Hello, My Name is Doris

Posted on March 17, 2016 at 5:14 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	Mature High Schooler
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for language
Profanity:	Strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	Drinking, smoking, drugs
Violence/ Scariness:	Sad offscreen death, wrenching emotional confrontations
Diversity Issues:	A theme of the movie
Date Released to Theaters:	March 18, 2016
Date Released to DVD:	June 12, 2016
Amazon.com ASIN:	B01F08XCAG

Thank you, Michael Showalter, for giving American treasure Sally Field a role that gives her a chance to show us not just what she is capable of but what it means to fully inhabit a character with enough sensitivity and tenderness to illuminate the world.

In the very first seconds of the film, where we meet the title character at the funeral of the mother she has spent her life caring for, we are asked to look at the kind of person we prefer to ignore. It is the funeral of the mother she has spent her life caring for, and she is bereft, not only of her mother, but of her sense of who she is and what she is in the world. She is odd and needy and repressed. She wears a jumble of mismatched clothes and a frowsy topknot of a hairpiece. She works with a bunch of brisk, hip young people who ignore her. She has a feisty best friend named Roz, played with enormous gusto by Tyne Daly. Roz is so left wing that she comforts herself about here daughter’s imprisonment for for auto theft, because she stole a fuel-efficient hybrid. And she lives in the same house she grew up in, packed full of stuff that she holds onto because of memories or because some day it might be useful. When Roz points out that her refrigerator contains packets of duck sauce that have been there since the 1970’s, Doris responds with incendiary ferocity: “IT KEEPS!”

There’s someone new in Doris’ office. His name is John Fremont (a warm and magnetic Max Greenfield). Doris, whose emotions have been on ice even longer than the duck sauce, somehow explodes with emotion when she sees him.

With her mother gone, Doris begins to have the kind of agonizing crush that most of us get over by the end of middle school. With the help of Roz’s teenage granddaughter, Doris friends John on Facebook under a pseudonym, and then uses what she learns there to make him think they have interests in common, including a band called Nuclear Winter. Doris decides to attend a Nuclear Winter performance, and like Alice through the looking glass, she finds the club an opposite world, where her thrift shop clothes are suddenly vintage and daring. She and John become friends.

Showalter has three great strengths here. First, as we saw in “Hot Wet American Summer” and the underrated “The Baxter,” he is is a master of impeccable casting. Every role, down to the smallest part, is a small gem, deep bench strength that includes Natasha Lyonne as a co-worker, Beth Behrs as the girl John dates, Elisabeth Reaser as an understanding therapist, and Stephen Root as Doris’ impatient but loving brother. Second is his willingness to combine poignancy with humor, grounding and deepening the story. But most important is Field, who is a wonder in a role that has us rooting for her as well as for Doris.

Parents should know that this movie has very strong language and sad and uncomfortable confrontations.

Family discussion: What should Todd and Doris have done when their mother got sick? Why did Doris want to hold on to one ski?

If you like this, try: Some of Fields’ other films like “Norma Rae,” “Steel Magnolias,” “Murphy’s Romance,” and “Soapdish”

Eye in the Sky

Posted on March 10, 2016 at 5:43 pm

B+

Lowest Recommended Age:	High School
MPAA Rating:	Rated R for some violent images and language
Profanity:	Very strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs:	None
Violence/ Scariness:	Military violence including terrorism, bombs, explosions, characters injured and killed, some disturbing images
Diversity Issues:	Diverse characters
Date Released to Theaters:	March 11, 2016
Date Released to DVD:	June 27, 2016
Amazon.com ASIN:	B01CUMHBJS

“Eye in the Sky” is a rare thriller that grips the mind and heart equally. Drones take our military closer than we have ever been before to the people and the activities of the enemy as they remove us further than we have ever been before from the visceral reality of the actions we take based on what we have learned. This film takes us inside the tactical, political, legal, and moral choices faced by the international governments and military in combating terrorism. Director Gavin Hood and screenwriter Guy Hibbert show us the stakes rising and the options shrinking with each passing second, so we in the audience must constantly ask ourselves not just what the characters should do but what we would do.

