“Prisoners” – Movie Review

 

This weekend, my movie class had another bonus screening, “Prisoners”, a crime thriller starring Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal and Maria Bello.

Synopsis

Once two little girls are missing, the father of one of them decides to hunt for the suspect on his own when he believes the police are failing – but will he be willing to do whatever’s necessary to find the girls?   

Story

On Thanksgiving Day, Keller Dover (Jackman) and his brood head over to neighbor Franklin’s (Terrence Howard) house for both families to spend the holiday.  After their daughters run off to play together, they suddenly realize that no one can locate either one of them.   The police are contacted and Detective Loki (Gyllenhaal) is assigned to the case.  Before long, Loki apprehends a suspect, Alex Jones (Paul Dano), who ultimately must be released when the police conclude that they cannot formally charge him with anything.  

Understandably frustrated and angry, Dover decides that since the police aren’t doing enough to find his daughter, he must take matters into his own hands, so he sets out for Jones himself.  Dover captures Jones and brings him to an abandoned ramshackle house where he tortures Jones in order to get a confession out of him.  But when the slow-witted Jones proves to be a tough nut to crack, Dover chooses to imprison him until information is forthcoming.  In the meantime, Loki is pursuing other leads that may turn up information about the girls since he’s convinced chasing Jones may ultimately turn out to be fruitless.

With several known sex offenders in the area of this rural Pennsylvania town, Loki follows-up on each one of them but turns out to be unsuccessful in obtaining any substantial information until one young man starts behaving in a suspicious manner.  At this point, Loki relentlessly chases after this new suspect while Dover has reasons to believe he may have suddenly discovered the person who might turn out to be the key to recovering both daughters.  But do Loki’s suspicions have any merit?  And if Dover is right about his latest hunch, is he truly capable of doing the unthinkable in order to bring his daughter home safely? 

Review

How often have you seen a movie that was billed as a suspense that turned out not to be terribly suspenseful at all?  Or a horror flick that wasn’t all that scary?  For me, I know that’s happened far more frequently than I would like.  That’s why it’s such a delight to be able to report that “Prisoners” truly delivers on what it promises.  Excellent story telling technique from both the screenplay and the directing highlight this film, which is in no way intended to undercut some rather fine performances by its stellar cast.  This is a true thriller at its very best and is surely every bit as scary – if not more so – than any CGI – inflicted horror flick that Hollywood ever tried to produce. 

Misgivings about “Prisoners” are certainly few and far between and would truly be nitpicking – although to be honest, it is not a perfect film; some of the information occasionally gets a bit muddled along the way and there are some things that of course require a suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience, but if you’ve bought into the story by the point these incidents occur, it’s highly unlikely they will deter you from enjoying this motion picture, which is both satisfying and entertaining, right up until its eye-popping denouement. 

Prior to the screening, Broderick Johnson and Andrew Kosove – the film’s producers –were  were interviewed.  Kosove said that he and Johnson had met years ago when they were in college; neither one of them were studying filmmaking – instead, they majored in business.  Upon graduation, they decided to form Alcon, a production company, despite the fact that neither one of them knew how to make a movie.  He also made what I regarded as a rather astute observation – in most businesses, the practice is to discover a formula to make a successful product that is consistently reproducible.  When it comes to filmmaking, however, this is not the case; with each movie, you are starting up a new business with different goals and another set of employees.  In the business of movie making, there is no precise formula for success. 

 

7.9/10519 votes

 

 

DIY Whiskey With Smooth Ambler

 

 

Many little kids fantasize about running away to join the circus.  As adults, we learn to give up that dream – or at least trade it in for another.  For example, how many of us who are whiskey aficionados have ever dreamed about quitting the day job to open our own distillery in order to manufacture an amber-colored spirit that would bear our very own name?   I know I certainly have.  Alas, I never had the kind of courage it required to take such a mighty step.  But John Little did.  John is the Head Distiller for Smooth Ambler, a West Virginia-based craft distiller that has been rapidly growing in popularity during the short time it has been in existence. 

