitor to Copenhagen, I was sad to see that none of Copenhagen's or Denmark's beauty comes out in the film...since it is mostly filmed in the Czech Republic.

I suppose "Beasts of the Southern Wild" is supposed to be about the inability of even the most terrible environment (the most disadvantaged areas around New Orleans), or the most terrible event (Hurricane Katrina), to crush the human spirit.

But it was really 93 minutes of righteous silliness. There is nothing lyrical about it.

And the righteous silliness was only broken from time to time when the four "surreal" razorback hogs made "Beasts…" into righteous ridiculousness.

A movie certainly doesn't have to be uplifting, but if that was the director's intent (see my first sentence above), then "Beasts…" was a complete failure because the people who populate the movie are almost empty shells devoid of all humanity. There is no folk wisdom here, there is only folk stupidity.

No, I know that such damaged people exist, I know that there is a segment of society that is thrown away to live in a "world fashioned from debris", and I know that even the most marginalized of people can act heroically. But I didn't see any heroic people in "Beasts…" Not one.

According to one review I read, the residents of the "Bath Tub" were "…ripped from their waterlogged home by callous government relief workers? (But) they know where they belong" even if it means death? What a crock! Hushpuppy's performance is literally the only thing this film has going for it.

No, I get the part about men starting most of the world's wars and that a world run by women would probably have fewer wars.

And since I remember Lebanon's 15-year-long, bloody civil war between Muslims (backed by Iran and the Assads) and Christians (backed by Israel) it's always interesting to see what's happening in Lebanon these days, especially given what is going on in Syria.

But creating a Muslim "Tony" and the Christian "Maria" a la "Westside Story" didn't work for me, i.e., it wasn't believable.

Nor was the addition of the Ukranian dancers, added to provide comic relief, believable.

The baking incident and the occasional musical aspects did a better job of breaking the dramatic tension in what could have been a very gruesome ordeal.

Overall, I'm glad I saw it. The acting was decent and it was definitely different from what I expected. I'm glad it ended in a bloodbath. And I would agree with the idea that seemed to be the point of view of the directors, that these two groups really can't occupy the same piece of land in peace.

It must be tremendously difficult to make a meaningful movie in the Middle East, and I thank the people involved for their efforts.

I definitely recommend "Incendies" for the Lebanon-interested public.

Moving back and forth between four intertwined vignettes, Allen gives us his views on how Fate influences Fame, Love, Marriage…and Fame.

In the vignette featuring internationally-known actor and comedian Roberto Benigni ("Life is Beautiful"), Allen ridicules the capriciousness of meaningless fame promoted by the media. I was immediately reminded of Eça de Queiroz's "The City and the Mountains" (1902). A ticker tape machine inside the main character's ultramodern home in Paris spits out the following information: "the Russian frigate Azoff has entered Marseilles after a mechanical failure". The character immediately hangs up the phone and rushes over to read the ticker tape, and a friend asks the main character if the Azoff's problem affects him directly. He answers: "Does it affect me? No, it's a news item." In fact, it's a completely meaningless event that the news media has chosen to make into its story of the day. However, the vignette itself is as ridiculous as the new media it parodies. Although I loved Roberto Benigni in "Down by Law" (1986) (Allen's movie borrows from director Jim Jarmusch's style), I found this vignette to be the weakest of the four. But if you like Roberto Benigni channeling Jerry Lewis, you might like it.

A second vignette features a young Italian couple that has just arrived in Rome from the country, where their extended family has offered to set the young man up in a good job. Then by mistake or fate, Penelope Cruz enters the couple's life. This vignette is only slightly less weak than the one above. It just wasn't all that funny nor was it in any way original; Penelope Cruz is merely channeling her crazy Maria Elena character from Allen's "Vicky Cristina Barcelona." There is a third vignette featuring the ghost-like Alec Baldwin (it's not clear if he's a real person, or a ghost, or both) unsuccessfully and ironically trying to help Jesse Eisenberg avoid an inescapable mistake imposed by fate. Just as Charlie Sheen was obviously playing himself in his hit series "Two and a Half Men", Alec Baldwin is obviously channeling Alec Baldwin although officially Alec Baldwin isn't "Alec Baldwin" in the movie. If you like "30 Rock", you'll like this vignette.