Colonel Katherine Powell of the British Army (Helen Mirren) is awakened by her phone. Intelligence received via drone indicates that three from the top ten international most wanted list of terrorists may possibly be together at a home in Kenya. The British and the US are especially interested in one couple they have been trying to find for six years. The wife is British and the husband is American. Both countries want them captured and tried at home.

If her team can positively identify the couple and the man they are meeting with, the mission will turn from reconnaissance to capture. But then the drone camera reveals that the danger is far more dire and imminent than they thought. The house is not just a meeting place. They are arming suicide bombers, taping their last statements, and presumably getting ready to send them into densely populated areas for maximum carnage. The people working on this are all over the world, with a military unit in Hawaii that analyzes images from a drone in Kenya, flown by a pilot in Las Vegas, commanded by military personnel in England, under the direction of elected officials who are both away from their countries on business.

The military has the capacity to prevent the suicide bombers from inflicting damage on civilians by blowing them up before they leave. But they are in the middle of a residential area. Is this warfare or an execution? Does it matter that two of the targets are British and US citizens? Does it matter that a little girl is selling bread just outside the house?

The international scope of the mission and the bureaucratic/political decision-making is fascinating. Information inside the house comes from a tiny mini-drone that looks like an insect, flown into the house by an operative nearby who is pretending to be both selling buckets in the open market and playing a video game on a phone. The operative is played by “Captain Phillips” star Barkhad Abdi, a very different and equally impressive performance of great intelligence and thoughtfulness. Information from the outside, including the biometric identification of the suspected terrorists, comes from drones monitored by Americans half a world away. Sitting at screens are Aaron Paul and Phoebe Fox as US military who are diligent and dedicated but not really prepared to blow up the people they’ve been spying on, especially that little girl.

There is a literal ticking time bomb in that house. We can see it. What should we do about it? Should we risk that child’s life to keep the suicide bombers from taking more lives? For the military, including Colonel Powell and her boss, Lieutenant General Frank Benson (the late Alan Rickman, making us miss him even more sharply), it is a mathematical calculus; not simple, but clear. They know they must consult the lawyers, who remind them of the criteria, almost a formula, they are required to apply. But the bureaucrats get nervous, and bump it up to the politicians. Calls must be made all over the world as the officials are participating in various diplomatic events; at one point it is even suggested that the question be put to the President of the United States.

But the film shows us that these questions have already been asked and answered. There is a calculus that is reassuringly quantitative and comprehensive but disturbingly clinical. As we see the people all over the world watching the people inside the house, trying to figure out how to apply those algorithms expressed in acronyms and percentages, the film forces us along with the characters to try to apply formulas to a world that will always confound them.

Parents should know that this movie features military violence including drones, guns, explosions, terrorism, suicide bombers, with some grisly and disturbing images, and very strong language. An extended part of the film focuses on potential “collateral damage” to civilians, including a child, from military action.

Family discussion: How would you improve the decision that was ultimately made? How would you improve the process for making it? Who should decide?

If you like this, try: the documentary “Drone”

The Young Messiah

Posted on March 10, 2016 at 5:17 pm

We have a very clear picture of Jesus’s birth, and it is endlessly re-enacted and depicted each year at Christmas time. But we know almost nothing about His childhood, other than his astonishing the elders with his depth of knowledge.

“The Young Messiah,” “inspired by scripture and rooted in history,” shows us His early years. It is a reverential, respectful portrayal of Jesus at age 7, as the Romans were trying to find and kill Him, and as He was just beginning to understand His power and purpose. It is based on the book by Anne Rice.

Jesus is played by sweet-faced Adam Greaves-Neal. We first see Him listening to a young girl who is teaching him to draw a camel. When a bully gives her a hard time, Jesus steps in to defend her and the bully starts attacking Him. A mysterious hooded figure tosses an apple core to trip up the bully, who falls, hits his head on a rock, and dies. No one else could see the man in the hood, and Jesus is blamed for the boy’s death.