Attending a class called, “How To Make Your Own Whiskey” at The Astor Center Of New York City, I eagerly listened to the story behind how John created Smooth Ambler from scratch and in only a few years, made it one of the most talked-about small distillers in the entire country.  Oh, and the fact that we would also get to sample their array of product wasn’t exactly a painful experience, either. 

Starting out life as a purchaser of furniture and fixtures for hotels, one day John decided that he wanted to be a manufacturer.  After trying his hand at making belts, he read an article in Time magazine about micro-distilling back in 2008 and got the idea that he could begin by building a small distillery in his own garage.  Shortly thereafter, he attended a conference to learn about the distillation process and business, then took classes in college to further extend his studies.  Equipment manufacturers and suppliers of grain and yeast contributed initial supplies to help John make his initial product as an independent, in a field known as Merchant Bottling. 

We started our tasting with three variations on Smooth Ambler’s Old Scout brand, each subsequent one increasing its content of rye.  Beginning with Old Scout 10 Year, it contains 75% corn, 21% rye and 4% malt, and is 100 proof.  Sweet tasting due to the high concentration of corn, clearly identified in its taste are vanilla, honey and caramel.

Next was Old Scout Bourbon, which contained an unusually high 36% rye; most bourbons contain only about 15 – 20% rye.  As a result, this 99 proof bourbon is less sweet and more spicy due to its high rye content.  Aged seven years, this is a mingle of seven and eight year old barrels; the rye component is used as what is called “the flavor grain” to balance out the corn’s sweetness. 

Last was the Old Scout Rye; at 99 proof, it contains 95% rye – the rest is malt (there is no corn here).  Between the large amount of rye and the high alcohol content, its taste seems considerably hotter than the first two.  It’s got something of a minty nose, which can sometimes mask some of its other aromas – honey, straw and grass. 

John then treated us to a couple of cask strength samples which were considerably higher in alcohol content.  The first was the Old Scout 10, but this version was 120 proof.  Best sampled without water, this expression experiences something called flocculation, which causes small white flecks to appear in the bottom of the bottle; while some people see this as a flaw, it is actually the oils produced during the aging process – these oils add flavor to the spirit.

This was followed by the cask strength version of the rye.  At 126 proof, this one had more nose than any of the others. 

Wrapping up the evening, we were offered their 92 proof Yearling Bourbon and the Barrel Aged Gin.  Aged for only two and a half years, the Yearling is known as a wheated bourbon because it contains 20% wheat.  The gin contains only seven botanicals in order to keep the recipe simple, but it is nevertheless distinctly aromatic; aside from the required juniper, there is also lemon peel and cardamom.  The gin is just slightly yellow in color due to the fact that it is aged in a barrel, but only for three months. 

 

“Thanks For Sharing” – Movie Review

 

The bonus screenings for the fall semester of my movie class began this weekend with the comedy-drama, “Thanks For Sharing”, starring Mark Ruffalo, Tim Robbins and Gwyneth Paltrow.

Synopsis

When several men form a friendship while in group therapy for their sex addiction, will they be able to support each other in moments of crises or will they just lapse into their self-destructive nature?

Story

Adam (Ruffalo) is celebrating five years of “sobriety” – at least that’s what it’s called when recovering sex addicts are able to successfully avoid the kind of behavior that drove them into group therapy in the first place.  As anyone in a similar position can tell you, an accomplishment such as this cannot be done alone; he’s been fortunate to have Mike (Robbins) as both a friend and a sponsor.  Mike, a long-time husband with a decade of sobriety himself, has served as a stable influence for Adam, who is single; together, they have had each other’s back in their darkest moments.