Finally, the strongest vignette oddly enough is the one that features Woody Allen and Italian tenor Fabio Armiliato. Yes, Woody Allen is channeling a Woody Allen-type character and isn't that good. But this particular vignette does have the best set of characters of any of the four…and it is a good critique of the "America's Got Talent" mentality juxtaposed against Allen's "you have to risk (and experience) failure and derision to be true to yourself" philosophy.

*I* had to go because my wife loves Woody Allen movies and Rome (she gave the film an "okay"; not as good as "Midnight in Paris"), so I get point for taking her to the movies. If you want to see what Rome is like before you go, definitely go see the film; the cinematography is very good, and it definitely makes Rome seem like a charming place worth visiting. And since modern Italian films and TV are pretty terrible (yes, mostly much, much worse than US films and TV), it may be your only chance to see Italian actors (who *aren't* all terrible) in a movie or program that is NOT terrible. Overall, I give "To Rome with Love" a 6 for making Rome seem charming, which might help Italy's economic ills, for showcasing Italian actors, and because the whole is somewhat better than the parts.

"Monsieur Lazhar" is another fine film "québécois".

Vive la différence!

Like "Incendies", the film links Quebec to the rest of the world in an unexpected way.

The primary and secondary story lines that intersect in Bachir's life are well thought out.

Yet the superb acting of the children is what really takes this film to another level.

The film also shows Quebec's cinematic Frenchness.

Throughout the film we are left hanging on several counts, something that most Americans don't like (along with the film's lack of car chase scenes and explosions).

Nor will most Americans care about an Algerian refugee escaping terrorism in his home country.

Or that the film doesn't turn out in a predictable sappy way.

In fact at the end of the film, neither Bachir's or the children's futures are at all certain.

In a word, this is NOT a film that will be opening in multiplexes around the USA!

But for those who like a good plot and good acting, "Monsieur Lazhar" is definitely worth the small investment of time and money.

Wealthy married men in late 19th century Paris live respectable lives with their wives and children. They probably even take their children to be baptized in the church and are blessed by the religious leaders. When they die, their obituaries will fill the newspapers and they will be buried in large, ornate tombs. In word, they are respectable and respected men by society. And these respectable and respected men, of course, also spend many a night cavorting with prostitutes. Why wouldn't they? Why shouldn't they? They can afford it, it's their right, and no one can tell them not to.

The prostitutes, of course, are also decent women whose only crime was the misfortune has been to be born into a life where being a prostitute is about as good as it gets. One prostitute, in particular, is the victim of a horrendous crime inside the brothel. No one really talks about it; it was just bad luck. But the cruel and grotesque act didn't need to be replayed over and over again. Still, the upside is that as damaged goods the victim of the crime will be spared pregnancy, syphilis and/or being old by her madame. And on another upbeat note, by the end of the film rich women have been liberated...and can now visit the brothel with their husbands.

I did like the scene where the state medical examiner examines all the women, not from an artistic standpoint, but because, at least, in France prostitutes do get some medical attention, unlike here in the U.S. Of course, syphilis has symptoms, but the disease then goes latent, so the doctor was bounnd to miss some cases, condoms were not en vogue...and there were no treatments for syphilis, syphilis was probably going to infect most prostitutes...and their johns...and their families...eventually. But later having both clients and call girls wear cute masks was a nice touch as was ending the film on Bastille Day!

What's in this film for the viewer? Some nudity. No sex (this is not pornography, after all; this is art!). Ridiculous dialogue. Poorly developed characters. And that deja vu feeling that I've seen this all before in another not very memorable film before that I've forgotten about. And yeah, the musics was terrible. "Nights in White Satin" by the Moody Blues? Come on! I may have to watch "The Cook, the Thief, his Wive and her Lover" wash the visions of this depressing film out of my memory.

"Behind the Glass" is acted well enough. And sure, you get to see a little bit of Zagreb filled with Croatian faces. And if you're studying for your final exam in Croatian language, you get to practice your listening skills. But "Behind the Glass" is just not a very compelling story.

The story line: Men like sex, so they have children with their wives…and sex with their mistresses. Men are slaves to social convention, so they go to church with their wives…to baptize their children. But later they seek out their mistresses to compensate themselves for being so good. Men go to business meetings with their fellow workers and to picnics with their extended families…while their mistresses wait for the commitment that will never come. It doesn't really matter that the wife and the mistress are really not that different from one another. Men are in love with their mistresses, not with their wives.

There is a shocking and totally unexpected turn of events at the end. But even with this shocking and totally unexpected turn of events, "Behind the Glass" just wasn't a very compelling story.

but I understand why such a movie would be very difficult to make as a film with actors and sets.

