Knock-Knock, Grieve, Repeat

“The Messenger” (2009) — movie review
Today’s review is for the quietly devastating “results of war” drama “The Messenger” (2009), starring Ben Foster as Staff Sgt. Will Montgomery (a wounded Iraq War veteran reassigned to the Army’s Casualty Notification service), Woody Harrelson as Capt. Tony Stone (a seasoned officer with a rigid protocol and a fraying sense of detachment), Samantha Morton as Olivia Pitterson (a widow whose grief complicates the boundaries of duty), and Jena Malone as Kelly (Will’s ex-girlfriend, whose absence underscores his emotional isolation).  Directed by Oren Moverman, the film explores the moral weight of bearing witness to loss, the limits of military stoicism, and the fragile humanity that flickers beneath uniformed surfaces.
Background:  This was my first viewing of  “The Messenger”.  I was looking for a free stream of the film “Taking Chance” and this film came up on YouTube “Shorts”.   It looked interesting, so I decided to give it a view.  The film was nominated for two Academy Awards:  Best Supporting Actor (Harrelson) and Best Original Screenplay (Moverman and Alessandro Camon).  It also won the Silver Bear for Best Screenplay and the Peace Film Award at the Berlin International Film Festival.  However, the film didn’t make much money at the box office.
Plot:  Will Montgomery returns from Iraq with physical scars and emotional distance.  Instead of redeployment, he’s assigned to notify next-of-kin of soldiers killed in action — a task governed by strict rules:  no touching, no consoling, no deviation.  His partner, Tony Stone, is a procedural purist, masking his own trauma behind protocol and alcohol.  As they deliver news to families — each encounter a study in shock, rage, denial, and collapse — Will begins to unravel.  His connection with Olivia, a widow who receives the news with eerie composure, breaches the professional wall and forces him to confront his own grief.  The film doesn’t build toward resolution;  it accumulates emotional weight, scene by scene, until the burden feels unrelated to the actual viewing.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  exceptional;  restrained and intimate;  a few;  absolutely.
Any good?  Yes.  “The Messenger” is a rare war film that never shows combat.  Instead, it focuses on the aftermath — the domestic front where grief detonates quietly.  It’s a film about duty, empathy, and the impossibility of emotional neutrality.  The screenplay is taut, the pacing deliberate, and the emotional stakes high.  It’s not a crowd-pleaser, but it’s a truth-teller.
Acting:  Ben Foster delivers may be his career-defining performance — his Will is haunted, tender, and barely holding it together.  I am not a fan of Harrelson, but his Tony is a masterclass in controlled unraveling;  his Oscar nomination was well-earned.  I found the character interesting because although he served in a “war zone”, he never personally came under fire.  He sees this as a personal (and career) failure and feels his awards and decorations are somehow not as valid as someone who earned his while actually in firefights.  Samantha Morton brings quiet power to Olivia, and her scenes with Foster are among the film’s most affecting.  Her character feels the other wives in the area think she is a “slut” for entering a relationship so soon after the death notification of her husband.  My impression was both she and they are really just afraid that’s how they might react and they feel they’re betraying “the memory” of their spouses even though they (the spouses) are still alive and fighting in Iraq.  The supporting cast (including Steve Buscemi in a brief but gutting grieving father role) adds texture without distraction.  The ensemble works because each character is a fragment of grief — some brittle, some buried.
Filming / FX:  The cinematography by Bobby Bukowski is intimate and observational — handheld shots, natural light, and close framing create a documentary feel.  The editing is unobtrusive, letting scenes breathe and reactions linger.  There are no visual effects, no musical score-driven manipulation.  The film’s aesthetic is emotional realism — raw, quiet, and unadorned.
Problems:  Minor.  The pacing will feel slow to viewers expecting narrative propulsion.  The romantic subplot between Will and Olivia, while thematically resonant, creates ethical ambiguity that the film never resolves.   Some viewers may find the procedural (notification) repetition numbing — but that’s part of the point.  The emotional toll is cumulative, not episodic.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes — though “enjoy” feels like the wrong verb.  I was moved, unsettled, and grateful.  “The Messenger” is a film that respects its audience’s intelligence and emotional capacity.  It doesn’t offer easy answers or cathartic release.  It offers the viewer presence — bearing witness to pain, without flinching — just as it does for the characters in the film.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “The Messenger” is a war film (almost) without war, a love story (almost) without romance, and a procedural without resolution.  It’s about the cost of service, the fragility of protocol, and the human need to connect — even when connection is forbidden.  If you’re interested in films that explore grief, duty, and emotional integrity, this one’s worth your time.  Watch it for the performances (especially Foster and Harrelson), the writing, and the quiet moments when silence says more than you expect.
.
Click here (30 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Still Tending To…