New to their group is Neil (Josh Gad), a young man similarly addicted – in fact, his addiction has gotten so bad that it recently caused him to lose his job.  As a result, Adam is assigned as his sponsor, whose role is to educate, nurture and support his weighty charge.  However, when Adam correctly senses that Neil lacks both the dedication and discipline to make the commitment to this task, he bails out as Neil’s sponsor.  Soon, Dede (Alecia Moore – AKA Pink) joins the group as its only female member.  After hearing each other’s tale of woe, Neil and Dede exchange phone numbers and decide to become each other’s sponsor. 

Attending a party, Adam meets another guest, Phoebe (Paltrow), a bright, beautiful woman who is clearly attracted to him.  With great trepidation, Adam starts dating Phoebe and it looks like things may get serious between them.  But when she learns of his addiction, can their relationship survive?  Meanwhile, Mike and his wife Katie (Joely Richardson) are mysteriously visited by their drug addict prodigal son Danny (Patrick Fugit), of whom Mike is understandably suspicious.  When Mike and Danny entangle in an explosive fight over Danny’s potential substance abuse, will the father and son ever be able to repair their family?    

Review

While far from the ultimate film viewing experience, “Thanks For Sharing” is an enjoyable little movie that started out a bit shaky but eventually won me over, in spite of its flaws.  Early on, its script contains hackneyed jokes and questionable choices of character attributes, but eventually, manages to overcome those deficiencies with more clever writing than it began with, combined with some extremely palpable chemistry between the members of its cast  -- ultimately, we can believe the friendships that develop between certain characters might just really exist. 

Although I can’t honestly admit to being a big Gwyneth Paltrow fan, her performance in “Thanks For Sharing” is especially spicy – in particular, a scene where she gives Mark Ruffalo a lap dance in some rather tempting lingerie.  So much for her being perceived as the squeaky-clean Ice Princess, I guess!  Ruffalo holds the film together with his typically strong acting and Josh Gad – perhaps best known for his role in the Broadway musical “The Book Of Mormon” – dutifully fulfills his role as the movie’s comic relief in a number of scenes with Pink and Carol Kane as his mother. 

Following the screening, our instructor interviewed the film’s director, Stuart Blumberg, who also co-wrote the screenplay.  Blumberg, who made his feature-film directing debut with “Thanks For Sharing”, also co-wrote the movie “The Kids Are Alright”; he gave an interesting interview, which included his writing process for this script.  Co-writer Matt Winston is an old friend of Blumberg’s; they collaborated on another script prior to writing this one.  For “Thanks For Sharing”, they collaborated over Skype, despite the fact both writers were living in Los Angeles at the time. 

 

6.1/10416 votes

 

Chivas Royal Salute

 

In the sultry hot summer weather of a late August evening, what better way to relieve your customary torpor than to attend a Scotch tasting? OK, well, it wasn’t exactly the first thing that crossed my mind, either. But when I learned that the Scotch in question was Chivas, I was not exactly in a position to decline. Throw in the fact that they were also serving the ultra rare Royal Salute – which I had never even heard of before, much less tasted – and I’m there! So, it was with great anticipation that I headed to Union Square Wines & Spirits for a few drams of this famed brown spirit.

Upon arrival, attendees were greeted with a most refreshing cocktail that I highly recommend – a very summery punch made with Chivas 12 year old and pineapple juice, peach juice and a splash of lemon juice served over ice in a wine glass containing various fruits (strawberries, blueberries and blackberries, on this evening) as a garnish. A real thirst-quencher, you taste a gentlest hint of the spirit, yet its sweetness is not so cloying as to induce puckering.

Between passed hors d'oeuvres and an extensive spread of cheese and crackers, we sampled Chivas 12 Years, their Gold Signature 18 Years, their 25 Years (which was not present on the original menu) and finished with Royal Salute. To commemorate the tasting, the store discounted all featured Chivas products 15%, although the 25 Years was not currently in stock and would have to be specially ordered (even with the discount, however, its $340 price tag was still a bit steep for the likes of yours truly).

