Tabula Imago Blog

At Long Last

2010-02-20T18:36:00.002-05:00

Hurrah! After almost a year's medical absence, I have returned to reviewing with a special cinema review of Shutter Island. It's been a tough year, but my disability has finally been approved and I'm looking forward to getting back to reviewing. I know it's been a long time, but I hope that I can continue on with my reviewing and rewarding dear and faithful readers with more of my opinions.

I'm Back!

Back in Business!

2009-02-09T00:11:00.004-05:00

Awwwright! Got my new headphones the Koss Porta Pros and they do work well. They block out most sound and have a crisp response. They don't muff my ears so they don't sweat and get icky! Now I'll be ready to continue reviewing in style. Here's a pic of me at the "office" with my new headgear...

Also the mobile site is complete with all the back catalogue available now. You can view it from your regular browser but it's formatted especially for mobile phones. Now you can check out reviews while your at the video store!*

*As a belated thought I decided to add some fine print about using your phone. So here it is: the mobile website is subject to all applicable data/usage charges. Please check with your provider before using the mobile web. Tabula Imago recommendes an unlimited data plan.

Rough Week

2009-02-04T14:38:00.003-05:00

Man this week has been rough. First my Sennheiser HD-202 Headphones died (the ones I'm always pictured with) and now I have to get a new pair. I think I'm going with a pair of Koss Porta Pros, recommended by CNET. Just have to wait for my tax refund to come in, garrr.

Also our heat pump is frozen over so we've had to build a fire in our basement stove just to get the house temperature up to 60 Degrees F. So I've spent most of the morning wrapped up in blankets and not watching movies and doing reviews.

So I'm now behind, having to watch The Secret Life of Bees before supper. God it's been a hard week. Things are going to get better though.

I've got my mobile friendly version of my site at m.tabfilm.net and I've got my main site at tabfilm.net, so be sure to update your bookmarks (all 5 of you). Man this week has sucked. And to top it off I'll be 29 in 4 days. God help us all...

Sad news from my local Blockbuster

2009-01-28T01:14:00.002-05:00

I've learned today that as part of a nationwide reduction, Blockbuster is shortening its daily hours. Now Mon-Thu it's Noon-9PM and weekends 12A-12P. So it looks like my reviews may be a little delayed on Tuesdays as I can't get my flicks at 10 AM anymore. I'll keep you updated.

Introducing... GIGANTOR

2009-01-23T10:21:00.005-05:00

Hey, just thought I'd give you guys a behind the scenes glimpse here at Tabula Imago. Today I'm going to introduce this reviewer's best friend for film: Gigantor.

It's a Stanley insulated mug and does a pretty good job. It holds 20 some ounces and gets me through some real stinkers. Of course since it's usually filled with room temperature soda, I don't really put it to a test.

You can buy a similar model on Amazon here: STANLEY CLASSIC MUG

I got the name from the remote control robot off of an old cartoon called Gigantor.

Here's a vid of the opening of the cartoon.

Here's to Gigantor, getting me through bad movies by always being full of soda, milk, juice and the occasional alcoholic reinforcement. More movie reviews coming soon, so many movies so little time. Hope you enjoyed this brief behind the scenes glimpse of my and Gigantor.

GIGAAAAAAANTOOOOOR!

Busy Busy Busy

2009-01-18T05:07:00.002-05:00

Oh, so many movies, so little time. I've been trying to stay busy. My initial application for disability has been denied by Social Security. Apparently I'm not disabled enough since I can communicate and perform certain daily activities. Oh well, it's on to the first appeal. As I understand it takes 2 appeals, a lawyer and a judge and about another 6 months or so. Fortunately I have things to keep me busy, like this website.

My brother in law yesterday asks me, "are you going to review movies that people actually watch like family movies and kids films?" That was actually a good question. I'm sure anyone who's been reading my reviews have notice a dearth of family friendly entertainment. The fact that it's mostly foreign films and documentaries doesn't help much either.

SO with that in mind, I've decided to review a few family films including: Kit Kittredge: All American Girl, Journey To The Center Of The Earth, WALL-E, Nim's Island, and Veggie Tales Presents: The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything. (all links are IMDB).

Of course I'll have to fit these in with regular weekly releases (family films don't come out every week) but I'll shoot for one a week starting out and we'll see how it goes from there.

So, I'm branching out to watch movies I don't usually, not just chick flicks and period dramas (although those are bad enough). I guess it comes with the territory. I promised myself I wouldn't be a snobby site that only reviewed films that came out on one screen in your town (if at all). Guess it's time to live up to my promise.

Enjoy, more reviews coming soon!

One goal reached, another moves away

2009-01-15T20:09:00.004-05:00

Well, I have reached my 50th review with Gaspar Noe's Irreversible! I can't believe that in less than a month and a half I've generated so much content. It's been a lot of fun and a lot of work. Every review brings me closer to my goal of being on Rotten Tomatoes.

Unfortunately it looks like that goal has moved a good distance into the future now. I examined the by-laws of the Online Film Critics Association and it says that you not only have to have 50 reviews in the last year, you also have to have a minimum of one year of experience. So it looks like I can't join until next year around this time.

So, things are tough but I'm making it. I figured I can slow down and review new releases over the course of the week instead of doing a whole bunch on Tuesday. That said there will still be the latest and biggest releases reviewed by Wednesday. Coming up I've got Swing Vote (when it comes back to the local shop) and Brideshead Revisited. Stay tuned faithful readers, I'm in for the long haul.

49 Reviews!

2009-01-13T23:39:00.002-05:00

I just need one more review to hit the magic number. By the end of the week I'll be making my application to the Online Film Critics Society! Keep your fingers crossed!

Almost to 50!

2009-01-12T00:19:00.002-05:00

My goal when starting this blog back in December was to have 50 reviews and then submit my application to the Online Film Critics Society and try to get added to Rotten Tomatoes. I'm happy to say that as of January 12 I am 5 reviews away from 50!

I'm not sure what happens next but I'm actually kind of excited. I'm going to keep reviewing the biggest releases on Tuesday or Wednesday while spending the rest of the week picking up my back catalogue. Thanks to everyone who's been reading. Be sure to share the site with your friends. I thought about renaming the site but Tabula Imago is starting to grow on me. I hope it is for you too.

Eden Lake Mini-Review

2009-01-10T23:56:00.002-05:00

I didn't even finish this movie so I won't give it a proper review. I stopped it when the main character did something so stupid that my interest in the movie was permanently revoked.

When trouble is visited upon you, that is one thing, but when trouble appears and we go looking for it, we get what we deserve. Such a movie is Eden Lake.

Two lovers make their way to a soon to be developed flooded rock quarry and look to spend a romantic weekend away. They are interrupted by a gang of 12 year old hoodlums who insist on playing loud stereos and being little pricks. The gang moves along and when the lovers head back to their car someone has placed a glass bottle behind their rear tire. It of course pops and they have to use the spare.