I have always loved solitude, a trait which tends to increase with age.
—     Albert Einstein
.
Click here (30 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Life Redux

“Æon Flux” (2005) – movie review
Today’s review is for the dystopian sci-fi action film “Æon Flux” (2005), starring Charlize Theron as Æon Flux (a lithe, lethal rebel operative with a tragic past and a mission to destabilize a utopian regime), Marton Csokas as Trevor Goodchild (the enigmatic leader of the ruling government and Æon’s conflicted love interest), Jonny Lee Miller as Oren Goodchild (Trevor’s more ruthless brother and political rival / heir), Sophie Okonedo as Sithandra (Æon’s acrobatic ally with hands for feet), and Frances McDormand as The Handler (the Monican leader who issues cryptic orders from a surrealist throne).  Directed by Karyn Kusama and loosely based on Peter Chung’s animated MTV series, the film attempts to translate stylized rebellion and philosophical ambiguity into a live-action narrative of genetic control, memory persistence, and institutional decay.
Background:  I first saw “Æon Flux” several years after its release on DVD, drawn by Theron and the promise of high-concept sci-fi.  I have never seen the original animated series, so all of my comments related to it are from reading / research while drafting this review.  The film was met with critical ambivalence, though it has since (supposedly) earned a modest cult following among fans of stylized dystopia.  Watching it again, I found myself appreciating the ambition more than the end product.  It’s a film that wants to be philosophical but often settles for kinetic.
Plot:  Set 400 years in the future, after a virus has wiped out most of humanity, the surviving population lives in Bregna — a walled city governed by the Goodchild dynasty.  Æon Flux is a top agent of the Monicans, a rebel group seeking to overthrow the regime.  When she’s sent to assassinate Trevor Goodchild, she discovers a deeper truth:  the society is built on cloning, and she herself is a reincarnation of Trevor’s long-dead lover.  As memories resurface and loyalties blur, Æon must decide whether to destroy the system or reshape it.  The film builds toward a climactic confrontation with Oren, revelations about the cloning program, and a final act of destruction that is meant to symbolize rebirth.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Sort of;  committed but uneven;  stylized and inventive;  multiple;  yes — with caveats.
Any Good?  Sort of.  “Æon Flux” is a film that struggles to balance action with introspection.  It wants to be a meditation on identity, memory, and control, but often gets distracted by gymnastics, special effects and gunfire.  The script is heavy on explaining and light on emotional resonance.  Still, the film’s ambition — to explore a society built on repetition and repression — is interesting to consider.  It’s not a great film, but it’s trying to be an interesting one.
Acting:  Charlize Theron is physically commanding and emotionally restrained.  Her Æon is more soldier than seductress, and while the performance lacks the anarchic edge of the animated version, it’s grounded in grief and resolve.  I must admit to a certain amount of admiration / respect for Theron – the actress.  I missed much of her early work and am only coming to appreciate her career by viewing her older work retrospectively.  I like that she has been able to alternate between “beauty,” “action hero,” and “serious” roles.  Not many (male or female) can pull off this varied a body of work.  I just hope she doesn’t “jump the shark” by singing in some silly musical.  But, maybe she can sing, too.  LoL.  Marton Csokas brings gravitas to Trevor, though the chemistry between him and Theron feels muted (more like unbelievable).  Jonny Lee Miller’s Oren is suitably sinister, but underwritten.  Sophie Okonedo adds kinetic energy, and Frances McDormand — in a role that feels like a surrealist cameo — delivers cryptic authority with flair.  The ensemble is committed, but the dialogue often works against them.
Filming / FX:  Visually, the film is striking.  The production design blends brutalist architecture with organic surrealism — gardens, corridors, and costumes that evoke a world both sterile and sensual.  The cinematography by Stuart Dryburgh favors symmetry and shadow.  Action sequences are choreographed with balletic precision, though they feel disconnected from narrative stakes.  The film’s aesthetic and its strongest asset is as a blend of other action movies but the action’s not enough to make or carry a story.
Problems:  Multiple.  The script is dense with jargon and light on character development.  The pacing is uneven — slow philosophical stretches punctuated by sudden violence.  The emotional arc between Æon and Trevor is lacking, and the supporting characters feel like mere sketches.  The film’s central concept — cloning as a form of societal stasis — is interesting but poorly explained (probably because it doesn’t work).  And while the visuals are inventive, they often feel like they belong to a better film.
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes — with caveats.  “Æon Flux” is a film that rewards visual attention more than deep thought. I found myself admiring the design, the ambition, and Theron’s physicality, even as I questioned the coherence of the plot.  It’s a film that gestures toward depth but rarely dives.  Still, for fans of dystopian aesthetics and speculative fiction, it offers moments of intrigue.
Final Recommendation:  Low Moderate recommendation.  “Æon Flux” is a flawed but visually compelling sci-fi film that explores themes of memory, control, and rebellion.  If you’re a fan of stylized dystopia, philosophical ambition, or Charlize Theron in combat mode, it’s worth a viewing.  It’s rated PG-13 for stylized violence and thematic content.  It didn’t win awards, but it remains a curious attempt to translate animated abstraction into cinematic narrative.  You probably need to watch it — then revisit the original MTV series to see what was lost (and what was never meant to be found).  The movie didn’t impress me enough to do this (view the series) myself…
.
Click here (29 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