Chivas started making Royal Salute in 1953 to celebrate the coronation of Queen Elizabeth; it was decided to sell the expression as a 21 year old Scotch because the Queen herself was age 21 at the time she ascended to the throne. Marketed as a 21 year old Scotch, this means it is a blended Scotch which contains other Scotches that are aged at least 21 years; the oldest Scotch in the blend is aged between 40 to 45 years. It is sold in colored bottles – green, red or blue, although only the blue colored bottles are available here in The United States. The Royal Salute product line also comes in more expensive versions that are aged even longer – specifically, 38 years and 62 years.

On its own, Royal Salute 21 has something of a smoky, spicy flavor on the center of your palate; adding a little bit of water will bring out its citrus elements – grapefruit and lemon are those that are said to be frequently found. According to one of the company representatives, this is an excellent Scotch to pair with sushi, of all things!

For more information about Chivas tastings around the country, please be sure to register at the Web site The Chivas Brotherhood. Also, if you’d like to experience a tasting similar to this one, you might want to try contacting Chivas’ Brand Ambassador Peter H. Karras, who might just be able to hook you up with something not too far from where you’re located.

“Lovelace” – Movie Review

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

“The Artist And The Model” – Movie Review

 

This week in the final summer session of my movie class, we saw the Spanish drama, “The Artist And The Model”, starring Jean Rochefort and Claudia Cardinale.  

Synopsis

When the wife of an elderly artist brings home a young girl to work as his model, will this inspire his creativity or only serve to cause more problems for all involved?  

Story

During World War II, Marc Cros (Rochefort) is an elderly artist who lives in the French countryside with his wife Léa (Cardinale).  At this stage of his life, he is facing something of a professional challenge – although successful in his earlier days, he now feels that his best creative work is far behind him and that there is nothing left for him to do.  While in town shopping, Léa discovers Mercè (Aida Folch), a beautiful young woman who seems destitute.  A sympathetic Léa invites Mercè back to the house for lunch with her husband and together they learn that the girl recently fled Spain when Franco took over. 

Considering both her husband’s situation and this waif’s dilemma, Léa offers Mercè a job working as the artist’s model; Mercè gratefully accepts the offer and moves in to Marc’s studio.  With no experience as a professional model and unaccustomed to being naked in front of complete strangers, Mercè is extremely uncomfortable in her new role, which immediately irritates Marc, who must instruct her at every step of the way.  Eventually, though, Marc recognizes the beauty Lea saw in her – in fact, Mercè reminds them both of what Léa used to look like decades ago when she first posed for Marc.  Seeing her in this way now serves to fuel Marc’s creativity; he begins sketching her, painting her and in his grandest work of all, sculpting her likeness. 

Over time, Mercè learns how to become a model, albeit with great difficulty given that she has problems holding a pose for very long.  One night while taking a walk, she stumbles upon Pierre, a handsome young man who turns out to be an injured fighter in the underground.  Mercè brings him back to the studio where she can care for him.  However, upon the arrival of a German soldier writing a book on Marc, suspicions become aroused and Pierre realizes he must leave.  Will everyone be endangered at this point or will Marc be able to finish his sculpture?

Review

While I’m sure that most of the professional film critics will fall all over themselves with praise for “The Artist And The Model”, I’m going to be one of the amateurs who has to admit that this one really left me scratching my head wondering exactly what the hell I just watched.  The movie seems very muddled in the sense that there doesn’t appear to be a clear vision for a narrative tale that the filmmaker was trying to tell – it was really all over the place and quite unfocused.  Was this going to be a love story between the artist and the model which threatened his marriage?  Or was this going to be a suspenseful tale about defeating or evading the Nazis?  It seems as though the film couldn’t manage to make up its mind.

