exttraspecial

I knew he got into trouble for exposing the Pentagon Papers. This was a huge deal and brouhaha in the 1970's. What I didn't know was he was a Republican, he worked for the Rand Corporation, a think tank that did secret government work, like how to avoid nuclear annihilation. A Phd from Harvard, he thought the only way to know what is going on in the Vietnam war was to put on an army uniform and hit the ground. That took brass aggots. Upon his return and with the help of his wife-to-be, he changed from a hawk to a dove, which eventually led him to leak the Pentagon Papers, which led to the Nixon administration trying to discredit Elsberg, which led to the Watergate Burglary, which lead to Nixon's resignation. The rest is history. For additional context, watch Citizenfour (2014) about Edward Snowden's leak about mass surveillance by the US government. There's some uncanny parallels to both of these events in American history.

There's very few actors that have enunciation like Edward G. Robinson. He's Bugs Ahern who shuns the life of a Chicago gangster to become a member of high society in Calfiornia. He uses his powerful oratory to make mincemeat of the English language, all while enduring many faux pas and self inflicted embarassments. Mary Astor, a matinee idol of the 30's, plays a down and out society women and is the perfect foil to Robinson's Bugs Ahern. I'm not going to discuss the plot, except to say there is involvement with monkey suits, polo and what else? Scoundrels. This film is from the golden age of Hollywood, when actors like Bogart, Becall, Cagney and others helped to lift the country out of the Great Depression.

Tagline: A fish out of water.

This socially conscious film tells a disturbing story about a poor nation, Jamaica, but I get a feeling that it could be about any so called third world country that is duped to make a deal with the devil. The devil being wealthy and powerful nations (eq. The USA) who are in cahoots with the IMF. That human beings can be so destructive to one and other is shocking. It is difficult to reconcile the level of corruption in the name of foreign aid that has gone wildly off the rails. That the film is a documentary makes it all the more devastating.

There's a lot to process here and viewers should draw their own conclusions. But this is a serious film that will get under your skin and it will haunt you for a long, long time to come.

If you consider this that this is a period piece that takes place in the 1600's, I feel that its low budget look and feel enhances it authenticity. I imagine some of the dialogue is fictional, but the mainline of the story is apparently true. Yet the film feels realistic. I felt like I was a witness to history. Roberto Rossellini tells a compelling story with a purpose - to say this is the history of France and what a glorious history it is.

Louis the 14th takes power and he takes it absolutely. There's plenty of intrigue and amusement in this film. And though it's a fairly tame story, you're always wondering what's around the next corner. I can't recommend it highly enough.

I had to search far and wide for this DVD and it finally appeared on Ebay.

This 1966 production by D'Oyly Carte troop is true to its origins. Filmed on stage in England, this video performance is WAY better than the dated 1939 B&W film which is now on Criterion. The costumes and scenery are fresher but still authentic, the singing is superb, the actors "get into it" without overacting and adhere to the G&S tradition in the way only D'Oyly Carte can. Essentially The Mikado is a satire on British class wars superimposed over Japanese culture. It's hilarious. The lyrics by Gilbert are in the pantheon of literature and the music by Sullivan is unforgettable. The costumes, makeup, scenery, fans and story are jaw dropping. I first saw this operetta in 1965 and have been an opera fanatic ever since. For a somewhat fictionalized account of G&S and how The Mikado came to be, see the excellent film Topsy-Turvy (1999) directed by Mike Leigh.

Interesting that so many reviewers don't like this movie. I found it fascinating and appealing to my wokeness (I was woke long before wokeness became a thing, but I digress). Anyway---here's the jest of it: Anti capitalists are mad, break into the house of a borgeios capitalist and throw all his expensive accouterments in the swimming pool. Then they write on the wall "Your days of plenty are numbered". Then they abduct the capitalist. A long and dreary period in a hideout follows while the Edukators and capitalist grapple with materialism and the status quo. The film is prescient to our times.