Now, rather than go to the cops, or even just go home. Our heroes had back into town and find our hooligans hanging out at their home. So the man just goes on in the house, apparently to have a show down with these kids.

This is so remarkably stupid that whatever happened to him or her was really not interesting to me. I just turned the movie off. I'm going to watch something else instead.

Thoughts on Man on Wire

2009-01-10T22:18:00.003-05:00

While it probably is the best documentary of the year, I do think it's a little overhyped. The documentary plays more like a heist film, following a very specific time frame (pretty much just the day of the walk) and does a great job.

I wanted to know more about Petit though and what happened to him afterwords. I know that the film had a very narrow vision, I guess I was just hoping for more. I still gave it five stars because it is really good, it just wasn't what I was expecting. Not the film's fault for that.

You can read the review here.

A Hard Review

2009-01-07T02:37:00.002-05:00

I watched "The Killing Fields" the other day about the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. It's based on a true story of a New York reporter (Sam Waterston) and his fellow journalist and guide Dith Pran (Dr. ). When all the non-Cambodians are evacuated from the country Pran gets left behind. He struggles to stay alive in the reeducation camp and eventually walks out of Cambodia into Thailand.

The film is great. The soundtrack, the acting, the writing, the directing. It's one of the best war movies I've ever seen. But why am I having so much trouble reviewing it? I don't know. It just seems that I ought to think about my words with this film more than some of the others I've watched. I want to spend a little time with it.

I know it's not "time-sensitive" or whatever, but this one needs to roll around in my brain a little while longer...

Top of the Shlock (10 Best Horror/Exploitation Films) 2008

2009-01-07T02:31:00.003-05:00

Boogeyman 2 - A great slasher with a hard-R that has nothing to do with the original (as far as I can tell, since I didn't see it). It may not be the best but it's definitely above average and worth it for some great kills (including a disembowelment).

30 Days of Night – A vampire movie with a great twist. In Barrows, Alaska it gets dark for 30 days. And there are vampires lining up for the buffet. It's up to a rag tag band of citizens led by the sheriff (Josh Hartnett) to take them out before they're dinner. It's got some wonderful kills, a great sense of energy and visual style. From the director of Hard Candy.

Hitman – A throwback to the great Eurotrash cinema of the 70s and 80s. It's not really a good movie but it has the 3 Bs, which are brains, blood and barenaked actors. We get plenty of the latter two and just enough brains to keep things interesting. It's sort of a bloody poor man's James Bond. Definitely one of the most fun genre pictures of the year.

The Tattooist – Once again a 3B winner. This is a rather unique tale from New Zeland. It's about a tattoo artist that steals a cursed tool from a tribesman at a local tattoo show. When he uses it on people they slowly start to turn to ink and die. Can he save his girlfriend from an angry tribal ghost before it's too late? What makes this a definite watch is that it is a unique story that involves a culture that Americans don't normally get to experience. So it's an education hidden in a great horror flick.

The Ruins – Ah, this one is based on a book by Scott Smith (A Simple Plan) and comes with the red, red kroovy. It's what I like to call crunchy. Lots of bones and gristle and good old fashioned gore. Some tourists are trapped on top of a pyramid infested with man-eating plants. Horror in broad daylight, plenty of crunchy gruesome gore and a topless Laura Ramsey? Sign me up. The ending is a little blah, but the rest is solid.

Diary of the Dead – The great master himself, George Romero, returns to the dead for this lesson in how to shoot a “documentary” style horror film. Handheld without looking like it's strapped to a paint shaker? Cutting edge gore? It may not deliver on the barenaked actors but the script is tight and the gore is plentiful. The only thing I don't like is the use of more digital gore, but that's for another column.

Inside – Best French horror movie this year, probably best since High Tension (I haven't seen Frontier(s) yet) and delivering on the two most important of the 3 Bs – Brains and Blood! It's a story of a pregnant woman trapped in her house with a woman that wants her baby. She doesn't want to wait for the birth either. This film goes places that curled my toes and had me sucking in air. Definitely brutal, with smart characters well portrayed. It seems to jump the shark in the last 10 minutes but it's still great. Scissors to the testicles. 'Nuff said.

Storm Warning – Another nasty little film. This one is from Australia and features a couple in the outback who get lost and stumble across a crazy inbred family bent on killing them. It has some great horror set-pieces, has characters that are smart and desperate to live (especially a strong female character) and hell of a gag involving a baby food jar you won't soon forget. Crunchy and has the 3Bs!

Rambo – I know I gave it a good rating as a film but it's hard not to put this one on the gore lover's list for this year. IMDB estimates the body count at 2.9 corpses per minute. Now most of that occurs in the attack on a village and the end set piece but it does have the kroovy and it isn't shy. It's also clever and well shot so it delivers on 2 of the 3Bs. I don't count the brief rape scenes as they didn't feel exploitative enough (God that sounds horrible). But if a machete decapitation and a disembowelment don't get you itching, well this may not be the one for you. But if it isn't why are you still reading this list?

Zombie Strippers – Destined to be a midnight dorm room classic. This film features real porn stars (like Jenna Jameson and Roxy Saint) who are strippers turned into zombies by an infected patron. The thing is, it makes them BETTER STRIPPERS! Of course a private lap dance usually ends up in some good old gut munching but the film is over the top funny like old Troma pictures. Definitely one of the years best!

Now for the worst of the year. There are only six as I really couldn't find 10 that were really, really bad. Most were just average. The films on this list just didn't deliver, even if they did have all three of the Bs.

Them (Ils) – This is a French thriller in the vein of The Strangers. Beautiful people doing stupid things and then getting killed by less than skilled antagonists. It's well shot but it sucked.

Zombie Diaries – I have a full review of this one but I think it helps to say again, this movie is abysmally made and if I didn't have to review it I wouldn't have finished it. It was terrible, badly shot, badly acted, badly written, just terrible.

Saw IV – An unnecessary sequel to a franchise that, at episode 4 is feeling long in the tooth. The third film was a solid ending. This film is just a producer's indulgence to milk the bloody cow. Really just delivers on the blood because no one gets naked and the plot is overly complicated.

The Rage – Another wannabe zombie movie that just can't pull of the gore. It was bad writing and bad acting. Granted I could only get the Rated version at the time, but that wouldn't have helped. I'll admit that the only thing I remember about this movie was that I didn't like it.

Aliens Vs. Predator Requiem – It had two of the greatest gory sci-fi pedigrees available and it managed to screw it up, even with an R Rating. Say what you will about Paul Anderson, at least his movie was comprehensible and had characters and some plot. This movie was just a rehash of any zombie movie they just stuck Aliens and Predators in it.