5432

This post is the 5,432nd consecutive daily post on this blog site (and 7,472th non-consecutive post, not counting pages posted or comments replied to).
There is (otherwise) absolutely no significance to this post…
I’m just a “interesting” number kind of person and occasionally I notice this kind of thing.
I guess the next interesting number is “5445”, but since I don’t “track” this stuff with intent, I don’t know if I’ll be aware enough to post about it.  After that, I guess “6543”, but that’ll be over three years away…  And the expression: “Don’t count your chickens…”  springs to mind.  LoL
.
Click here (29 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Figuring Out Your Own Meaning

Everything has been figured out, except how to live.
—    Jean-Paul Sartre
It is up to you to give life a meaning.
—    Jean-Paul Sartre
.
Click here (29 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Carpe Diem, Eventum Fer*

“Dead Poets Society” (1989) – movie review
Today’s review is for the coming-of-age drama “Dead Poets Society” (1989), starring Robin Williams as John Keating (a charismatic English teacher whose unorthodox methods challenge conformity and awaken passion), Robert Sean Leonard as Neil Perry (a gifted student struggling under the weight of parental expectation), Ethan Hawke as Todd Anderson (a painfully shy newcomer who finds his voice), Josh Charles as Knox Overstreet (a romantic idealist chasing love and courage), and Gale Hansen as Charlie Dalton (the group’s rebellious spark).
Background:  I first saw “Dead Poets Society” about a decade ago, long after its theatrical release, and this viewing was with fresh eyes.  I remembered the iconic “O Captain! My Captain!” moment, but not the quiet ache that permeates the film.  Williams, known for his comedic brilliance, delivers a performance here that is restrained, magnetic, and deeply human (the lighter side of his character in “Good Will Hunting”).  Watching it now, I was struck by how much the film leans into idealism without losing sight of consequence.  It’s not just a story about inspiration — it’s about what happens when inspiration collides with institution.  The film remains a cultural touchstone, often quoted, often misremembered, and still relevant.  The film won the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay and was nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor (Williams).
Plot:  The film is set in 1959 at Welton Academy, a fictional elite boarding school in Vermont, and explores the tension between tradition and transformation, obedience and authenticity, and the cost of living deliberately.  Welton Academy is a bastion of discipline, tradition, and academic rigor.  Into this rigid environment walks John Keating, a former student turned English teacher, who urges his pupils to “seize the day” and view poetry not as a subject, but as a lens for life.  His students — Neil, Todd, Knox, Charlie, and others — form a secret club, the Dead Poets Society, reviving a tradition of verse and rebellion.  As Keating’s influence grows, so does the students’ willingness to challenge authority and pursue their passions.  Neil auditions for a play without his parents knowledge and then performs in the play against his father’s wishes.  Todd begins to speak.  Knox pursues love.  Charlie pushes boundaries.  But the cost of defiance is steep.  The film builds toward Neil’s tragic death, the school’s scapegoating of Keating, and a final gesture of solidarity that is both heartbreaking and hopeful.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  exceptional;  atmospheric and poetic;  a few tonal imbalances;  absolutely.