At first, everything is going fine, but you know hell's going to break loose, not if, but when, because it is, after all, a Samuel Fuller film. He's a great film maker, and in my opinion, he's certifiable. It's noir, crazy & humane all at the same time. Unless you like your noir piled deep and high, I wouldn't call this an enjoyable film. But intriguing it is. The story, characters and events are so believable, I just got pulled in. Eyes glued to the screen. Figuratively speaking, it's a real nail biter. The camera work and lighting are visually stunning. Comparable to Antonioni, even. I suspect the early 60s was the culmination of b&w noir-style. Special shout-out to the child actors.

This is all-out Samuel Fuller. And it's no surprise that it comes on the heels of his mind blowing, must see, "Shock Corridor (1964)"

So much to learn here. I got an education in film writing, character studies, Japanese culture, entrepreneurship and noodles. The humorous vignettes about food break from the main story arc, are metaphorically speaking, the icing on the cake. The vignettes are erotic in a foodie sort of way. Kôji Yakusho has a smaller role, expertly played, as a deadpan gangster foodie with his moll. Check him out in "Shall We Dance (1996)"

The main story is deliciously LOL funny as it takes a look into, what is to me, the strange world of Japanese Noodle. An early scene gives you a college education in traditional Japanese noodle cuisine. Thereafter, the main characters take you on their quest to become real pros.

Nobuko Miyamoto in the role of Tampopo pulled at my heartstrings. That's all I can say, because it is a highly original film, and as such, you should see it for yourselves. It's in the top ten on my list.

The contrast between a wealthy middle-aged, unhinged woman, and a free-wheeling group of uninhibited Serbians is so stark, it kept my on the edge of my seat throughout the film. The comic scenes are not cerebral, they are laugh-out-loud. And the cerebral scenes, you have to figure out for yourself. At some point I had to ask - what did I get myself into?

I like weird things. And as such, this is one of my all-time favorite films. This is creative, original and a crazy story-telling. I suspect much of this weirdness is present due to the film's Swedish roots.

I am not going to tell you what happens, because that would spoil it for you. You need to see it yourself.

Except to say the highly erotic sex scene in a horse trough was no less than a true aphrodisiac for my date that night. Huzzah!

This is the background story to the prolific work of G&S, is excellently acted (and sung) by everyone involved. It's a large cast, it is readily apparent that they take G&S seriously, it is serious fun, and at times rolling on the floor and laughing out loud. I died. Gilbert seems to be the most central character, this film is not so much about his genius as it is about his character. That he is a genius is rather obvious. Some parts of the story are fictionalized (Supposedly the falling sword never happen) but as a period piece it is both educational and entertaining. The film is a masterpiece of art by Mr. Leigh. I must have seen it 30 times (I own a copy). And I'll watch it again and again.

Mike Leigh works with several actors who appear in many of his films. Jim Broadbent & Timothy Spall (both gifted) among several others who work frequently with Mr. Leigh make for some intense and engaging ensemble acting. This poignant and sweet story is about a middle class family and their encounter with everyday hopes, struggles, friendships, accomplishments or lack thereof. The bitter-sweet ending left me filled with hope and satisfaction. I liked the film because the story seems real, is so easily accessible and well played.

If you are drawn to off-beat characters then this film is for you. Mike Leigh is a story teller par excellence. The comedy is both laugh-out-loud and at times, more cerebral. But it is also a lesson in how to understand and be with other people who are obviously not on the same page as you. The acting is superb, particularly the quirky and tender characters Poppy and Scot. Although a writer can conjure up characters anyway he or she sees fit, it's not hard to imagine these are real people, we all know they exist somewhere. Indeed we know them, we just need to open our eyes and minds and accept their quirkiness, don't take life too seriously, fun is important.

The film is about curiosity, the environment, sea life, animals (including the human animal), animal intelligence, friendship, evolution, persistence, family, physical fitness, education - and most of all - octopus. Minds are relatively blown. The cinema-photography is stunning, great background music; a technical feat of monumental proportions. And it's deeply emotional. I was pulled in. Never take the natural world for granted.