The young Messiah insists on visiting the body, and it is there He performs His first miracle, bringing the boy back to life. This is an extraordinary moment because no one, even Jesus himself, knew such a thing was possible or that He was capable of it. And yet Jesus is so young, and his compassion so deep, that it seems completely natural for him. It confirms the greatest hopes but also the greatest fears of Mary and Joseph as it makes him a target for the Romans. And, like all parents, they have to find a way to protect their child and to answer His questions, though both are difficult and both at the same time seem impossible. “How do we explain God to His own son?” Even more difficult, how can they explain to Him a world in which the road is lined with crucified Jews and babies were murdered because the Romans were so afraid of Him? And how should they guide Him in using a power no one really understands? Mary can only say, “Keep your power inside you until your Father in Heaven shows you the time to use it.”

As Jesus and his family travel from Egypt to Jerusalem, Herod sends a soldier named Severus (Sean Bean) to find the boy and kill Him. Severus is not worried about reports that the boy can perform miracles. “There’s only one miracle,” he says, brandishing his sword. “Roman steel.”

Greaves-Neal is not really an actor, but his performance has an appealing dignity and tenderness. “Am I dangerous?” he asks, not “Am I in danger?”

It is especially good to see the young Jesus portrayed as compassionate but also intensely curious about the world. That thirst for knowledge and understanding is as inspiring to those around Him as His miracles.

Parents should know that this film include Biblical violence including crucifixion, bullying, and characters are injured and killed.

Family discussion: What do we learn about Jesus from his reaction to the bully? How did his curiosity about the world and scripture help him understand his purpose?

If you like this, try: “Risen” and “The Gospel of John” and read my interview with director Cyrus Nowresteh

Related Tags:

Drama Epic/Historical Spiritual films

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

Posted on March 3, 2016 at 5:20 pm

When Michiko Kakutani of the New York Times reviewed the book that inspired “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot,” the memoir of journalist Kim Barker about her days covering US military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, she wrote:

What’s remarkable about “The Taliban Shuffle” is that its author, Kim Barker — a reporter at ProPublica and the South Asia bureau chief for The Chicago Tribune from 2004 to 2009 — has written an account of her experiences covering Afghanistan and Pakistan that manages to be hilarious and harrowing, witty and illuminating, all at the same time.

It’s not just that Ms. Barker is adept at dramatizing her own adventures as a reporter — though she develops the chops of a veteran foreign correspondent, she depicts herself as a sort of Tina Fey character, who unexpectedly finds herself addicted to the adrenaline rush of war.

And now that book is a movie, and the role of Ms. Barker is being played by non-other than Tina Fey, who also co-produced. As always, her work is whip-smart and original. This is not Liz Lemon goes to war, it is an impressively sensitive dramatic performance.

But Barker’s story has been movie-ized, giving it the “inspired by” rather than “based on” designation, and removing the “r” from the character’s name to create some space. The real Barker was a print journalist, but making her a television correspondent to make it more cinematic. And the various love interests are fictional. It is disappointing that the movie makes the impetus for the assignment a combination of professional and romantic ennui. Barker was a dedicated journalist looking for a big story.

But much of the essence of it is the real deal, starting with Barker/Baker’s plan to spend three months in Afghanistan that turned into three years, and the ramped-up intensity of spending days embedded with the military, frantically editing the story, and then trying to obliterate memory and consciousness with some hard-core partying, only to start over again. Baker is inexperienced but dedicated and smart. She quickly impresses the cynical General (Billy Bob Thornton) who sees embedded journalists as a bother and a risk. And she quickly bonds with the other woman reporter (Margot Robbie), who shows her the ropes and asks very politely if she can sleep with Baker’s hunky security guy.