Any Good?  Yes.  “Dead Poets Society” is a film that asks what education is for — obedience or awakening?  It’s a story about the power of words, the fragility of youth, and the danger of dreams deferred.  The script balances inspiration with introspection, and while some scenes lean into sentimentality, the emotional core remains intact.  It’s a film that doesn’t just celebrate rebellion — it mourns its sometimes inevitable consequences.
Acting:  Robin Williams is extraordinary.  His Keating is not a caricature — he’s a man who believes in his students, even when the system does not.  Williams delivers his lines with warmth, wit, and quiet urgency.  I haven’t seen all of Williams’ “serious” works, but this is the best I’ve seen outside of “Good Will Hunting“.  Robert Sean Leonard’s Neil is luminous — full of promise and pain.  Ethan Hawke’s Todd evolves from silence to strength, and his final scene is a masterclass in emotional release.  Josh Charles and Gale Hansen add texture and tension.  The ensemble cast — young, earnest, and believable — carries the film’s emotional weight with grace.
Filming / FX:  The film is rich in autumnal tones — Welton’s campus is framed with reverence and restraint.  The film favors long takes, soft lighting, and deliberate pacing.  The film allows the performances and poetry to breathe.  There are no flashy effects — just atmosphere, rhythm, and emotional resonance.
Problems:  Few and minor.  The film romanticizes Keating’s teaching without interrogating / considering its risks.  The pacing in the first act is slow, and some supporting characters — particularly the faculty and parents — are painted with broad strokes.  The final resolution, while emotionally satisfying, leaves institutional accountability unaddressed.  These are things I thought about only by looking back.  Other than the “slow” pace at the start, I’m not sure most viewers would notice or care about them…
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes.  “Dead Poets Society” is a film that reminds one (me) of the power of language, the urgency of youth, and the quiet rebellion of choosing authenticity in the face of structured / institutionalized authority.  Watching Todd stand on his desk — not to defy, but to honor — is a moment you remember.  The film doesn’t ask you to agree with Keating as much as it asks you to remember him and the intellectual freedom in the future which he represented in the students’ lives.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “Dead Poets Society” is a poetic, provocative drama that explores the intersection of education, identity, and personal courage for a group of young males approaching graduation from an elite boarding school.  If you’re a fan of character-driven stories, literary themes, or performances that blend inspiration with introspection, this film is worth viewing.  It’s rated PG for thematic elements and brief language.  For its performances, tone, and cultural resonance, it remains one of the most quietly powerful films of its era.  Watch it.  Then read a poem aloud — not for a grade, but for the sound of your voice reading poetry.  That too will stir memories…
Final Thought:  Neil’s character is “Puck” from Shakespeare’s play:  “A Midsummer Night’s Dream“, which I had viewed earlier this year.  Had I never seen the movie / play, I really would not have know what was going on during Neil’s performance.  LoL.  I guess this “acquiring culture via cinema” is working (at least a little bit, anyway).
* Carpe Diem, Eventum Fer —  Latin for Seize the day, bear the resulting consequence
.
Click here (28 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