Rest Stop – Don't Look Back – A terrible sequel to a movie that was just plain bad. The original was small and starred Jaime Alexander (who I like) and revolved around a haunted rest stop. The second one tries to cash in on the so called torture-porn craze but fails miserably. It has a little grue but the other 2Bs are missing and there's not enough of the blood to cover that up.

One Minute Roundup!

2009-01-02T20:37:00.002-05:00

I've not been able to get full reviews up since I've been messing with this damned search engine (that finally works, thank you). So here's some briefs as I write the full reviews.

Zombie Diaries - 1/2 Star - It's like someone duct-taped a DV cam to a paint shaker and turned off all the light except one little flashlight. Horrible.

Eagle Eye - 2 Stars - A competently made thriller with handsome LaBeouf and Michelle Monahagn that features an enemy and means that are not possible. PERIOD.

Michael Clayton - 4 Stars - This is a good one from last year, a solid thriller in the vein of The Verdict, stars George Clooney in a great dramatic role and Tilda Swinton as his nemesis (one of my favorite actors).

Search Engine Blues

2009-01-01T06:22:00.002-05:00

Damn getting a search engine to work is a pain in the ASS! I'm using the google search but I'm having a hell of a time getting results. I'm having my page indexed and trying to make something happen. I didn't think it would be this hard. I'm giving up for tonight, try again tomorrow. Hell, I might even watch a movie.

At least the site is browsable and as far as I know the links work. there's a few I need to work on, some broken deep links. I'm determined to finish though. As soon as I get this working it will be easier for future iterations. I just didn't know that setting up a website would be such a Herculean effort.

Thank the gods I have this blog that is so nice and easy to use. While I wait for my site to index. Christ this is a nightmare. I just want to watch movies. And write about them. I'm just too damn poor to hire someone who knows what they're doing.

Hang in their faithful readers. We'll get it going.

PS: Anybody else think it's funny that spellcheck doesn't recognize Google in lowercase?

We've MOVED!

2009-01-01T02:56:00.005-05:00

Hey, I've got a proper website all made up and you can come check it out at Tabula-Imago.com! I'll still blog here but the reviews will be mostly on the new site. My old site will stay up so you can check the reviews that are here.

I hope you like it. It's been a real effort to get done. I found a free template by cruising the web and edited it with some free editors. I want to use this as sort of repository of stuff that doesn't go anywhere else. I've got a place for essays, a proper archive and everything.

Building the site has been a real pain in the ass. Since I don't have a job right now I've had to use all freeware and unlicensed images. Freeware is cool but it's not the most stable of tools. I use Mozilla's WYSIWYG HTML editor KompoZer and good old text editor Notepad ++. Basically when something didn't work in KompoZer I'd shuffle over to Notepad ++. There was quite learning curve, especially after coming from things like MoveableType/WordPress/Blogger composing that is primarily template based.

All my reviews are written using OpenOffice Writer. It works well most of the time and can do just about anything that you can do with MS Office, though it may take an extra step or digging through an extra menu. Such is the life of the open source user.

I'm especially proud of my banner image. I used images available from Wikipedia that had Creative Commons license and used GIMP 2.4 to make my banner image, and I'm really proud of it and I think it looks great!

I really recommend all the tools I list here and they do the job, even if it's a slow job. Of course a lot of that has to do with my poor web-design skills. I was able to find some great templates (HERE) and picked a nice one that was rather simple and clean.

A long time ago when I was reading about blogging and web design the two most important things I learned were that the internet is content driven and that access to content is the most important part.

In short this means that if you want people to keep coming to your site you have to stay constant with the new content (especially in the ADD world of blogging) and that simple clean site navigation allows people to get to it. So all my designs and template choices are probably considered pedestrian, if not down right boring. But you can read all the content and it's easy to access.

I know it's presumptuous to think that anyone reads this but I enjoy the work and keeps me from sinking into depression or other unpleasantness.

I'm a poster-child for the DIY (and Do It for Cheap) ethic. I hope you guys get something out of this.

Happy New Year!

Wanted

2008-12-27T17:25:00.003-05:00

English/110 Minutes/2008/Rated R

“Wanted” is a great summer action flick that triumphs more in style than in depth. The story follows Wesley Gibson who is miserable as a cog in the work-a-day world. His girlfriend cheats on him with his best friend, his boss abuses him and he constantly frets over his extraordinary insignificance. One day that all changes when he learns that the father he never knew, one of the greatest assassins that has ever lived, was recently murdered.

He is then recruited by The Fraternity, a group of assassins of whom his father was a part. We follow Wesley through the inevitable training sequence (that manages not to fall into the montage trap) and on his early missions as he builds up his skills to tackle his father's killer. The Fraternity itself is a fascinating hodgepodge of characters with standouts being Fox, (Angelina Jolie in a role she is born to play) and Morgan Freeman cast against type as the leader of this gang of assassins. Wesley is played by one of my favorite actors, James McAvoy (Atonement, Last King of Scotland) and he does a spectacular job at selling Wesley's insignificance while equally well portraying his powerful side.

Visually the film is great and while being utterly over the top never falls into the realm of self-parody that was the undoing of “Shoot 'Em Up.” It helps that it is directed by the great visual stylist Timur Bekmambetov (Nightwatch, Daywatch) in his English language debut. Timur fills the screen with impossible action that somehow remains feasible and all the more pleasurable for it. A close comparison would be “Live Free or Die Hard” another over-the-top action film that never quite crosses the line of credulity. A great example from “Wanted” is the scene where an assassin flips his car over another vehicle to fire down through an open sunroof. Completely ridiculous, absolute pleasure.

“Wanted” is easily the most visually exciting movie I've seen this year. It's use of slow motion is stellar including long reverses (a bullet going through someone's head is traced back through time to the gun that fired it) and the visual representation of Wesley's different abilities is handled in such a way that the viewer immediately knows which sense he's using. There are other great visuals that I don't want to ruin by giving away. Suffice to say that the film is a visual treat and is Timur's best film to date.

Narratively the film is fairly pedestrian with the action set pieces really setting it apart. This is not to say that the film has no distinguishing and original ideas. The method of target selection for The Fraternity is interesting if a little bizarre, yet it is believable and interesting. Of course it helps that you have Morgan Freeman selling it to you (providing the gravity that he also gives in the recent Batman films). The film has some other great conceits that I won't ruin here and is great fun. I think it's safe to say that while there has been some criticism of the film's similarity to both Fight Club and The Matrix (nobodies who discover great power), “Wanted” is enough its own man that viewers who enjoyed those films won't mind the similarities.

In closing, the story of “Wanted” is familiar but it manages to overcome its familiarity with great style and a stellar cast. You'll be hard pressed to find a more exciting and fun summer movie than this. Highly Recommended.