This was a fun to watch thriller. All of the characters performed well. Except maybe Larry, but he ended up with the short end of the stick anyway. All of the segments (Paris, Nice, Arles) were written and performed well. Everything up to that point was fine. The characters were compelling, the thrill ride believable and the continuity flowed. Deniro plays tourist with Natascha McElhone ("Diedre is the name"). "You look good cleaned up" he says. The way she rolls her eyes in response. PRICELESS. The repartee between those two is flawless.

I didn't like the insipid ending. What should have been the climax of the picture fell flat on its face. If I say why it will spoil it for you. Still, it's worth a watch, at least the first 75% of the film.

This is a larger-than-life film not unlike other DeMille pictures. The dialogue is crackling. The tension between Cleopatra & her Caesar is palpable. The dance segment and seduction of Caesar is highly imaginative, jaw dropping, I was wowed. The 1934 bikini clad Egyptian dancing mermaid-like pearl fishers blew my mind. They certainly gave Caesar a rise. How they got past the censors I don't know. The sets, Cleopatra's entourage, parades and Egyptian paraphernalia are breathtaking, artistic and grand. Caesars great danes should have won for best supporting actors for their cameo appearance. Surely I jest. The grandeur of the entire production is a knockout. A home run. Claudette Colbert's Cleopatra is a smooth operator. She is the brains of the story who, in short order, wants nothing more than to snare Caeesar, give him her heart and take over the world. Although this is a fanciful story, I came away wishing it to be 100% believable. If you're looking for enchantment and a spectacle of epic proportions, this is your ticket.

The feint critics say how jarring this film is and how it will give umbrage to your sensibilities. Dogtooth at its essence is a coming of age story. It is weird, I'll give you that. But weird is where all the juice in life is. I loved this film. I love the actors who transform themselves into a world of artifice with a ferociousness, you can see it in their intense gaze.

The airplane scene is funny! The dog and cat horror motif, jarring perhaps, but it's funny! The bathtub scene - incest à la Russ Meyer is not so funny. As my 3rd cousin once removed used to joke, incest is best. No Gracie, it really isn't.

The film is a profound and dismal commentary on the self imposed blinders we wear everyday. We're all humans captured in the zoo of our own making. Surrounded by a tall hedge we can't see what's on the other side. We cannot, we won't take a leap of faith because we don't know who will catch us or how to soften the landing on the other side of the hedge. We are slaves to our frailties at best, we pretend we can't access universal truths at worst.

I wasn't expecting it but after the first few minutes of what would seem to be an ordinary documentary the story falls in rapid succession into calamity, mystery, horror, absurdity and heaps upon heaps of surrealism and ultimately falling completely out of touch with reality. We're in new territory here. It's like Buñuel on steroids with a side order of TNT. The film wears you down as the characters flip flop through their machinations about how to deal with the after affects of a botched execution. Why don't they just shoot the guy in the head and get it over with? That would be a hell of a lot easier. I loved this movie, but I'll have to give my brain a few months to digest it before watching it again.

This sweeping film covers the political life of Giulio Andreotti, who was a 7 time prime minister of Italy over a 20 year period starting in 1972. The cinemaphotography is lush, the editing is to a constant and unrushed beat.

Directed by Paolo Sorrentino - director of the wonderful best foreign film oscar winner for The Great Beauty (2013) - the casting is ensemble. Toni Servillo plays Andreotti in a stunning realization, assertive and serious, but never taking himself too seriously, adding levity to the film. You can see the wheels turning in his brain.

His alleged connections with reputed corrupt officials, the mafia, and his relationships with church officials, bankers and journalists all points to circumstantial evidence raising suspicions that Andreotti is either the luckiest man alive or a murderer capable of airtight cover-ups. You decide. The use of sound - whistling and flute playing in the action's background (I don't know what you call that but this is one of the first films to use that) is ingenious. The use of Toop Toop by Casius in the beginning and Faure's Pavane while Andreotti takes a stroll late at night with his body guards is uncanny. The noir-ish murder scenes and replays of them, while gruesome, I actually find them to be funny. After all, it's only a movie. This is a stunning modern and idiosyncratic Italian film which is a genre all of it's own. This is one of my favorite films, I've seen it maybe 25 times and never tire of it. Viva Italia!

A newborn baby is abandoned in front of a hospital wrapped in a sweater. Some non-descript guy pretending to exercise while smoking a cig and running through a park shoves the baby into the arms of Sister Caterina (Margherita Buy) who lives in a convent. Silvio Orlando plays the part of Ernesto, a hypochondriac owner of a struggling dry cleaner business in Milano. The Sister is determined to find the baby's mother, a laundry ticket on the sweater leads her to Ernesto.

At first Ernesto pleads ignorance of the sweater's owner, but the sister's persistence finally gets to him and they begin the search for the baby's mother. Meanwhile, Sister Caterina develops a fondness for the baby (named Fausto by a judge) which is at odds with convent life and frowned upon by the Mother Superior.

The friendship of Caterina and Ernesto is complicated and wrought with frustration and ultimately unrequited love. Other characters (the dry cleaner employees, Caterina's mother, Fausto's mother & father, the nuns and lovely Marina-who drops blatant hints of her desire to hook up with Ernesto that he doesn't pick up on. Fool.) all figure into the story. I won't say how this all ends. Suffice it to say this movie will tug on your heart strings.

The cinemaphotography is artistic and direct, the depth of the film is in the story and the characters. Buy and Orlando are superb, their character quirks makes the film all the more interesting. I love this movie.

I found this film very accessible. It has become one of my favorites. The film is about an eccentric close-knit dysfunctional family. The characters are quirky, borderline bizzare but real. They are obstinate, boorish, brooding, insulting, conniving and philandering. Their roles are in constant conflict, but the comedy derives from It's smooth ensemble acting and impeccable timing. Some of it's shenanigans are highly cultured slapstick. Their personalities intertwine with French culture in odd ways. Perhaps that was a redundancy. I was pleasantly surprised. I'm not going to say any more because I don't want to ruin it for you. You should see it.

Sometime in the late '70s I saw The Graduate which sort of popped my cherry regarding inappropriate relations, sexual affairs and seduction. At the time I was shocked, I say shocked to find out fornicating was going on there. I told my mother about it and she said yes, it is shocking. After that it's been a slippery slope. Nowadays we see porno on network TV.

But in 1961 defloration, of a nun no less, must have been over the top. So there's that. So here's my question. Was Buñuel a genius or was he a twisted genius? I guess it doesn't really matter.

First of all, the print I have of this film (actually DVD) has very high contrast which gives it remarkable depth of view. I have no idea if it was filmed that way or it was enhanced digitally. But I believed the lighting must have been done carefully. Even if enhanced, the depth had to be their first anyway. Nest pas? My point is for a mid-century b&w film it looks like 3D.

I'll dispense with the social commentary. Notice Viridana's perfect legs when she undresses. Sensuous. She looks great in the wedding gown. You naughty nun girl! You dirty incestuous wanabee necrophiliac uncle!!

One of the best scenes in all of film is the peasants banquet. Pure magic. Where did he dig up these actors? Most actors are beautiful and svelte. Not here. Was this scene rehearsed? How did they clean up that mess? Did he give them free reign, how was it even possible to script all that debasement and debauchery? Once the wine spilled on the tablecloth I didn't expect to see a rape behind the sofa. Kudos.