If Necessary, One Pebble At A Time

The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones.
—    Confucius
.
Click here (28 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Winners Forget They’re In A Race, They Just Love To Run

“With Honors” (1994) – movie review
Today’s review is for the collegiate dram-com “With Honors” (1994), starring Brendan Fraser as Monty Kessler (a Harvard senior clinging to academic perfection and emotional detachment), Joe Pesci as Simon Wilder (a homeless man with a past and a philosophy that challenges Monty’s worldview), Moira Kelly as Courtney (Monty’s quietly loyal friend and unspoken romantic interest), Patrick Dempsey as Everett (a DJ roommate with a flair for irreverence), and Josh Hamilton as Jeff (the fourth housemate hoping to be a doctor, earnest and slightly adrift).  The film explores the tension between intellect and empathy, privilege and poverty, and the unexpected ways wisdom finds its way into our lives — sometimes through a man living in a boiler room.
Background:  This is my first viewing of “With Honors”.  I was prompted to view it by a YouTube short and viewed it on Tubi (streamed for “free”, but with commercial interruptions).  I will be picking up a copy if the film is ever available at my price point.  The “short” led me to the preview, which pretty much explains the film premise — a thesis held hostage by a homeless man — but not the emotional arc.  Watching it now, I was struck by how much the film leans into sentiment without drowning in it.  Fraser plays Monty with restraint and vulnerability.  Pesci, known for his explosive roles in “Goodfellas” and “My Cousin Vinny“, dials it down here — offering a performance that’s more Socratic than streetwise.
Plot:  Monty Kessler is a senior at Harvard, obsessed with finishing his thesis on the U.S. Constitution and securing a future that matches his ambition.  When his computer crashes and he loses his only copy, he discovers that a homeless man named Simon Wilder has found it — and won’t return it unless Monty agrees to a deal:  one page for every favor.  What begins as a transactional nuisance evolves into an unlikely friendship.  Simon, who lives in the basement of the Widener Library, challenges Monty’s assumptions about success, failure, and dignity.  As Monty’s roommates — Courtney, Everett, and Jeff — become entangled in Simon’s orbit, the group begins to shift.  The film builds toward Simon’s declining health, Monty’s academic reckoning, and a final act of grace that reframes what it means to graduate with honors.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  solid and sincere;  modest but effective;  a few tonal slips;  yes — with warmth.
Any Good?  Yes.  “With Honors” is a film that wears its heart on its sleeve (and frequently – product placement – on a Harvard sweatshirt).  It’s not subtle, but it’s sincere.  The script leans into idealism, and while some scenes are engineered for emotional payoff, the overall arc is earned.  It’s a film about learning — not just in classrooms, but in boiler rooms, hospital beds, and late-night walks across campus.  It’s about the difference between being smart and being wise.
Acting:  Brendan Fraser plays Monty with a quiet desperation — a young man who’s built his identity on achievement and finds it crumbling under the weight of lived experience.  His transformation is gradual and believable.  Joe Pesci’s Simon is the film’s soul — part philosopher, part provocateur.  Pesci avoids caricature, offering a performance that’s layered with regret, humor, and dignity.  Moira Kelly’s Courtney is understated but pivotal — her scenes with Fraser carry emotional weight without saccharin melodrama.  Dempsey and Hamilton round out the ensemble with charm and texture.  The chemistry among the housemates feels authentic — a blend of friction, affection, and shared growth.
Filming / FX:  The cinematography is functional — Harvard’s campus provides natural gravitas, and the boiler room scenes are lit with shadow.  The pacing is steady, and the film’s emotional beats are given room to breathe and be shared by the viewer.
Problems:  minor.  The film tends to veer into preachiness — Simon’s monologues, while heartfelt, sometimes feel like political / societal sermons.  The supporting characters, particularly Jeff, are underdeveloped.  The romantic subplot between Monty and Courtney is hinted at but never fully explored until they end up together after a party.  The film critiques elitism, but it does so gently — never fully interrogating the systemic barriers that separate Monty from Simon.  Like I said, minor issues / problems.
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes.  “With Honors” is a film that reminds me of the value of listening — not just to lectures, but to lived experience.  It’s a story about humility, friendship, and the quiet revolution that occurs when we allow ourselves to be changed by someone we didn’t expect to matter.  Watching Monty evolve — from thesis-obsessed to human-aware — is both satisfying and melancholic.  The film doesn’t ask you to pity Simon.  It asks you to respect him.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “With Honors” is a character-driven drama that explores the intersection of intellect and empathy.  If you’re a fan of campus films, stories about unlikely friendships, or performances that blend humor with heart, this one’s worth watching.  It’s rated PG-13 for language and thematic elements.  The film offers something rare — a story that respects its characters and its audience.  I recommend you watch it.  Then ask yourself:  what would you trade for a page of your own story?
.
Click here (27 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

On A Blog Site Or In A Blog Post

Each reader has to find her or his own message within a book.
—    Laurie Halse Anderson
.
Click here (27 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Happy Thanksgiving 2025!!

I would like to wish all who happen on this site today a Happy Thanksgiving…
If you are not American and don’t celebrate this holiday, I still wish you a happy evening meal.  Hopefully, you’re joined by family and friends.  Please give each of them a hug and make sure you tell them how much they mean to you.
I lost my younger brother a little over two weeks ago.  I miss him terribly and wish I had another opportunity to share a meal and a laugh with him.
Life is precious and fleeting.  Savor every moment you are granted with your family and friends because none of us know how many more opportunities we’ll have to do so.
.
Click here (27 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Butterflies, Candles, And Cracks In The Walls