Rated R for Strong Bloody Violence Throughout, Pervasive Language, and Some Sexuality

Red (2008)

2008-12-27T15:28:00.003-05:00

English/93 Minutes/2008/Rated R

I came to “Red” as a Lucky McKee fan. I enjoyed his bizarre horror film “May” and his Masters of Horror episode “Sick Girl.” The screenplay was also written by Stephen Susco (“The Grudge”) based on a novel by Jack Ketchum. I haven't read the book by Ketchum but another of his books adapted for the screen is “The Girl Next Door” about a teenage girl who is tortured to death. The story of Red is described on the box as being about Avery (Brian Cox) who's dog is brutally and senselessly murdered by some teen punks. When Avery finds that he cannot get justice for the killing he takes matters into his own hands.

I was all set for a nice tight revenge thriller ending with Avery going insane and opening some gruesome cans of whoop ass on the punks. After all Cox once portrayed Hannibal Lector in Michael Mann's “Manhunter.” McKee is no stranger to the red, red kroovy and the writer of the Grudge remake should make for something that at least tries to be chilling. Unfortunately the film ends up rather bland. After a good build up the film sort of sputters and fails in the final act. It effectively undoes all of the previous buildup and feels confused and overly pat, as if the film needed to end in a hurry.

I believe this is in large part caused by the fact that McKee did not finish the film himself. He has co-directing credit with producer Trygve Diesen. I did some research and while I couldn't find anything concrete it appears that McKee was let go during production. Filming stopped for almost six months before Diesen stepped in and completed the film. While there is consistency in the visuals of the film (although certain sections are both darker and warmer) the film is unable to come with the payoff. It neither gives us a thought-provoking downbeat ending or a good nasty exploitation ending.

Conceptually this is definitely the kind of film that McKee has made a career of. His characters are often physically and/or emotionally damaged and are outcasts. They are triggered into increasingly violent behavior by singular obsessions that culminate in some self-revelation. For reasons we'll probably never know he never got to see it through. The fact that Angela Bettis was announced as a cast member and does not appear in the final film seals the deal for me (she has an appearance in every McKee film).

While the visuals of the film are sometimes questionable, the acting in the film is uniformly impressive. The cast is filled with well-known names including Tom Sizemore, Robert Englund, Amanda Plummer and a long list of names you may not know but who's faces you certainly will. McKee is able to bring out great performances, especially from hams like Englund who is in only two scenes but is utterly convincing as an out of work, white trash dad. Sizemore is oily as Mr. McCormick but not arch or scenery chewing. The real star though is Cox as Avery.

Cox brings to Avery a quiet dignity and a completely believable escalating obsession. He is definitely damaged goods. He is a widower who is still in mourning for his wife and children. In one chilling scene he describes how they died and the camera never leaves Cox's face. He is positively riveting.

The greatest thing about his performance is that he is believable in his obsession. Not being a dog owner myself it was hard to understand the lengths that Avery goes to. But Cox as Avery shows that Red was the last vestige of his family and his loss is palpable. Every escalation comes naturally. But even a great performance can't sell some of Avery's actions. Many of his actions stretch credulity, especially in a highly litigious age. Avery coming around to the killers' houses borders on harassment and these days he'd have a restraining order slapped on him. It would have been more believable if Avery was more malevolent or secretive in his obsession.
But the character of Avery doesn't want revenge. All he wants is for his loss to be understood and acknowledged. He is like a ghost of guilt that is haunting the boys until they become as unhinged as him. Unfortunately the payoff does not honor that emotional arc leaving us feeling hollow and cheated.

The film seems lost. It doesn't work as exploitation and it doesn't have the chops to bring off something more significant. Thus while the acting is great and the story had promise, I can't really recommend “Red” unless you're a big Brian Cox fan. Those looking for a film like “May” and fans of McKee in general will probably be disappointed. Not Recommended.

NOTE: There is a scene of violence involving the dog but it is off screen. Later in the film we see the corpse of a dog that is worm eaten. Those who are upset by animal violence should take this into account.

Rated R for Violence and Language

Rambo

2008-12-26T23:32:00.002-05:00

English/91 Minutes/2008/Rated R

Those not wishing to read the entirety of this review will hopefully find the following summary satisfactory. Rambo is a good action film that finds its roots in a real life tragedy. It is not exploitative even though it is very graphic. It is recommended. For those interested in a more full-bodied defense, read on...

“Rambo” is a film that contains much that is unpleasant but I hardly feel that it is morally indefensible or disgustingly pro-violence. My contention is that the film brings a satisfactory end to Rambo's story while staying true to the underlying elements of the character. It is ironic that a film star who made the right-wing uncomfortable with his first film seems to make the left-wing uncomfortable with his latest film. I think, however, that this film is just as effective at starting discussion as any Oscar-worthy film on the subject and in this review I will tell you why.

The story of the latest “Rambo” installment is fairly simple. John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) has once again gone into hiding, this time in Thailand where he spends his time in purgatory and exile, wrangling poisonous snakes. Into his world come a group of missionaries, including Sara (Julie Benz), who want to cross the border into Burma (Myanmar). There has been a genocidal campaign by the ruling government for the last 30 years to drive out an ethnic people called the Karen (pronounced KAH-rin) to take over their land. These missionaries are going to help. Rambo asks, “are you bringing any weapons.” No they say, they are not. “Then you aren't changing anything,” he says. He has no interest in helping these people. Yet in a rain-soaked confrontation Sara is able to convince Rambo to take them up river and he does so grudgingly. When the missionaries don't return their Pastor hires a group of mercenaries to get them back and Rambo must take them up the river as well.

What follows is a no-holds barred assault on the senses and perhaps the sensibilities of some viewers. Unlike other critics I don't think the film exploits the real life tragedy of Myanmar for the sake of a film, at least no more so than a “Hotel Rwanda” or “Blood Diamond.” Rather it takes the opportunity of a summer action flick to shine a light on a little discussed subject. I'm sure I am like many other viewers who, after seeing the film, decided to look up what was really going on in Myanmar and see how people are helping.

For the film itself, while it is as graphic as you have been led to believe, is a great opportunity for Rambo to use his fighting skills to purge himself of his demons. I personally feel that a level of reality has finally been brought to a series known for a high body count. For example in “First Blood Part II,” Rambo kills at least a hundred people but its done in a stylized way; all fun and no consequences. The new film is not squeamish in showing what happens when violence really occurs. If we find that distasteful then the film has, in some ways, done its job. If we also find it exhilarating it says something about us as humans and as viewers.

“Rambo” does harken back to a time of simpler moralities where bad guys wore black hats and the good guys were good. Yet it's simple story is sometimes at odds with its realistic depiction. It comes closer in its realism and its desire to depict violence as nasty and unpleasant but it does not make a full demythologization like we saw in Clint Eastwood's “Unforgiven.” Instead the movie engages us viscerally in the simplistic rah-rah pleasure of great 80s action films of which this franchise is a pillar. This is what I feel many critics and viewers have had issue with.