Alfred Molina is excellent, as always, as an Afghani official, though we should be past the time when European actors are cast as Middle Eastern characters. And maybe we do not need any more stories of Western characters discovering the mysteries of the other side of the world, with illuminating life lessons from exotic people. We don’t want this to be “Under the Tuscan Sun” but with war instead of sun-ripened Italian tomatoes, and it gets uncomfortably close at times. But the thoughtful script from longtime Fey collaborator Robert Carlock keeps the film from making war be just a growth experience for a reporter looking to shake up her life a bit, and the contrast between what the war does to the people trying to tell the story, knowing that the people back home just change the channel anyway give the story a sobering weight.

Parents should know that this movie has constant very strong, crude, and colorful language, drinking, drugs, smoking, wartime violence with some graphic images, characters injured and killed, sexual references and situations, and nudity.

Family discussion: What was the most important story Kim Baker reported? What did she mean when she said it “started to feel normal?”

If you like this, try: The book that inspired this film, The Taliban Shuffle, and the film “The Year of Living Dangerously”

Gods of Egypt

Posted on February 25, 2016 at 5:36 pm

“Gods of Egypt” has more gods than IQ points. There are some grand and striking visuals and some well-staged fight scenes, but there are also effects that look like they were created for a 64-bit computer game and lines of dialogue that make cheesy sword and sandal epics of the Steve Reeves era look like Noel Coward. It may be pretty to look at, but this is a big budget wheel of cheddar.

The producer and director have both apologized, too little and too late, for making a film based on Egyptian mythology without a single Egyptian actor. The gods are played by Australian Geoffrey Rush (Ra, the sun god and father and grandfather to the other gods), Danish Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (Horus, god of air and libertine turned hero), Scotsman Gerard Butler (Set, angry and ambitious god of the desert), American Chadwick Boseman (Thoth, smug god of wisdom), and French Elodie Yung (Hathor, goddess of love). And then there are a few humans, Australian Brenton Thwaites as an Aladdin-style street thief called Bek, and imperious as always British Rufus Sewell as Urshu, Set’s obsequious architect. Given the results, I imagine the Egyptians are relieved not to be a part of it.

The ponderous opening narration informs us that ancient Egypt is the cradle of civilization and so the gods decided to live there among the humans, though they are much taller and have gold for blood. As the story begins, Horus wakes up bleary following an orgy as he is about to take over as king from his wise and progressive father (Australian Bryan Brown). But his uncle Set arrives, kills the king, and plucks out Horus’ super-special eyes. Horus, humiliated and blind, retreats to his temple to sulk and drink. And Set enslaves the entire population to build structures for his glory and decrees that only the rich will obtain eternal life.

Zaya (Australian Courtney Eaton, very appealing) is the servant of Urshu, and the beloved of Bek. With access to Urshu’s architectural drawings, she shows Bek where Horus’ eyes are hidden. She believes that if Horus’ sight was restored, he would be able to defeat Set. Bek gets through an Indiana Jones-style series of traps to retrieve one eye, delivers it to Horus, and persuades him to fight Set and get back his kingdom.

There is visual splendor on a scale Cecil B. DeMille could only dream of, with sumptuous production design by Ian Gracie and costumes by Liz Keogh. But some of the CGI effects are less persuasive than Ray Harryhausen‘s stop-motion miniatures, and a few of them, like Ra’s flames and a sort of sand-based version of Skype, look like they came from a 64-bit video game. The mis-matched sizing of the gods and humans is more silly than impressive. The dialogue is a mish-mash of pretentious claptrap about the Journey and comments like “death is not the end” and “never doubt a man fighting for the one thing as powerful as any god — love.” Occasionally there are painful attempts at humor, as when Bek tells Horus to run from danger: “Mortals do it all the time!” or when Hathor brags that she is “the goddess of too much.” The mythology of ancient Egypt is fascinating and meaningful. This movie is not. It cannot decide whether it wants to be campy or thrilling, but it really does not matter because it fails at both.

Parents should know that this film includes extended sword and sorcery peril and violence with many characters injured and killed, monsters, disturbing images, sexual references and situations, and brief strong language.

Family discussion: Why did Ra treat his sons differently? Why does he say he wants human destiny to be uncertain?

If you like this, try: “Clash of the Titans”