“Encanto” (2021) – movie review
Today’s review is for the animated musical fantasy “Encanto” (2021), directed by Jared Bush and Byron Howard, with music by Lin-Manuel Miranda and score by Germaine Franco.  The film features Stephanie Beatriz as Mirabel Madrigal (the only member of her magical family without a “gift”), María Cecilia Botero as Abuela Alma (the matriarch guarding the miracle), John Leguizamo as Bruno (the ostracized uncle whose visions foretold trouble), Diane Guerrero as Isabela (the “perfect” sister whose floral powers mask deeper frustrations), and Jessica Darrow as Luisa (the strong sibling cracking under pressure).  Set in a vibrant Colombian village, the story unfolds within a sentient house and a family blessed with supernatural abilities — all except Mirabel, whose lack of a gift becomes the key to saving them all.
Background:  This film was recommended by one of my daughters who couldn’t believe I hadn’t already seen it.  Released in November 2021, “Encanto” had a modest theatrical run, however, its post-release success on Disney+ transformed it into a cultural phenomenon.  The soundtrack, especially “We Don’t Talk About Bruno,” topped charts and became a viral sensation.  The film won the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature in 2022, along with three Grammy Awards, and is now considered one of Disney’s most emotionally resonant modern entries.  It’s also notable for being the first Disney animated feature scored by a Latina composer (Franco), and for its nuanced portrayal of intergenerational trauma within a Latin American setting.
Plot:  The Madrigal family lives in a magical house — Casita — powered by a miracle born from tragedy.  Each family member receives a unique gift:  super strength, healing, shape-shifting, animal communication, and more.  Mirabel, however, receives nothing.  As cracks begin to form in the house and the family’s powers falter, Mirabel sets out to uncover the truth behind the miracle’s fading light.  Her journey leads her to Bruno, the exiled uncle whose prophecies were misunderstood, and ultimately to a confrontation with Abuela Alma’s rigid expectations.  Through reconciliation and vulnerability, the family learns that their true strength lies not in their gifts, but in their unity.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  vibrant and heartfelt (for animation);  dazzling and layered;  a few;  absolutely.
Any Good?  Yes.  “Encanto” is a visually lush, emotionally layered film that trades traditional villain arcs for internal family dynamics.  It’s a story about identity, pressure, and the cost of perfection.  The narrative is deceptively simple but rich — exploring generational expectations, emotional repression, and the healing power of empathy.  It’s not a “hero’s” quest film in the traditional sense, but it is a film which explores and ultimately is a reckoning / understanding your place film.
Acting:  Stephanie Beatriz anchors the film with warmth and nuance.  Her Mirabel is earnest, funny, and quietly defiant.  María Cecilia Botero’s Abuela balances sternness with sorrow, and her arc — from protector to oppressor to redeemer — is one of the film’s most compelling.  John Leguizamo’s Bruno is both comic relief and emotional core, and his performance adds depth to a character who could’ve been a caricature.  (His role is my personal favorite in this film.)  Jessica Darrow’s Luisa and Diane Guerrero’s Isabela shine in their musical numbers, revealing the burdens behind their gifts.  The ensemble voice cast is uniformly strong, and the characters feel lived-in despite their animated form.
Filming / FX:  The animation is stunning.  Casita is a character unto itself — expressive, playful, and reactive, very reminiscent of the the “alive / animated” castle from “Beauty And The Beast“.  The color palette is rich with Colombian textures, flora, and architecture.  Musical sequences are kinetic and symbolic:  Luisa’s “Surface Pressure” visualizes anxiety as a collapsing circus;  Isabela’s “What Else Can I Do?” bursts with chaotic beauty.  The choreography of movement — both in dance and emotion — is precise.  The film’s visual language is metaphorical:  cracks in walls mirror cracks in relationships, and butterflies signal transformation (personal growth AND personal emergence).
Problems:  A few (and minor).  The film’s pacing is brisk — sometimes (much) too brisk.  Emotional revelations arrive quickly, and some characters (like Camilo and Dolores) feel in need of more developement.  The resolution, while satisfying, leans heavily on sentiment and could benefit from more narrative support.  Also, the central metaphor — a magical candle sustaining a miracle — is vague in its mechanics.  But these are minor quibbles in a film that prioritizes emotional truth over plot logistics.
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes.  “Encanto” is a film that registered for me as an Hispanic American – not personally, but because I recognize the characters in my own extended family.  It’s not just about magic — it’s about pressure, silence, and the longing to be seen.  Watching Mirabel navigate a family that both loves and overlooks her is quietly devastating and ultimately uplifting.  The film’s final act — where gifts are restored not through a miracle but through understanding — is a masterstroke of emotional storytelling.  And yes, the music is catchy.  But it’s the message that resonates:  you don’t need a “gift” to be extraordinary.  YOU are the “gift” and YOU are extraordinary!
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “Encanto” is a heartfelt, visually dazzling film that redefines what a Disney “hero” looks like.  It’s a story about emotional labor, familial expectations, and the courage to confront silence.  If you’re interested in animated films that blend cultural specificity with universal themes, this one hits the target.  It’s rated PG for thematic elements and mild peril, but its emotional depth is what makes it memorable.  Watch it for the music, stay for the message, and remember — the miracle is you.
.
Click here (26 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Like Tariffs Causing Inflation For Example

There are many truths of which the full meaning cannot be realized until personal experience has brought it home.
—    John Stuart Mill
.
Click here (26 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Scalpel and Soul