The only thing worse than sci-fi is sci-fi done badly. Isabelle gets some glow-in-the dark powers. When her inner light comes on she can kill a school kid, or she can just sit on a bench outside her home and stare at the moon. Whatever. There is a lack of continuity and understanding here. It's as if the filmmakers want you to guess what just happened knowing you'll never figure it out. Nevah! In short order, why does she only care about one student (the guy Malik) and none of the others? They are all behaving like animals, but Malik is the object of her attention. Everyone else is chopped liver. What causes her mysterious glow to turn and off? Stress? Stubbed her toe? Hot flashes? Why is she so nasty to her bleeding heart sappy doormat of a husband? Besides Malik, the only other "thing" that happens is her tribulations in earning tenure. Which at one instant looks like an epic fail and in the next is her fait accompli. I gave an hour and a half to this malarky and I'm worse off for it.

I've been getting into Michael Haneke movies lately. Code Unknown, Cache, Amour and now this. They're all excellent. Haneke seems to be a genre unto his own. Call it Haneke Intrigue.

Isabelle Huppert, with 137 acting credits, is gifted. In English or French she is a natural, it's like she is not acting, she is just whatever the role she is playing which I find uncanny. In this film she is billed as the lead, but I don't think she is the lead. She is the glue that holds it together, it is an ensemble cast that leads. JeanLouis Trintigant plays the family super-rich patriarch coming out with dementia is wonderful. He and his cutesy (wish I had a girlfriend like her when I was 12) grandaughter Eve share a penchant for suicidal tendencies. Eve is played by Fantine Harduin, a somewhat troubled youth, pulls off a crying scene in the car, I don't know how she does it, the pouting, tightening face muscles, Niagara Falls tears and sobbing kind of blew my mind.

For me those are some of the high points. Like most French film the story unwinds slowly, contemplatively and with care. It's not about what happens as much as how it happens and why it happens. Substance over form I call it. No real plot to it. Just life. People think, they feel, they emote, they deal with it, sometimes its productive and sometimes it just is. Thanks Ms. Huppert for keeping it all together.

First of all, don't know where McMafia title comes from because there's no Irish mobsters here. False advertising? I was misled.

The story and characters are engaging, there is intrigue here, and the plot moves fast enough to keep one interested. EXCEPT for the lulls in the action. The husband says something outrageous to the wife, and then waits for what seems like an eternity for her reaction. Dead air. I guess they don't want to break the budget by moving too quickly to another scene. Because it seems like a lot of money went into each episode, what with all the disparate locations, action scenes, high end hotels and lavish wardrobes. A feast for the eyes.

Russian mobsters, let's face it, are boring and boorish. The action is with James Norton, who plays Alex, a Jack Kennedy-look type, fearless wannabe mobster, from Harvard, with a moral compass that only points south. The extent of his high-powered-money-person role seems to involve nothing more than clicking a mouse on a box that says SEND with a number followed by lots of zeros. His meetings concerning money arrangements for drug deals start out by passing out deal memos. What mobster in his right mind would provide incriminating plans on paper for business deals to move billions of dollars of heroin across continents? Maybe I'm old school, my wall street drug deals were always done with a handshake and a wink.

The cat-and-mouse chase between the warring drug factions is well thought out. One faction gets ahead and the other one figures it out and strikes preemptively. It's good writing. The pace at which the tables turn made my head spin. I loved it.

Still, if I was an Irish mobster, I would be disappointed.

This is a who-done-it-cat-and-mouse thriller where the tables turn sometimes on a pin head. McConaughey brings all the punch, verve and deadpan comedy from Wolf of Wall Street broker, to this thinking man's lawyer role. Except here he is in every scene and I was sitting on the edge of my chair the whole time. William Macy is excellent as the fixer. Only problem here is everytime there is an important morsel of information needed to move the story along Macy comes up with it in no time, without any explanation, even before we know there is a need for that information. I guess that is the expediency of film. Keep it simple stupid.

Other than that, there is a surprise at every turn. The dialogue is fast and snappy and the other characters along with McConaughey and Macy form an ensemble cast that make this movie run like a tightly wound clock.

Enjoy.