The Band's Visit (2008)

- 3 Eberts

Roger had given this one 4 stars so I was looking forward to seeing. A rather simple story with complex characters, it was a very interesting watch.
The main thing I liked about the story was it pointed out something we all know : people are just people. Israelis or Egyptians or whatever, we all have our tragedies and triumphs. It's part of being human.
One reason I like Blade Runner so much is that it opens up the discussion of what it is to be human. This movie in its own quiet little way does the same thing.
I didn't think it was a great movie, just a good little movie, but well worth seeing.

Monsieur Hire (1990)

- 3 1/2 Eberts

I hadn't heard of this but saw it on Netflix on Roger's list of his 4 Star movies, so I picked it up. Even though there didn't seem to be much going on in the movie, it was still fascinating to watch.
It was successful as a thriller, a mystery and a character study.
For most of the movie I had no idea what was going on, and when I thought that I had it figured out I couldn't have been more wrong. It reminded me in tone and style of another great French movie, Les diaboliques (1955).
Not for all tastes, this movie is a little bit out there.

For me, another good recommendation from Roger.

Australia

- 3 Eberts

This movie, set in 1939, tried to be the Australian Gone with the Wind but it fails on most levels. Like GWTW it was beautifully filmed and epic in scale. GWTW had the burning of Atlanta and Australia had the burning and bombing of Darwin.
The movies were different because the story was so much better in GWTW. The trials and tribulations of Scarlett and Rhett were portrayed so well that they carried the movie. The Civil War served as a great back drop and was well integrated into the sophisticated soap opera.
In Australia the story of Lady Ashley and Drover could not carry the movie. The story should have been interesting and dramatic, but for some reason it wasn't. The tone was more Disney-like than dramatic.
The movies were also different because GWTW, although a better movie was at heart a well done propaganda film supporting an insidious and evil world view. GWTW made in clear that the Southern way of life in the ante-bellum years was beneficial to both the slaves and the slave holders. It portrayed and supported a paternalistic view of society in a romantic way. In the context of the movie, having Big Sam volunteer to dig trenches for the South makes perfect sense. GWTW was also a movie telling the North in 1939 America, not to interfere again in the internal racial policies of the South.
Australia, on the other hand, supports a world view condemning Australia's past. Drover, who is the hero of the story, had married an Aborigine. He considers his brother-in-law to be his brother. The movie is very strong in its condemnation of Australia's policy of taking mixed race Aborigines from their homes and and trying to turn them into "proper" Australians.
Australia can be looked at as the ant-GWTW. One revels in an evil past and the other abhors it. Australia isn't half the movie GWTW is, but it is by far a more honorable and honest movie.
Roger had some problems with the movie presenting the Aboriginal people practicing and believing in magic. He said, "Luhrmann is rightly contemptuous of Australia's 're-education' policies; he shows Nullah taking pride in his heritage and paints the white enforcers as the demented racists they were. But Australia also accepts aboriginal mystical powers lock, stock and barrel, and that I think may be condescending."
I know what Roger is saying but I don't agree. The movie is about the aborigine world view and in 1939 they practiced and believed in magic. I think this aspect of the movie is presented in a powerful and beautiful way.
Another thing I found interesting in Australia was the use of another 1939 movie, The Wizard of Oz, as a plot device.
I liked Australia. I think it was a little too long and the main story wasn't presented in a dramatic enough tone. It is definitely worth seeing, even though it could have been much better. I enjoyed the ending. Nullah, like Dorothy, finds out he can go home again.

A Clockwork Orange (1972)

- 4 Eberts

I had this movie included in my list of Roger's Worst Reviews, so I figured I would have to watch it again.
Roger really missed the boat on this one. He starts his review by saying, "Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange is an ideological mess, a paranoid right-wing fantasy masquerading As an Orwellian warning. It pretends to oppose the police state and forced mind control, but all it really does is celebrate the nastiness of its hero, Alex."

I couldn't disagree with him more. Anyone that watches that movie, and thinks that Alex is a hero must be really twisted. Although there are warnings against the Orwellian state it certainly does not hold up Alex as someone to be admired. What makes the movie interesting is looking at the savage Alex and the State's response to him. Is it a reasonable response? Is it over the top?

He finishes his review by saying, "In addition to the things I've mentioned above -- things I really got mad about -- A Clockwork Orange commits another, perhaps even more unforgivable, artistic sin. It is just plain talky and boring. You know there's something wrong with a movie when the last third feels like the last half."

Wow! A Clockwork Orange boring! I have never heard that before. I can understand why some people don't like this movie. It is very violent, misogynistic and graphic. But the one thing it is not is boring.

This movie has an 8.5 rating on IMDB and has 6 directors and critics selecting it in the Sight and Sound Poll as one of the Top Ten movies of all time. Roger only gave it 2 stars in his review.

I think if Roger watched it again he would really like it. What makes it so good is that it is even more relevant today than when it was made.

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

- 3 Eberts

This has been a year in which Germans' role in the Holocaust has begun to be discussed. There had been movies, like Cross of Iron and The Young Lions, made in the past in which German soldiers and their roles have been shown. In Valkyrie we see that not all the German officers were for Hitler. Most followed him more out of fear than because they believed in him. In The Reader we see a woman who took part in the atrocities, but was looked on as more of a victim than a criminal.
In The Boy in the Striped Pajamas we see a family of a concentration camp commander. As the family begins to discover what is really going on, they begin to see the father for what he really is. The wife end up calling him a monster. The son becomes friends with one the boys in the camp.
The movie is the beginning of a discussion about the German people themselves also being victims of the Holocaust and the Nazi regime. It has been sixty four years since the Nazi regime fell, so it is time for the discussion to begin.
Roger also liked this movie and gave it 3 and a half stars.