As I have said of other war, holocaust, genocide movies, anyone who wishes to bring to the screen stories of these tragedies has a choice to make. They can go totally abstract with the depictions of violence like the scene in “Schindler's List” where people are marching into the crematoria or they can try for some level of verisimilitude. At the far end of that scale is essentially a document of atrocities in all their vile detail to the point that any message you have is drowned out by the desensitization of the viewer. Essentially we turn off and zone out.

There is also the accusation that any film who opts for more realistic portrayal of horrific deeds is somehow exploiting the tragedy for the purpose of entertainment. Then there are those who say that nothing less than the full monty is acceptable. There are of course downsides to both ends. Anything less than documentary is considered sacrilege and any graphic depiction less than that is exploitation. Thus Rambo finds itself in the camp of films that take their stories from real tragedies and make from them 90 minutes of entertainment with a serious face. That is the great criticism of the film.

And this is the major theme that must be addressed by any critic who recommends the film as technically the film is well made. The acting is better than previous installments (save the first) and the story is tight and engaging. Stallone shows a sure hand when it comes to filming action set-pieces and this installment should be praised for the increased realism.

For example, Rambo no longer takes on a whole battalion alone, and not always in face to face combat. Many of his successes focus on surprising the enemy or outwitting them instead of merely outrunning-and-gunning them. In fact much of his success is based on a mixture of luck and the involvement of others. He still gets his hands plenty bloody but the feeling of the film is different. John Rambo as portrayed by Stallone is no longer the lost boy of First Blood or the steroidal invulnerable badass of the later flicks. Rather this Rambo is utterly familiar with himself and hates what he is. In his mind he only brings death.

Consider if you will Rambo's place in time. John Rambo was a veteran who was cast out by his country. He did his best to help POWs still unaccounted for in Vietnam. One could only imagine how he would feel about veterans these days getting poor treatment at Walter Reed. He was over in Afghanistan in the 80s helping the Mujuhadeen finish off the Russians. But when the Russians left the Taliban came to power. We now live in a world where 9/11 has taken place and we find ourselvse again in an unpopular war. Wherever Rambo goes trouble is waiting and in his world nothing ever really does change.

At the same time, Rambo is not conflicted about his personal use of violence. Rambo says that killing is easy for him and it is hinted that he enjoys it. He has long since given up any pretense to fighting a good fight or doing a greater good. I think he may even realize the futility of violence in the long run. This is not to say that “Rambo” is a work of quiet philosophy. There is still the expected body count and the simplistic villains.

Rambo himself doesn't have much dialogue and what there is mostly imperative “go here, do this.” The brief moments of philosophy can fit on a poster (and they do): “live for nothing, die for something.” However, Rambo has not aligned himself with some greater good. Rather, John Rambo has been looking for a good reason to die, because he doesn't have a good reason to go on living. The scene where he is prepared to give his life for someone else (literally) is a far cry from the old Rambo.

I think it is also significant that this is the first time that Rambo is not sent on a mission by a government or on behalf of one. He doesn't do it for money or even for love (Benz is easily half his age and the character isn't exactly a lover). Instead he takes on this mission because he has learned to care about people again. He also realizes that killing is what he does and that no one is as good at it as he is. And he has plenty of people to kill.

The villains in the piece are rather one dimensional and are portrayed as utterly, irredeemably evil (one is even a pedophile) and to their credit all the villains perform admirably in rather thankless roles. The supporting cast fairs a little better with a group of mercenaries who, while also rather one-dimensional, make their presence felt and we care about what happens to them. In a great turn, Graham McTavish plays a surly former SAS man who ends up being surprisingly sympathetic. The missionaries are fairly expendable and are for the most part interchangeable, with the exception of Benz and Paul Schulze as their leader.

In fact Rambo has been criticized for showing the missionaries as weak and naïve. Benz's character is particularly singled out for supposedly being a throwback to the damsel in distress. However, in this case I found it to be a little more realistic. With a lack of training and days tied up in a hog pen with little food, I'm sure we would all find it difficult to be more proactive.

As a film, “Rambo” does what it sets out to do which is revamp and revitalize a forgotten series, entertaining while shedding light on an important topic. Topical films have a habit of being incredibly dated and falling prey to the passage of time. Such was the fate of “Rambo III” and may be of this new Rambo as well. The new Rambo just happened to be made at a time where many in the critical establishment do not want to see endorsements of violence and the heedless portrayal of bloodletting of the type featured in the film.

The great sin of Rambo is that it addresses an important topic in a politically incorrect fashion. If, for example, Stallone had paid for a documentary about Myanmar, no one would have gone to see it. If this film were a drama starring a white woman as a heroic doctor who is killed for helping the Burmese people, it would critically lauded. Finally if this were a foreign language film about a Burmese woman who must use her wits and her sexuality to survive being in a prison camp until she is liberated by fellow rebels, it would win an Oscar. The issue with Rambo is not that it is a bad film. Rather it is pilloried for making a good film in a politically incorrect way and thus it cannot be appreciated either as entertainment or serious commentary.

Personally I find that the film is a good conclusion for the character and if none other was ever made I would consider the franchise well ended. Rambo finds his peace at last and we are given hope that while he may have been a man of violence, that is not all that he is. Recommended.

Rated R for Strong Graphic Bloody Violence, Sexual Assaults, Grisly Images and Language

Cortex

2008-12-26T18:38:00.003-05:00

French/105 Minutes/2008/Not Rated

The French thriller “Cortex” has an interesting concept that could have turned into a gimmick but thankfully delivers a crisp whodunit instead. In “Cortex,” Charles Boyer (named like the film actor from the 50s) is a retired police detective that is suffering from Alzheimer's. He is no longer able to live by himself and his son and he have agreed that he needs to enter a retirement home.

Boyer (Andre Dussollier) is a widower who is slowly losing control of his memory and faculties due to the disease. When he arrives at “La Residence” he finds that patients are dying from mysterious circumstances. He suspects there may be a murderer loose in La Residence. The question is can he overcome the growing instability of his own memory to find the murderer in time?

Directed by Nicholas Boukhrief, “Cortex” teases us. Are there really murders occuring or has Boyer become paranoid? Who could the murderer be and why would they kill? The storytelling is handled in a fairly straightforward manner as Boyer sneaks around the hospital trying to gather evidence. What makes the film unique is that we are unsure if we are seeing Boyer from the inside or the outside. We rarely leave his perspective in a shot and when we do he is either entering or leaving the scene. The viewer is thus left to question if perhaps there are no murders or that Boyer may be the killer himself.

His condition is used to great effect narratively. In one scene he desperately scrawls notes in a little notebook he keeps only to look down and see that he has written notes on top of notes leaving an almost indecipherable scrawl. Even when he discovers who the killer is and writes it down, he forgets again leaving his note in a place he has forgotten. In another scene at the beginning of the film he reaches into his desk to get his pistol. He finds the paper it was wrapped in and the pistol in the waste can.

Of course no one believes Charles accusations and he constantly has to trick the hospital staff, particularly with faking taking his medication. In these scenes I found the film to be a little less realistic. Anyone who has been in a hospital like that will tell you that nurses know how to check and see if you have taken your medication. Also being able to hide a gun would be a difficult task. How he finally determines the solution feels a bit contrived but allows the viewer some extra suspense. Finally I don't believe that a real hospital or retirement home would have corridors that were unwatched.

Those criticisms aside the film is well acted and well written. It uses its plot conceit (Alzheimer's patient solves logic puzzle) to the full dramatic effect without feeling exploitative. This is an easy recommend for people who like brain puzzles. A classic whodunit with a great twist.

Not Rated: Mature Audiences, contains Some Language and a Scene of Violence

Death Train (aka Im Auftrag des Vatikans)

2008-12-26T15:30:00.006-05:00

English/104 Minutes/2006/Not Rated

"Death Train" is an average TV movie that is undone by a ridiculous ending and overdirection. With three words I can tell you whether or not you'd like this movie. If the words “Catholic Kung-Fu” sound like brainless fun have I got a movie for you.

“Death Train” tells the story of Matthais (Simon Dutton, who looks like James Van Der Beek), a former soldier in the war in Kosovo. He has come to a monastery to live out his days in peace. However, he is secretly being groomed by the society “Pugnus Dei” (roughly Fist of God) who work as “Catholic secret agents.” Matthais along with his friend Gladius (Stephan Bieker) along with their mentor Matthew are on the pilgrimage train to Lourdes, where all sorts of afflicted people come to pray for healing.

Among the passengers is Sandra and her son Joey who has a rare blood disease that the insurance won't pay for. Also among the passengers are Lennart (Arnold Vosloo), Jurek (Mario Irrek), and Zandi (Michelle MacErlean), gangsters who have stolen a killer virus. Once the police discover who is aboard they refuse to stop the train and the only ones who can save the day are Matthais and Gladius.

Matthais is a typical suffering hero, like Cain in Kung Fu who always tries to avoid combat and killing people to leave his past behind. But like any typical action movie he is forced by circumstance to fight the gangsters one by one, hand-to-hand, usually on top of the moving train. It may sound ridiculous and it is but the fights are well filmed and much of the stunt work (car chases, explosions, helicopter crashes) is straight from the Joel Silver playbook (something has to happen every 10 minutes).

The film has above average writing for most of the picture. The solutions for innoculating the passengers and some of the plot twists and resolutions are clever and for the most part feel organic to the story. Again, if you can get past the silly premise the movie plays like “Under Siege 2” meets “The Da Vinci Code.” It's just unfortunate that it falls apart in the final reel.

In the last 10 minutes the story and the characters' actions are physically impossible, not even feasible and turn out to be just plain silly. I can deal with one dimensional villains and silly plot conceits (what I call a “gimme” every movie gets one) but once a film crosses the line into utter impossibilty then I can't enjoy it.

The film's other great black mark is the over editing and direction of the film. There are several great moments of direction (note the flashback scene where we get a dutch angle from the ground. But for everyone of these comes something really boneheaded like the constant use of ramp up and ramp down of film speed. Also every explosion is shot from 10 different angles and cut and recut so we see it over and over, sucking out any coolness or pleasure that comes from these stunts by becoming overlong and irritating.

If you're looking for a fun Friday night film you could do better, but you could also do worse. The film is predictable and derivative but fun and the acting and writing are above average for a TV film. If it wasn't for the ending it might have been worth watching. I can't say I recommend “Death Train” but if you're looking for some decent hand-to-hand fights and don't mind the concept it's a lot of fun.

Not Rated: Contains Violence and Brief Language

Happiness

2008-12-26T12:34:00.004-05:00

English/139 Minutes/1998/Not Rated

In the movie “Happiness” no one is happy. They all see the sunny sides of other lives and wish they were their own. But as Solondz is pleased to remind us the happier we pretend to be the more depressed we really are.

The movie follows three sisters as their lives intertwine in small town New Jersey. Joy (a fragile Jane Adams) is a struggling artist, almost thirty and living at home with her parents. Her opening scene with Jon Lovitz (the finest bit he's ever done) sets the stage for what will be the theme in Joy's joyless life: punishment of hope.

Sister Helen (Lara Flynn Boyle) seems to have it all. She's a successful single writer but is completely facile and vapid at one point saying she wished she'd been raped so her work could be more authentic. She finds a weird connection with an obscene caller, Alan (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) who is also her neighbor.

The third sister, Trish (Cynthia Stevenson) is “happily” married to Dr. Maplewood (Dylan Baker) and has three children, the oldest of which is their 11 year old son, Billy (Rufus Read). They live a fairly conventional life with the exception of the good doctor's secret. He is a pedophile, masturbating to teen pop magazines and staring longingly at his son's little league teammates. Dr. Maplewood also happens to be a psychiatrist whose patient is none other than Allan.

Each story presents a facet of what might make us happy. Whether it's happiness in success, happiness in others, or happiness in a situation. Solondz seems to say that happiness is an ideal but isn't found in real life, at least not in the ways we expect. Often we look beyond ourselves for happiness and love only to find that the only unconditional love is self love.

This is illustrated literally by the use of masturbation as a narrative tool. In three cases characters masturbate. One character does so to release frustration, the other to hold his demons at bay and the third as a right of passage that proves that there is hope. This is not happiness either.

Another theme is that the things that make us happy aren't always good things. Many times they hurt others or give us pleasure at their expense. At best people realize they are being used and don't mind because they get something out of it too. In many cases things that make us happy (or think will make us happy) are self-destructive. On the other than if we enslave ourselves to what society says are “good things” they don't necessarily lead to happiness. Only when we surrender our chase of happiness and learn to be content in our situation do we find happiness. In this film happy is the enemy of content just as perfect is the enemy of good.

I would be remiss in this interview if I did not single out for comment Dylan Baker for his performance as Dr. Bill Maplewood. Baker plays Bill as a man who has a desire that he knows is inappropriate but he feels helpless to stop. We never see his molestations on screen but they are discussed in the film in rather explicit terms. It is difficult to watch (as it should be) but Solondz refuses to portray Bill in arch or vile terms, instead showing what a real pedophile would be like. It is a performance that cannot be topped by an actor who probably can't get work anymore because of it.
The highlight of the film is a conversation between father and son. Bill is brutally honest with his son and the scene is heartbreaking. He has lost everything and he knows it. Bill does not justify himself, he knows what he has done is evil and inexcusable. Why does he tell his son these things? He is not seeking forgiveness or even understanding. Perhaps it is his way of saying goodbye, of pushing his son away. The scene brought tears to my eyes and that is not an easy task.

Many people misinterpret Solondz's films as misanthropic which is untrue. Rather he refuses to make his characters one dimensional. They all want to be happy, they're all selfish and self-absorbed. On the other hand they are capable of love and sympathy and evoke in us a sense of pity and perhaps self-identification. Every Solondz film challenges us to not identify with these characters. Everyone has some part that we can empathize with and a part we have a knee-jerk negative reaction to. The question is, are we brave enough to identify with these characters.

In “Happiness” the characters are all damaged in their own way and sometimes they find a moment of pleasure or happiness only to find that the consequences outweigh the pleasure. There is no guaranteed happiness for the characters in the film, but as one of them observes in a toast, “Where there's life, there's hope.” Highly Recommended

Not Rated: Mature Audiences, contains Sex/Nudity, Graphic Language, Mature Thematic Elements Involving Child Molestation and a Scene of Violence

Palindromes

2008-12-24T00:57:00.004-05:00

English/100 Minutes/2004/Not Rated

In “Palindromes” Todd Solondz has perhaps finally found a way to tell the story he's been struggling with all these years. From “Welcome to the Dollhouse” through “Storytelling” he has been trying to convey that people do not change but that they are more than their circumstances. At least I think that's the story. It's the one I like best.

Palindromes is the story of Aviva who from a young age decides that she wants to be a mother. When she gets pregnant though, she learns that love is not unconditional and that life is much more complicated than she expected. I should tell more of the story but I don't want to spoil it. Suffice to say that, after a tough decision, she leaves home to find better fortune.

What makes the movie interesting and vital to it's core message is the fact that Aviva is played by 8 different actors of varying ages, race, (and in a brief segment) gender. The movie is roughly episodic with actors changing out at breaks in the story (usually titled by a character name) and sometimes within the same segment (especially near the end). While it may sound like an arthouse stunt the complexity provided by so many different actors provides an intriguing perspective.

Each actor has their moment to shine but there are a couple that really stand out. Sharon Wilkins as “Henrietta Aviva” shines in the role of a lifetime. She is an overweight black actress, a group not unlike middle-aged women who are too young to be lovers and too old to be moms, for whom Hollywood rarely has room. Solondz and Wilkins bring to Henrietta a beautiful innocence and openness that is refreshing. Far from a stunt she is one of the highlights of the film (no coincidence, I think, she's on the cover).

In another turn Valerie Shusterov plays the sexual side of Aviva in a bold role. She occupies an odd middle ground. She may be over 18, maybe not (it is implied she is a minor). She is mature and open about her sexuality and craving that connection. In a typical Solondz trend she finds love with a pedophile named Bob (Stephen Adly Guirgis) who is tortured by his desires.

Finally an unrecognizable Jennifer Jason Leigh turns in a portrait of an older, wiser Aviva who still clings to hope. She has learned to assert herself in a new way, expressing control over her circumstances. It is this Aviva that encounters Mark Weiner, the devil's mouthpiece of the film. He tells her that people do not change, that the depressives will always be depressed, that he has no control over whether he gets married and has children because its completely dependent on his “programming.” Mark has given up control of his life and hidden behind a mask of "rationality” while Aviva still holds out hope. Mark may be Solondz voice, but Aviva is his heart.

Solondz may be saying that we do not change, that we end the way we begin, but that what lies between those areas is complex and beautiful. Each Aviva is a shard of a soul, a facet of her. Even though she does not change she has so many parts. She has a child part, a guy part, an older woman part, each different but adhering to the same unchanging core. Aviva is played by many actors but remains a singular entity. One actor alone would have made a decent dramatic film, but Solondz is not interested in narrative as much as looking so intensely at one character that she actually fractures into pieces.

That's why “Palindromes” works so well as a film but also as a bookend to “Welcome to the Dollhouse.” It finally shows what Solondz' intentions have always been, why his stories are so fractured his characters so tormented. Perhaps I read too much hope into the film, but I think Solondz has said something life-affirming in this film and I think he has finally told his story.

We may never change, but there are so many parts to us that come to the fore in different times that we do not need to “change” we just need to learn to love all our parts. Highly Recommended.

Not Rated: Mature Audiences, contains Language and Sexual Situations, some involving Teens

Welcome To The Dollhouse

2008-12-23T22:10:00.003-05:00

English/88 Minutes/1995/Rated R

“Who ever told you to fight back?” - Mrs. Weiner

“Welcome to the Dollhouse” was Todd Solondz first movie and while it is well made and earnest it never achieves the emotionally devastating power of his later works. Having seen some of Solondz's other films (Happiness and Storytelling) I found this one to be his least engaging and most readily digestible. There are themes he would later revisit (hatred of younger siblings, child abuse and kidnapping) but here they are in a much more reserved form.

In “Dollhouse” we find young Dawn Weiner (Heather Matarazzo) who is going through the hell which is junior high. She is neither popular nor attractive and is subject to some pretty far out abuse (a girl demands she take a shit while she watches, a boy threatens to rape her). The tone seems to be mixed, trying to be blackly comic but not always getting the tone right. For the most part though Solndz film is spot on.

The family dynamic shows Dawn stuck between an overachieving older brother, Mark (Matthew Faber), and sickeningly sweet baby sister Missy (played by Daria Kalinina in eternal tutu). Her father is a non-entity in the house wanting only peace and quiet while her mother is manipulative and domineering. She is estranged from her elder daughter, praising instead her brother and doting on her little sister. Dawn is supposed to play the silent middle role, always acquiescing to everyone else's needs.

Dawn is reaching an age where she is beginning to express herself and each time she attempts to carve out a place to stand she finds that she is pushed away. Solndz reminds us of what it was like to be 12 or 13 and through Dawn we can experience it all again, for better and worse. It is to both Matarazzo and Solndz's credit that we feel a bittersweet knowing. For we know what the results of many of Dawn's experiments will be.

We see Dawn in what is probably her first crush on an older man (Eric Mabius) and we share her disappointment when she finds he already has a girlfriend. We see her fumbling romance with a boy who is a different kind of outcast as they find a common ground. We see the moments when she learns, as we all did, the painful truths of life and what it means to know yourself.

I am reminded of one particular scene where Dawn is asked to write an essay on dignity after an embarrassing debacle in detention. Her essay shows she has no understanding of the word means but throughout the film in her little rebellions and assertions of self (even where they are passive-aggressive), we find that she has a stubbornness, a quiet dignity that she does not know she has.

Her life changes when she has a run in with one of the school's bullies, Brandon (Brenden Sexton Jr.). After Dawn makes fun of him one day he tells her that he will rape her after school. She shows up, he has a knife, and we are not sure where this will lead. This is, I think, Solndz only real mistake as the shift in subject matter without a shift in tone makes for a sort of cognitive dissonance. Once we learn more about Brandon it makes sense but it is a jarring way to introduce someone.

The surprising thing is that Brandon is not a beast. In a performance that rival's Matarazzo's, Sexton makes Brandon a frightening aggressor only to have our sympathy once he opens himself to Dawn. As with most bullies, we find that he is just as sad as those he abuses. He comes close to stealing the show with his honesty and vulnerability.

But the story belongs to Dawn and how she deals with the difficulty of being a young girl. By the end we see that she has lost some of her shine, a little tarnish on her tiara. Even as she is the protagonist (in the literal sense) her forays into the world and into identity are spurned and ground down at every turn. In what could have been a turning point scene for Dawn in different film she does not assert herself, merely stands there quietly crying. I so wanted her to stand up and say how she really felt. But this is not that kind of movie.

In the end, Dawn realizes that she will never be first in her family's affection, she has learned a little of what a broken heart will be. The closing shot implies to me that nothing has changed for Dawn except that she has found she can bear more suffering than she thought. For Dawn wants desperately to be loved and praised. She doesn't just want to be popular or “normal (which is the worst word in any language),” she wants to be noticed by boys, by her family, by her peers. She wants to find her place in the world as we all do and like the rest of us she is still looking. Recommended.

Rated R for Language

Fat Girl (aka A Mo Soeur)

2008-12-23T16:37:00.004-05:00

French/86 Minutes/2001/Not Rated

First let me say that I hate the American title of this film “Fat Girl.” It engenders every sentiment that this film is opposed to, at lest in my interpretation. The literal title is “For My Sister” which makes much more sense and is a more appropriate title for this touching, realistic depiction of adolescent sexuality, the definitions of womanhood, and the relationship of siblings.

The story is an old and simple one. Anais (Anais Reboux) and Elena (Roxane Mesquida) are two high-school age sisters on a summer vacation. Anais is overweight and plain while Elena is sleek and sexual. Elena is always smiling and bubbling, unconcerned. Anais is withdrawn and somber, living in an interior world. She sings to herself tragic songs of love lost and birds picking at her corpse. In once scene she moves between a wooden diving board and a metal ladder in a swimming pool treating each like a lover, saying things like “of course you're the only one” and asking the diving board if he is jealous. It is a beautiful and heartbreaking scene that is captured with tenderness and that is what makes “Fat Girl” one of my favorite films.

While on vacation Elena meets a handsome college boy, Fernando (Libero De Rienzo), who is also on vacation (from Italy) and they fall quickly into that awkward young love that is so poorly portrayed in cinema. Anais is both suspicious of and jealous of her sister's relationship. She shares a room with her sister and is privy to all her sister's secrets. When Elena has Fernando over Anais can't sleep for the noise. At times she watches curiously and at other times she is crying. Each of the characters are emotionally complex and treated with respect by director Catherine Breillat.

When Fernando is lying in bed with Elena trying to convincer her to make love, he says the things that all men are guilty of saying, “of course I'll respect you” and “you can show your love for me.” As corny or malicious as it may sound on paper, Fernando is not imbued with any ill intentions by the actor or director. He is infatuated with Elena and (like most men) would say anything to have her. His scenes with Elena are filled with mixed emotions and trepidation. She cries, she is unsure and is so totally human. She is young and a virgin and like all people (who are honest with themselves) she is afraid of sex and life after it. Part of the film's strength comes from exploring emotions of a child turned lover and the complexities that it entails.

Anais on the other hand manages to be both more cynical and more sensitive than her older sister. Her scenes alone are heartbreaking as she sits in familiar isolation living out her dreams while realizing how pitiful she is. She does not like her body (as many kids her age do not) but Breillat does not show her as disgusting or treat her as somehow less worthy of love and attraction than her sister. That is partly why I'm confounded by the English title. It is so utterly American where the film is most certainly not. In fact the film goes to emotional depths that are rare in cinema, especially between the sisters.

Anais and Elena fight like sisters but they also love like sisters. There relationship is complex. They yell at each other and call names. They slap one another and wound deeply with words as only a sibling can. But for every scene of violence and anger there are scenes of solidarity and love. There are tender scenes where they talk to each other like sisters, but more importantly like little girls. They recall their childhood and in one scene they talk about looking into one anothers' eyes and feeling complete. It is in these times that we realize that Anais isn't truly jealous or hateful, she loves her sister so much and her sister loves her that they have the explosive element only found among siblings. Perhaps what is saddest is Anais' fear that Fernando will replace her, that her sister will no longer need her around. Elena, after all, is her window to the world.

Anais in fact says she does not want to know her first lover well, that way they won't have to fall out of love and feel foolish, or the boy brag about his conquest. She seems already burned by love having never had it, carrying around the dark weight of someone twice her age. It may be “better to have loved and lost” but for Anais the thought of the loss overwhelms the desire for love, so she daydreams of loneliness and love forsaken. The resolution of her story is both terrifying and understandable and we realize that she has lost the only thing of importance to her as well as the thing she hates most.

The film turns tragic in the last half, with real adult consequences coming for the youths. Breillat deftly captures the shame that outsiders can bring to a sexual relationship, somehow implying that such simple love, such foolish innocence, are things for which we should feel embarrassed. In one confrontation with her mother Elena asks “I suppose you never had a first (lover)?” to which mother replies “this is not about me,” at once denying her own shame and the right to sexuality of her daughter. Breillat sets this up dispassionately as we look through the eyes of Anais. When she hears that her father wants to have Elena examined (to see if she is still a virgin) Anais says “I don't see why others think it is their business.”

The final scenes are quite a shock and I'm not sure that I like the “deus ex machina” approach to the resolution. It feels like Breillat may have said everything she wanted to say and needed a way to resolve one final thread. It is a case where something in real life would feel like grand and random misfortune but in the context of a film seems merely convenient. Whether this is a deficiency in storytelling or just a limitation of the medium I cannot yet decide. The film makes a strong statement I'm just not sure what exactly it is.

The power and uniqueness of Breillat's film is that it treats the girls honestly, never making them young adults (like Ellen Page in “Hard Candy”) or innocent children preyed upon by older men. They are autonomous, capable of love and being loved and expressing their sexuality. Granted, in many cases they do not realize the possible consequences of their actions but how many lovers begin just so. Part of growing up is experiencing and learning from those tentative steps into sexual independence and the worst thing that can happen is for someone else to come in and say “this is wrong, you should be ashamed.”

Perhaps I see in this film a lot of myself and that may sway my perspective. However, I do not think this is completely the case. The sensitive subject is handled in a reverent and respectful manner. It does not skimp on showing sexuality but never feels prurient or for titillation (an excellent contrast would be to the work of Larry Clark). Breillat may be better known for her “pornographic” depictions but that is yet another exertion of an outside morality that does not seek to understand but to judge. While the film is graphic it focuses on the emotions surrounding these decisions and their consequences rather than beautiful people necking for our pleasure. This film is highly recommended.

Not Rated: Mature Audiences, contains Graphic Nudity, Sexuality, and Brief Strong Violence Including a Rape, all involving teens