In addition to the clumsily-told story, I found much of the behavior of some of the characters rather confusing at times.  Why was Léa not jealous of Mercè’s youth and beauty?  Was she so magnanimous as to subvert her ego in the greater good of restoring her husband’s creative inspiration?  Why was the German soldier not more suspicious of these strangers whose presence was not completely explained?  Also, I found Marc’s narcissism as an artist a bit of a turn-off and why Mercè didn’t rebel at his grumpiness and leering will forever remain something of a mystery, I suppose. 

Prior to the screening, our instructor interviewed both Director Fernando Trueba and Aida Folch, who played the model.  Trueba talked a bit about how he got into film when he watched old Hollywood movies as a teenager; his first film was made when he was only 24 and it was quite successful.  Despite seeing the acclaim he received for his work, following its opening, Trueba’s father asked him if he had gotten this whole filmmaking thing out of his system and would pursue a real career.  Folch talked about getting the role for this movie.  Having worked with her on another film a few years before, Trueba called Folch and told her he was thinking of her for a part in this film, then inquired as to whether or not she spoke French.  Regrettably, she told him she did not, so he abruptly ended the conversation.  Folch then moved to France for a number of months and upon returning to Spain, contacted Trueba and showed him her new-found proficiency in French, proving that she was now capable of the role he had in mind for her.

 

6.8/10205 votes

 

“Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” – Movie Review

 

This weekend in my movie class, we had a bonus screening of “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” starring Casey Affleck, Rooney Mara and Keith Carradine.

Synopsis

When a convict escapes from jail to reunite with his wife and meet the daughter born during his imprisonment, will he be able to see his family before being caught or killed?

Story

Texas couple Bob (Affleck) and Ruth (Mara) see themselves as something of a modern-day Bonnie & Clyde.  Despite the fact that Ruth breaks the news to him that she’s expecting their baby, Bob decides to follow through with his armed robbery plan, risking not only his future, but also that of his wife and unborn child.  After Bob stashes the loot in a beaten-up suitcase buried near their run-down cabin, the law catch up with them and a shootout ensues.  This culminates in the pair being arrested; although Ruth is acquitted, Bob is found guilty of the crime and sentenced to 25 years in prison. 

While Bob is doing his time, he writes frequently to Ruth, who by now has been set up in a new home by Skerritt (Carradine), one of Bob’s former cohorts.  During Bob’s incarceration, Ruth gives birth to their daughter, Sylvie.  Remaining connected to the case throughout the years is Deputy Wheeler (Ben Foster), who was injured during the firefight when the two were apprehended; Wheeler periodically provides Ruth with updates on Bob’s status in prison.  What Ruth eventually figures out, however, is that Wheeler has his own romantic designs on her. 

After several failed attempts over the years, Bob finally escapes from prison.  Carjacking his way across Missouri, he finds his way back to Texas and meets up with an old buddy of his who gives him a temporary hiding place.  While the police are after him, Bob sneaks his way over to Skerritt, who warns him to stay away from Ruth and Sylvie for their safety.  When Skerritt learns that Bob is trying to track down his family, he hires some men to find Bob and kill him before he can locate Ruth.  But will Bob finally be able to meet his daughter before either the police or the killers can catch him?

 

Review

“Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” is either reminiscent of or derivative of similar, earlier films from 30 or 40 years ago (the adjective you choose will certainly depend on whether or not you enjoyed the movie).  Despite being eminently watchable, you can’t help but thinking that you’ve seen this exact same story told before.  Its slow pace makes it feel much longer than its hour and a half length.  Although I’m given to understand it won a cinematography award, I found much of the photography a little on the dark side (trying to resonate the mood of the motion picture, perhaps?) and as such, occasionally difficult to follow.  

The main problem I had with this movie has to do with the number of loose ends that are left hanging in the story.  Who are the men that are hired to kill Bob?  How did Skerritt know that he could hire them for the job?  How did Bob get a change of clothes and clean up by the time he reached Texas?  These are just some of the questions that left me more than just a little bit puzzled as well as quite surprised at the high rating the critics on Rotten Tomatoes gave “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints”.  Whether these problems come from the screenplay, from the editing or from a tight budget that prevented the filmmaker from shooting certain scenes is hard to say. 

Lastly, this movie has got to have one of the worst titles ever, which certainly doesn’t help matters any.  What does it mean?  Infuriatingly, this is never explained.  To think that no one could’ve dreamed up a better title is really hard to believe.  While this film may be a darling with the critics and get extraordinarily good reviews, I can’t imagine too many people wanting to actually pay money to see “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints”.  I wish the best of luck to whomever is responsible for marketing this thing because they sure do have a tough job ahead of them. 

 

7.0/10440 votes

 

“In A World” – Movie Review

 

This week in my movie class, we saw the comedy “In A World”, starring Lake Bell, who also wrote and directed.

Synopsis

When a young woman pursues her father’s career as a voice-over announcer, she finds that the business is reluctant to hire women – but when she’s being considered for a new job, it turns out she’s competing against other industry veterans, including her own father.

Story

At 31, Carol (Bell) is an underachiever and proud of it – working some occasional freelance jobs as a vocal coach, she doesn’t make enough money in order to have her own place, so she is living with her widowed father, Sam (Fred Melamed). Inviting Carol to leave because his girlfriend is going to move in with him, Sam tries to motivate her to start to take her career seriously by following in his footsteps as a voice-over announcer for movie trailers. Carol’s father is regarded as the voice-over king after the passing of the great Don LaFontaine and might be able to get her foot in the door; despite this, she realizes the business has a strong preference toward using men in their advertisements.

Sam is reveling in the fact that as an acknowledged leader in his field, he will be getting a lifetime achievement award at an upcoming ceremony. Realizing that he must soon pass the torch to an up-and-coming voice-over announcer, the logical pick would appear to be his good friend, Gustav (Ken Marino), a younger man who has managed to carve-out a successful career in this field. In celebration of his own success – and to honor his buddy Sam – Gustav throws a party; in addition to bringing his girlfriend, Sam drags Carol along in the hope that she can network herself. Quite by accident, however, this results in Carol and Gustav hooking-up.

While Carol seems to be in no hurry to end her trysts with Gustav, it is really Louis (Demetri Martin) in whom she is most interested – he’s the manager of the recording studio where she works and has made his affection for Carol no great secret. In the meantime, Carol learns that if she is willing to submit an audition tape, she will be considered for a voice-over job in a movie trailer that is bound to have high visibility and the potential for considerable career advancement. But when she discovers that both her father and Gustav are among the more seasoned professionals who are up for the same gig, will Carol have any chance of winning the opportunity?

Review

From strictly a technical standpoint, the screenplay for “In A World” is well-crafted, if not always well-played. It hits all the right notes in terms of act-end turning points and climax as well as sub-plots and well-defined characters. As a comedy, however, it is a bit on the soft side – more mildly amusing than outright funny. Not much in the way of laugh-out-loud jokes, but nevertheless somewhat entertaining in an unthreatening, unchallenging kind of way. While the characters are clearly delineated, I didn’t find them to be terribly sympathetic and some of the scenes were little more than merely movie-convenient contrivances.

Clearly, Bell has called in quite a few favors to some of her colleagues, whose names and/or faces should be immediately familiar to most viewers; there are a number of actors and actresses of some note who at least make an appearance in this movie, if not play significant supporting roles. These include (in no particular order) Jeff Garlin, Geena Davis, Rob Corddry, Nick Offerman and Eva Longoria. So, if you get bored with the film and decide to play “Spot The Celebrity”, this is as good a motion picture to use as just about any other. Of course, the potential danger with these casting decisions is that when you see a star in a movie mostly populated with unknowns (especially in the lead roles), you can tend to get taken out of the story ever so briefly (if not entirely).

One of the things that might be either off-putting or confusing (or both) for some people is the derivation of the movie’s title and its reference to Don LaFontaine. LaFontaine was a real person who was somewhat famous for his ubiquity when it came to performing voice-overs for many movie trailers. One of his more infamous traits was arguably the fact that so many of his voice-overs would start with the phrase, “In a world …”. People unfamiliar with either or both of these facts might find themselves head-scratching throughout much of the film.

  7.1/10169 votes

 

“The Conjuring” – Movie Review

 

This week in my movie class, we saw the horror flick “The Conjuring”, starring Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson.

Synopsis

When a family is haunted by ghosts in their new farmhouse, they call in experts to help them – but once it becomes clear that the ghosts want the entire family dead, can the entire family be saved?

Story

In autumn of 1971, The Perron Family moved into their newly-purchased farmhouse in a remote area of Rhode Island. Shortly after their arrival, however, they started to notice certain oddities: their pet dog refused to enter the house, all of the clocks stopped at 3:07 AM and an unusual rotting aroma permeated various rooms. After finding their dog mysteriously dead, things soon get worse when Carolyn (Lily Taylor), the mother of this five-daughter brood, starts developing bruises throughout her body. Between hearing weird noises and seeing inexplicable visions, they are convinced that their house is haunted and they need help. But to whom can they turn?

The Warrens are a couple of some notoriety as paranormal investigators. Husband Ed (Wilson) is a demonologist and wife Lorraine (Farmiga) a clairvoyant. Together, they have spent years looking into sundry claims of possessions and hauntings; in most instances, they have been able to prove that these events are simple coincidences with rational, reasonable causes behind them. Other times, however, they have been forced to put their lives at great risk in order to either rid a home of spirits or drive out a demon from some human form it has temporarily overtaken.

After attending The Warrens’ speaking engagement at a nearby university, Carolyn meets with them to share her tale and implore them to assist with her family’s situation. Following a cursory inspection of the premises, The Warrens find considerable evidence that Carolyn’s story is neither a hoax nor a coincidence, but in fact a genuine haunting, possibly with an attempted demonic possession. They immediately get to work to record and document the existence of the spirits, but when they discover that a demon wishes to possess Carolyn so she will murder her daughters, can they get Vatican approval for a priest to perform an Exorcism on her before it’s too late?

Review

I’m tempted to say that the recipe for “The Conjuring” would be to add one part of “Amityville Horror” to one part of “The Exorcist”, run it on high in a blender, then pour generous servings of this concoction over ice and serve. While I suppose such a remark might be a facile description with which to characterize this rather well-made movie, that certainly doesn’t make it any less apt. For people who are fans of this genre (not I), this cocktail of spooks and devils will be sure to hit the spot – especially now, since there tends to be something of a dearth of horror films during the summer months.

One of the reservations I have about “The Conjuring” is the fact that the filmmakers try to cram in too much within this nearly two hour long movie. Besides the story lines of The Perrons and The Warrens, there are also way too many ghosts inhabiting the story – and they all have their own story line, too. This makes things a little confusing and hard to follow at times. It may have been better to focus on one or two of these supernatural beings than to overcomplicate the story to the point that we wind up forgetting who’s doing what and why. Given the fact that “The Conjuring” is supposedly based on actual people, they may have fallen into the trap of trying to stick a little too closely to actual incidents to the point that the film’s quality is compromised.

Director James Wan – perhaps best known for “Saw” – manages to hit all of the right notes throughout “The Conjuring” that should make horror fans jump and squeal in their seat and generate the kind of physiological reaction in their system to which they seem to have become addicted. For me, arguably the scariest part of this movie isn’t the ghosts or the demons, but rather the emphasis of how religion – specifically, Catholicism – is seen as the cure-all. Seriously, would it be possible for an atheist to either be haunted by ghosts, possessed by demons or work as a paranormal investigator? Perhaps – but then you’d really be called upon to suspend your disbelief even more so.

  7.7/101,550 votes

“Still Mine” – Movie Review

 

This week, the 2nd half of the summer semester for my movie class began and we saw the drama “Still Mine”, starring James Cromwell and Genevieve Bujold.

Synopsis

When an elderly farmer tries to build a new house on his land to better care for his wife suffering from Alzheimer’s Disease, he falls victim to his town’s bureaucracy – but will he be able to complete his project or will it be bulldozed before he can finish?

Story

Octogenarians Craig (Cromwell) and Irene (Bujold) have spent the decades carving out a living for themselves the hard way – as a couple of Canadian farmers who have raised seven children.  Unfortunately, old age is creeping up on them and soon, Craig finds his wife is experiencing increasingly frequent incidents of senility.  When Irene almost accidentally burns down their house, Craig realizes something must be done immediately.

After discussing the situation with his children, he quickly dismisses any consideration of putting his wife in a home and instead decides that he can better care for her himself if they lived in a smaller house – with that, Craig decides to build a cottage on a tiny stretch of the 2,000 acres of farmland he owns.  However, in the many years since he built his current house, he finds the local government in the town in which he lives has enacted many new rules, regulations and fees.  Confused and frustrated by all of red tape, he proceeds with construction anyway because he realizes that time is of the essence, given that Irene’s condition is gradually deteriorating, putting her well being at great risk. 

When Craig ignores the town’s Stop Work Order on his new home, that’s when the lawyers are brought in and things get increasingly complicated – not to mention expensive.  Having to meet with the lawyers takes away from time he could be spending finishing the new house.  Meanwhile, Irene is getting substantially worse – after various episodes, she suffers a bad fall and winds up in the hospital with a broken hip, which will result in a long stay followed by weeks of physical therapy as she is trained in the use of a walker.  During this time, Craig’s case makes the town’s newspapers; despite all of the media attention, the town’s building department brings him to court anyway.  Will the judge allow him to finish construction or will the new house be demolished?

Review

A delicate, fragile movie, “Still Mine” can be seen as either a humanistic or political drama – if not both – depending on your perspective.  Humanistic in the sense that it is about dealing with one of life’s many great indignities – aging and the associated resulting problems.  Political in the sense that it is a story about the individual versus the big, unwieldy and uncaring government.  At its core, however, it is above all a love story about a long-time married couple that have grown old together and are still very much dedicated to taking good care of each other.   

That said, some might find a couple of scenes slightly uncomfortable to view – for one thing, Cromwell is briefly nude when entering an outdoor shower; also, husband and wife have a sex scene that could make certain people squirm just a bit (thankfully, however, it’s neither long nor graphic).  But then again, hey, if you’re open minded and aren’t turned off to geezer love, then you likely won’t have any issues with this.  I also found “Still Mine” to be an excellent choice for a title because after seeing the film, you realize it can refer to a great many things that the lead characters would insist are “still mine” – my spouse, my life, my land, my dignity … you get the idea…

Following the screening, our instructor interviewed one of the film’s stars, the great James Cromwell.  If you ever get the chance to hear Cromwell speak or be interviewed, by all means, go for it – he happens to be one of the all-time spellbinding raconteurs, sharing many fascinating stories from his life both in an out of acting.  Cromwell said he was very thankful to Norman Lear, creator of the legendary television situation-comedy “All In The Family”.  Lear gave Cromwell his big break, casting him as Archie Bunker’s co-worker, Stretch Cunningham.  He said that the casting came about as a result of a salary dispute between Lear and the show’s star Carroll O’Connor (who played Archie Bunker); upon reaching something of an impasse, Lear notified O’Connor that they were going to kill off Archie and replace him with a character played by Cromwell – shortly thereafter, there was a resolution.  O’Connor returned to work, but Cromwell still appeared in a number of episodes as his co-worker Cunningham.

7.1/10165 votes