Even if the Cuban communists authorities allowed the exiled Bebo Valdez to make his film in Cuba, it would be almost impossible to re-create most of the scenes in Havana.

Thus, animation makes sense and it gives the creators of the film complete control over the creative process.

Still, I didn't think the animation itself was as good as it could have been.

But because I am somewhat familiar with the history of and somehwat familiar with 20th century Cuban music, the animation wasn't an issue for me.

Yeah, it's a bit sappy and melodramatic as far as the storyline of love between Chico and Rita goes.

But I found I could get into the music and so the other elements of the film didn't really matter.

I think it's just a matter of knowing what you are going to see...and not see.

If you like the music, you'll like the film.

I saw "Stranger than Paradise" when I was a 20-something in grad school in the 1980s.

I immediately loved Jim Jarmusch's understated style, and I have seen every Jarmusch film since then.

"Stranger than Paradise" is NOT ha-ha funny.

But John Lurie is perfect in the role of a gritty, self-confident New Yorker who thinks that snow blowing across a frozen lake outside Cleveland in winter is beautiful.

And Eszter Balint is also perfect as Lurie's not American cousin just off the boat from Hungary.

This was Jarmusch's first "commercially" released film...and it's definitely low budget in the way that Spike Lee's "She's gotta have it" is low budget.

But it showed that Jarmusch had what it takes to make original films that break the mold...even if it also showed that Jarmusch would never really be commercially successful.

Yes, Jim Jarmusch is sort of the "Grateful Dead" of indie film makers.

This is probably the closest Jim Jarmusch will come to commercial success.

And Bill Murray probably deserves a lot of credit for this.

If you met the person of your dreams as a youngster, fell in love, got married, had a family, and lived happily every after, you might not get this film.

But if you needed a lot of time and more than a few relationships to get it right, you definitely can live vicariously through Murray's Don Johnston character.

The choice of five very different women that Don has to search for is brilliant.

And each woman (except one) plays her role exquisitely (you'll notice which one is the "except one" but in a completely unexpected way when you see the film).

Bill Murray, like Jim Jarmusch, has been quite a late bloomer.

Yet even in his "bad" movies (like "Where the Buffalo Roam" in which Murray plays Hunter S. Thompson), Murray is just a hoot...even when (or maybe especially when) he's not trying to be (e.g., in "Get Low").

And Murray is exactly the right guy in "Broken Flowers."

I am NOT among the people who think George Clooney was cheated at the Oscars for not winning the "Best Actor" award. In fact, I don't even think George Clooney is that good an actor in general nor do I like the topics of most of his movies. But I deal feel "The Descendants" is a worthwhile movie, including possible the "Best Picture" award because it does a good job of examining Hawaii's ruling colonist class without being too heavy handed about it.

On the U.S. mainland, we almost never talk about the mixing of peoples nor do we seem to form stable mixed-race groups. Barack Obama, e.g., is "black" because in the U.S., if one of your parents is white and the other black, you are black to most white people, thus, if you want to have a life, you make that life in the black community where you are most likely to be accepted…and your whiteness is even an advantage. But on in most other parts of the world, the white colonists mixed with the non-whites to form mestizo (Native American + European) groups or mulatto (African + European) groups, and then when the whites left, the mestizos or the mulattoes simple took the place of the whites and the non-whites remained at the bottom. Guatemala and Haiti, respectively, are prime examples.

So I have happy to see Clooney's film explore that aspect of Hawaiian mestizo culture (even if I don't buy the ending regarding the 25,000 acres of unspoiled Kauai paradise). And I would still love to visit Hawai'i someday…and I promise…I won't stay and try to muck up your paradise.

In Woody Allen's Oscar-nominated film, a young writer, in Paris with his fiancée and her parents (which can't possibly be a good idea), falls in love with and fantasizes about the Paris that no longer exists.

The storyline in "Les femmes du 6éme étage" is about as plausible as the one in "Midnight in Paris" and the movie's ending is positively ridiculous.

Plus, you will find just about every Spanish and French stereotype in the book in this movie...along with a great deal of truth about the "refined" French and their less "refined" Spanish neighbors.

Yet the film is mostly and genuinely funny and the acting superb all around for the most part (the ridiculous ending happens so quickly that it doesn't really detract from the film at all).

Finally, it was nice from the standpoint of a student of the French language that I could pretty much understand everything that was said without really paying attention to the subtitles.

I'm not sure why Demi Moore was in this movie; Julia Roberts probably would have been a better choice as the token woman in the Wall Street firm (Lehmann Bros.?) portrayed in the film.

But overall the fine is superb; Kevin Spacey deserves an Oscar nomination.

If I were going to make one change, I would have replaced Jeremy Irons (the head vulture) with Mitt Romney.

Edward Abbey once wrote, "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell." This film portrays that core principle of Capitalism (a religion that is every bit as godless as Communism ever was) very well.

Unfortunately, we have no choice...just as the people in communist countries had no choice.

I guess it's better to fill our bank accounts with other people's mooney and not think about our actions...until we get and die from cancer.

At least, that seems to be the American way.

It's one twisted tale about one messed up family from one screwed up country, but it a very well told story with fantastic plot twists and lots of realist suspense.

If I were the twins' mother, I don't think I could have put on Jeanne and Simon what their mother Nawal put on her children.

I think I would have left the secrets die with me.

Still, the author of "Incendies" could have taught the ancient Greeks something about tragedy.

But unless you actually prefer real life drama based on real history to the typical American fantasy world of cinema, don't see this film.

And although always not graphic, be prepared to see violence against women, including by other women, as the subtext.

In "La chute", Albert Camus wrote that the French has two passions: reading the newspaper and fornicating. Now the French have a third passion to pursue in between reading the newspaper and fornicating: seeing a psychoanalyst.

In fact, if one is a prostitute who is tired of being a prostitute, evidently she goes to a psychoanalyst. And if one is a psychoanalyst who is tired of being an psychoanalyst, evidently he goes to see a prostitute.

But what happens if the psychoanalyst can't help the prostitute? And what happens if the prostitute can't help the psychoanalyst? Where does one goes from there?

As a fan of Isabelle Huppert's for 28 years (since "Entre Nous"), I still find her acting engaging (even if she doesn't seem to be aging all that well) and I liked the plot twist at the end.

But the role of Xavier the psychoanalyst was weak. I mean really, what was *his* problem? Ah, but that's modern life. Every one has a problem...and the overpaid, overweight psychoanalyst's problem is just as serious...to him...as slender prostitute's (who could never be paid enough to compensate her for what she does) problem is to her.

Perhaps that's the point.

"The Guard" continues a foin, foin tradition of very funny Irish movies about gritty topics (like unemployment in "The Van").

The Ireland portrayed in the movie is now being invaded by violent, sociopathic traffickers of hard drugs whom the local police are only too happy (even if the corrupt police officers never laugh) to help (this scenario is actually, no doubt, true).

But one guy stands out because...he just doesn't go along with anyone; he's his own guy, his own weird guy.

Still, when everyone you works with is either corrupted or soon dead, what's a guy to do? If the film had a "weakness", it's that the dialogue is sometimes difficult to understand, even by we who are Celtophiles used to the lilt and the brogue (I was reminded of "Mona Lisa" with Robbie Coltrane and Ed Hoskins).

And perhaps the actors are all well known in Ireland, but I was also reminded of "The Dead" by John Huston is that the entire of no-name actors in "The Guard" was brilliant.

I give "The Guard" a 9/10 but that's because I thought the ending was a little sloppy (like Jim Jarmusch's fortress scene in "The Limits of Control."

The plot has something to do with diamonds. The password is, Do you speak Spanish? And mysterious black helicopters are involved. But why does de Bankole's character care what happens to the nude girl? And are we really supposed to believe that de Bankole's character penetrated the American's fortress with his imagination? I have seen all of Jarmusch's pics from "Stranger than Paradise" through "Broken Flowers." And I can definitely see Bill Murray playing Bernie Madoff. The photography was great. But you lost me, Jimbo.

I am reminded that Wim Wenders once made a meaningful movie about Portugal because Wenders visited Portugal, loved it, and decided he would make a movie in Portugal. I guess Jim Jarmusch also enjoyed his time in Spain but maybe he needs to meet Stella so she can help Jim get his groove back.

If you like uplifting movies, DON'T go to "Blindness", based on the novel "A ceguera" by Jose Saramago. Saramago's novel writing is quite uneven; sometimes it hums like a fine-tuned motor, sometimes it stumbles and putters along. But Saramago is always about real life, and the leftist author is usually fiercely critical of the neo-con/neo-lib world we live in. So how did Fernando Mireilles do with his film adaptation of "Blindness?" I think Mireilles did a fine job, including assembling a fine cast. There is one short scene suggesting extreme sexual violence that one could easily fast-forward through without any loss of meaning because it's easy enough to imagine what's happening. But otherwise it seems closely in tune with both the letter and the spirit of the novel. This is the world of "V for Vendetta"...except almost everyone, including the dictators and their police, are literally blind. But that doesn't matter; blindness need not impair a human's ability to exploit and be cruel to his fellows.

There is really no credible explanation for the disease "white blindness", and neither film nor novel offer any explanation. But that doesn't really matter. The people in the film and novel may be visually blind, but the film isn't about blindness of the visual kind.

I also highly recommend the sequel novel, A lucidez (Lucidity)...but only if you like movies like "V for Vendetta" and "District 9" and other films with a message.

I remember very few shows from the 1980s. This is one of the few shows that I remember. George Clooney's talents weren't that evident (in fact, I'm still not much of a George Clooney fan. But if they ever make a re-make, he could be Dr. Howard Sheinfeld now that he's been to TV med school). But it was immediately evident that Jason Alexander and Conchata Ferrell were really funny, so I was glad when both resurfaced later on "Seinfeld" and "Two and a Half Men", respectively. Was "E/R" the funniest show ever? No, it was really kind of an earlier version of "Scrubs" (in fact, I saw the "Scrubs" janitor on "Seinfeld" just last night!). Like "Scrubs", "E/R" was a usually silly comedy that occasionally morphed into into full-blown drama. And back in the grim days of Reagan, silly comedy was what the country needed.

In spite of some superficial similarities, "Small Town Murder Songs" is not "Fargo" set across the border in Canada, eh, and that might disappoint some American viewers(ya, you betcha).

STMS it strives to be a bit more believable, but it's definitely not as thrilling as, say, "Frozen River", which is set on a Native American reservation on the U.S.-Canada border.

At 75 minutes, STMS is much shorter than the standard 100-110-minute theatre film. The film is concise and doesn't waste any time or space and it didn't need to be much longer. Still, it would have helped tremendously if director Gass-Donnelly had added five or 10 minutes to explore the influence of Walter's Mennonite upbringing on his pathos. I think a lot of viewers will be confused by this aspect of the film, I know my wife was.

I was also dissatisfied with not knowing more about the victim, but maybe that's because in a U.S. film the audience is often spoon-fed and because unlike real life, the relationship between the victim and her killer is not well known (This was not an episode of "Dateline" or "48 Hours Mystery"). STMS is definitely understated and leaves out some things that many U.S. viewers have come to expect. In a word, it's a Canadian film and it doesn't play to the expectations of U.S. viewers.

Still, really the only aspect of the film that left me dissatisfied was Walter's ex. While it is completely believable that she leave Walter (he's a messed up dude and it's clear he really shouldn't be a cop anymore), her choice of a new beau is just not believable, even it adds a lot of tension to the plot.

It's not the funniest Woody Allen movie ever, that's for sure. But it's still kind of amazing that a director who's been around for so long can still put together a second-rate comedy that is better than most directors'best work. And the point of the film is interesting as well, especially coming for an older director who should be washed up and retired by now, that one can't go backward to a time when things were supposedly better...as the dough nuts holes who lead the Tea Party seem to think. Even though from a mathematical standpoint time doesn't have a direction, in reality time does have a direction. We can argue that time is going forward to the future or around in circles. But there's no need to revisit the past between the past is never really gone, it continue to exist along with the present and the future. And although Owen Wilson does a good job with the lead character, Corey Stoll does a great job as Hemingway.

Isabelle Huppert (along with Helen Mirren, Juliette Binoche and Laura Linnie) is one of my five favorite actors (the only male on the list being Bill Murray), so I had no doubt that she could realistically play a colonial coffee farmer trying to hang on in soon-to-be post-colonial Africa.

From the opening scene, there seems to be no doubt that things will turn out badly for Huppert's character. This is, after all, not war-torn Algeria portrayed in "Battle of Algiers", where the French are going to fight tenaciously to hold onto "their" land and then suddenly fold and get out of Dodge City. This is sub-Saharan Africa, and the politicians back in France know that it will be more profitable, and maybe even easier for them, to turn their colonies over to local African dictators, who can then be bought off for the benefit of French corporations and politicians. It's a win-win situation for everyone...except for the vast majority of Africans and Huppert's character. Perhaps we could let the French off the hook by saying that France couldn't have prepared their African colonies for independence if they had wanted to. But the French certainly did nothing positive in their colonies during their stay or after they left (the best we can say is that the Belgians in the Congo were much worst).

This is life in the land of barely living, where the local African warlords have no background in or time for the niceties of "civilized" brutality and exploitation a la française. Huppert seems oddly out of place, a relatively nice colonist who perhaps thinks naively that she can trade on her relative niceness to survive the new and very ugly reality about to engulf her. But she is completely out of touch with the reality. She could choose to leave, unlike the Africans who work on her plantation. But she somehow thinks she has no choice but to stay even as child-soldiers wander across the countryside around here.

I mainly saw "White Material" mainly because I like Isabelle Huppert acting, because one seldom sees a movie filmed in sub-Saharan Africa and because I had read Louroma's "Les Soleils des Indépendance" dealing with Ivory Coast. But I spent most of the movie hoping that when her time came, Huppert's character would take one carefully-aimed shot to head to relieve her suffering.

A couple of other points. The Supplement interview with Claire Denis is well worth seeing (Isabelle Huppert's interview is okay; unfortunately the disk wouldn't let me watch the interview with Isaach de Bankolé). I was glad that the child-soldiers were not shown committing a lot of the violence in the film. And as Denis points out, the local actors were very good. I also know that not all African countries are the same, but I also wondered about whether there was a lot of violence against women during the conflict in Ivory Coast like is currently occurring every day in Congo. Still I was glad that violence against women was not shown; it wouldn't have added to the film's message or effect.

I was hoping for eroticism between two women searching for their sexual identities, but what I got was "loving strangers" (aka soft porn). And not particularly "good" porn either. I know, if it's porn, there doesn't have to be a plot and the acting doesn't have to be convincing. And at least Chantelle Akerman wasn't sitting naked in her room for two hours eating sugar out of a paper bag ("Je, Tu, Elle").

And about half way through the movie there is an interesting plot twist, which means there must be a plot. But the music was terrible. "Lucía y el sexo" (which in English was translated as "Sex and Lucia") was good; but Medem's misses the mark on "Room in Rome." I recently saw a film, the name of which I can't recall, about two marriage-age young women friends, one Muslim and one Jewish, living in WWII-era North Africa during the Nazi occupation. Now that was a good erotic film...with a plot and good acting. Now I'm off to watch Isabelle Huppert's "White Material."

I expected to see a journey across Colombia's diverse geographical and cultural landscapes...and I was not disappointed. And as a second-language Spanish learner, I wanted to hear authentic Colombian Spanish...and I did. In fact, "The Wind Journeys" is a very well filmed journey across Colombia; I could see it winning an award for best cinematography. But the story about the current owner of the devil's accordion who, after the death of his wife vows to never play again, embarks on a journey to return the instrument to its rightful owner, including the ending, just didn't click for me.

Perhaps the times they are a changing, or maybe I've changed. I think in the 1980s, when I was 30 years younger, full of enthusiasm to travel the world and learn about exotic cultures, reading novels by García Márquez and more hopeful about life in general, I would have liked "The Wind Journeys" a lot more, or I would have just enjoyed watching it without caring if I bought the premise.

The premise of "The Wind Journeys" isn't as ridiculous as that of "Central Station" (another beautifully filmed and culturally-interesting story but which is based on a ludicrous premise). Yet even without the ongoing violence of the drug lords or the 40+ years of the ongoing FARC rebellion simmering in the background, the Colombia we see in "The Wind Journeys" is a violent, cruel, macho place where it's hard for me to have sympathy for anyone...because what good would that do? In spite of the great filming technique, this is not the Colombia of magical realism, this is the Colombia where a bit of hope swims hopelessly in a sea of hopelessness.

Mark Twain wrote that readers of romantic novels should love the good people, hate the bad people, and always be able to tell the two apart. I guess the two protagonists are the "good" guys in a world of "bad" guys, but I just didn't find myself caring deeply about their fates. Having said that, I would recommend this film for my hardcore Southamericanophile friends who want to see the wondrous and horrible beauty of Colombia. But I'm glad I didn't make my wife go with me to see this film at our local art-house theatre. In fact, I may go out and rent "La triste e increíble historia de la cándida Eréndira y su abuela desalmada" to cheer myself up, or maybe I'll put on my favorite Carlos Vives CD. Yeah, that's what I'll do.