“Something The Lord Made” (2004) – movie review
Today’s review is for the HBO biographical drama “Something the Lord Made” (2004), starring Mos Def as Vivien Thomas (a Black carpenter turned surgical pioneer whose brilliance helped revolutionize cardiac surgery), Alan Rickman as Dr. Alfred Blalock (a white surgeon whose reputation was “somewhat” built on Thomas’s uncredited work), Kyra Sedgwick as Mary Blalock (Alfred’s wife and quiet conscience), Gabrielle Union as Clara Thomas (Vivien’s wife and emotional anchor), and Charles S. Dutton as a hospital janitor who sees what others ignore.  Directed by Joseph Sargent and based on Katie McCabe’s award-winning article, the film dramatizes the true story of two men who changed medicine — and each other — while navigating the racial and institutional divides of 20th-century America.  The film won the Emmy for Outstanding Made for Television Movie and remains a landmark in medical and civil rights storytelling.
Background:  This is my first viewing of “Something the Lord Made” which was prompted by a YouTube “short”.  Pure serendipity…
Plot:  Vivien Thomas, a young man with aspirations of becoming a doctor, is derailed by the Great Depression and systemic racism.  He takes a job as a janitor in Dr. Blalock’s lab at Vanderbilt, but quickly proves himself a surgical savant.  When Blalock is recruited to Johns Hopkins, he brings Thomas with him — though not as an equal.  Together, they develop a groundbreaking procedure to treat “blue baby syndrome,” a congenital heart defect.  But while Blalock receives accolades, Thomas remains in the shadows — uncredited, underpaid, and barred from medical school.  The film traces their evolving relationship, from mutual respect to painful estrangement to a late-life reconciliation.  The final scenes — Thomas walking the halls of Hopkins in a white coat, receiving an honorary doctorate — are quietly devastating.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  excellent;  restrained and effective;  a few;  absolutely.
Any Good?  Yes.  “Something the Lord Made” is a rare biopic that avoids overt melodrama without sacrificing emotional depth.  It’s a film about legacy — who gets to claim it, who gets erased, and what it costs to be brilliant in a world that refuses to see you.  The script is tight, the pacing deliberate, and the cinematic emotional payoff earned.
Acting:  Mos Def (credited here under his former name) gives a career-best performance as Vivien Thomas.  His portrayal is restrained and internalized — he doesn’t raise his voice, but you feel every slight, every compromise, every moment of grace.  Rickman is equally compelling as Blalock, a man whose genius is matched only by his blind spots.  Their chemistry is electric, especially in scenes where admiration and resentment coexist.  Sedgwick brings warmth and tension as Mary Blalock, while Dutton and Union ground the film in lived experience.  The ensemble is tight, and the casting feels perfect.
Filming / FX:  The cinematography is clean and period appropriate, where sepia tones, soft lighting, and institutional grays dominate.  Surgical scenes are handled with precision but never veer into gore.  The production design captures the class and racial divides of 1930s–40s Baltimore without overstatement.  The score is understated, allowing silence and breath to carry the emotional weight.  The film’s aesthetic matches its subject: meticulous, humane, and quietly radical.
Problems:  Minor.  The film compresses decades of work into a tight runtime, which occasionally flattens character arcs — particularly in the middle of the film.  Some supporting characters (notably the hospital administration) verge on caricature.  And while the final act is emotionally satisfying, it leans a bit heavily on symbolic closure.  As stated, minor flaws.
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes.  Deeply.  “Something the Lord Made” is a film that rewards viewer attention and patience.  It doesn’t pander or preach, even as it invites reflection.  Watching Thomas navigate a world that refuses to see him, and still choose excellence, is both heartbreaking and inspiring.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation. “Something the Lord Made” is a quietly radical film about race, recognition, and the cost of genius.  It’s a story of surgical innovation and social injustice, told with restraint and resonance.  If you’re interested in medical history, character-driven drama, or stories that reclaim erased legacies, this film is essential.  It didn’t play in theaters, but it belongs on the list outstanding medical-biographical films.  Watch it for the performances, the message, and the man who made history with his hands — and who’s true legacy waited decades to be seen.
.
Click here (25 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Share Your God

When you give, you receive.
—     Alek Wek
God is a verb, not a noun.
—     R. Buckminster Fuller
.
Click here (25 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Running Into History

“The Express”  (2008) — movie review
Today’s review is for the biographical sports drama “The Express” (2008), starring Rob Brown as Ernie Davis, Dennis Quaid as Ben Schwartzwalder (the gruff but evolving Syracuse football coach), Charles S. Dutton as Willie Davis (Ernie’s proud and principled grandfather), and Omar Benson Miller as Jack Buckley (Ernie’s loyal teammate and friend).  Darrin Dewitt Henson plays Jim Brown and Chadwick Boseman has a brief role as Floyd Little (a high schooler being recruited to Syracuse by Davis).  The film chronicles Davis’s meteoric rise from humble beginnings in Pennsylvania to national stardom on the gridiron, all while navigating the racial turbulence of 1950s and ’60s America.  Directed by Gary Fleder, the film attempts to blend sports triumph with social commentary — a balancing act that’s as ambitious as it is (continues to be) necessary.
Background:  This was my first viewing of “The Express“.  I don’t have any memory of it’s initial release, nor did I see anything on YouTube to spark interest.  The film was just a standard VUDU (now Fandango) “you liked this, so…” referral.  In anticipation of seeing it now, I was curious whether the film’s emotional beats and historical framing would resonate — or whether it would feel like a formulaic entry in the “inspirational athlete” genre.  (It did “resonate” but it’s still mostly the later.)  The subject, Ernie Davis — however, does hold a unique place in American sports history as the first African-American to win the Heisman.  As such, his story is not “just” about football;  it’s about dignity, perseverance, and the cost of breaking barriers.
Plot:  The film opens in the steel town of Uniontown, Pennsylvania, where a young Ernie Davis is raised by his grandfather after being abandoned by his father.  From an early age, Ernie’s speed and agility set him apart, and he quickly becomes a high school football sensation.  Recruited by Syracuse University, he joins the team under Coach Ben Schwartzwalder (after being recruited by the legendary running back Jim Brown), a WWII veteran with a no-nonsense demeanor and a locker room still adjusting to integration.  As Davis rises through the ranks, he faces racism on and off the field — from opposing teams, fans, and even within his own squad.  The film builds toward the 1960 Cotton Bowl, where Davis leads Syracuse to a national championship, and culminates in his historic Heisman win.  But just as his professional career begins, tragedy strikes:  Davis is diagnosed with leukemia, cutting short a life and career that had only just begun.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  solid and sincere;  period-authentic and well-paced;  a few clichés;  yes — and I teared up.
Any Good?  Yes.  “The Express” is a heartfelt, but occasionally conventional, sports biopic that succeeds more often than not.  It’s a film that understands the power of its subject and doesn’t shy away from the ugliness / racism of the era.  While it follows familiar beats — the underdog, the mentor, the big game — it does so with conviction and care.  The film’s greatest strength lies in its ability to humanize Ernie Davis without sanctifying him.  He’s not just a symbol — he’s a son, a teammate, a young man trying to navigate fame, expectation, and injustice.
Acting:  Rob Brown delivers a quietly powerful performance as Ernie Davis.  He captures the character’s humility, resolve, and inner conflict without resorting to melodrama.  Brown’s Davis is not a firebrand — he’s a steady flame, burning with purpose.  Dennis Quaid, as Coach Schwartzwalder, brings gruff charisma and surprising nuance.  His arc — from reluctant integrator to staunch defender — is handled with restraint, and Quaid avoids caricature.  Charles S. Dutton, as always, grounds the film with gravitas, and Omar Benson Miller adds warmth and levity.  The ensemble cast — including Clancy Brown and Chadwick Boseman in a brief but memorable role — rounds out the story with authenticity.
Filming / FX:  Visually, the film is effective without being flashy.  The football sequences are well-staged — kinetic but coherent — and the period detail is convincing.  The cinematography leans into warm tones and grainy textures, evoking the era without over-stylizing it.  The use of archival footage and recreated newsreels adds a layer of historical weight.  The  sound design during game sequences — the crunch of tackles, the roar of the crowd — is immersive.
Problems:  A few.  The film occasionally leans too heavily on sports-movie tropes — the slow-motion touchdown, the locker room speech, the montage of victories.  While these moments are expected, they sometimes undercut the more complex racial and personal themes the film is trying to explore.  The script also simplifies some historical tensions, particularly around the integration of college football and the NFL.  And while the film touches on Davis’s illness, it doesn’t fully explore the emotional toll of his diagnosis — opting instead for a more inspirational tone.
Did I Enjoy the Film?  Yes!  “The Express” is a film that moved me — not just because of its subject, but because of its sincerity.  It reminded me that sports are not just about winning;  they’re about individuals (and teams), character, courage, and change.  Ernie Davis’s story is one that deserved to be told, and while the film may not be perfect, it tells the story with heart.  I found myself almost tearing up more than once — not just at the tragedy of Davis’s fate, but at the grace with which he carried himself through it.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation.  “The Express” is a stirring, character-driven sports drama that honors the legacy of Ernie Davis without turning him into a statue.  It’s rated PG for thematic material (portrayal of overt racism), language, and some violence, but it’s suitable for most audiences.  If you’re a fan of sports films, civil rights history, or stories about quiet heroism, this one is worth your time.  It’s not just about football — it’s about running through barriers, and doing it with dignity.
.
Click here (24 November) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »