'Chronicle' (2012), the Movie: Go See It!

'Chronicle' (2012) is an excellent movie for those of us bewildered by big budget movies whose themes seem remote from our quotidian cares and concerns. As perhaps the most original of movies I've seen lately, I would urge you to see it. Don't leave it to teenagers. I did attend with one, despite having been warned the hand-held camera scenes might make me dizzy. They did, and the beginning can be a bit slow-going for those of us who are past our teen years. Here's a minor spoiler alert, when 'Chronicle' finally revs into gear, the story unwinds faster and faster and faster into an extended Tolkien-style adventure. This is where the special effects surge into high gear. I didn't hear the audience laugh as much later in the movie as much as they did during the more comical early scenes when the boys first discovered their rare powers. It's all good fun, and worth watching.

When the main likable characters, two teenage cousins and a so-called friend - one of whom decides to film his life - find literally a hole-in-the-ground in the woods, and follow it, Alice-in-Wonderland style, down to a Harry-Potter-esque underground cave, the boys experience mysterious transformations. They are bestowed with unique, transcendent powers. To the delight of the audience, these powers grow and grow, first wowing each other, and separately, their school friends at a talent show.

These three were all new actors to me, Dane DeHaan plays Andrew, the cameraman, Alex Russell plays Matt, his cousin, and Michael B. Jordan plays Steve, their friend. They can fly with glee through the air and enlarge their powers in new ways as the story develops. Admittedly, some scenes were gory, and showed mangled, mutilated bodies, on fire, and gutted.

My favorite scenes were the flying scenes, without doubt, involving a plethora of fancy technological feats of engineering rather than the school and party settings, which nevertheless redeemed the story with a semblance of reality. With a single romance between one of the actors and a camera-toting, beautiful, blonde blogger, the story checks back into the cameraman's sorry home-life with a cancer-stricken mother where he ultimately exacts revenge on his cruel, pathetic, unemployed fireman father. His strength made this mother's heart beat harder with sympathy, and say "yes!" for under-privileged, abused teenagers out there.

The boys' new powers take them to places they (and the audience) wouldn't have dreamed of, and thrill everyone to the unexpected heights, social and otherwise, they achieve. Spectacular in vision and optimism, the good times finally turn, of course. The special effects meshed in a tightly-edited hip, mash-up style made me wonder how much of it was real, and how much possibly computer-animated. Certainly, in 'Chronicle', more than in most movies, ideas were freely lifted from other movies and from literature and blended, with good intentions, into an entirely fresh, new concept. Bravo to everyone involved in making it. Sequels might explain and enlarge on how they obtained their special powers, with kudos to the debut of Josh Trank.

'Chronicle' is well worth watching for spectacular special effects, directed by Josh Trank, and for originality of concept, written by Max Landis.

Rated: PG-13. 

Runtime: 84 min.Released: February 3, 2012.

Budget: $12M.  Opening weekend gross: $22M.

Filming Locations: Cape Town, South Africa. Vancouver, BC.

Watch 'The King's Speech': About Leadership and Compassion

All I'll say about the last post is that I got several self-publisher emails in response. They might have seen the post or they might have sent them anyway since I contacted them after the first few drafts. (That latest draft is probably number twenty or so.) We'll see...

Anyway, 'The King's Speech' is a fast-paced, never boring, riveting movie indeed. Sure it's about a speech impediment. Concerned it might be dull, how could the subject-matter be interesting, I wondered? That idea couldn't have been farther from the truth. Everyone loves this movie, and little wonder! 

King George VI

It's so moving emotionally, I suspect no one saw it dry-eyed; it was that  touching. Not only was it compassionate about speech problems, it was sympathetic to Britain, the West and the British monarchy before the Second World War.

King George VI was a British King famous for his stirring speeches; his brother King Edward VIII who abdicated the throne and then married the American Wallis Warfield Simpson had a more lingering, colorful, partying reputation. 

History shows King George VI made many important speeches during the war and his wife, 

Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother (above) of current Queen Elizabeth II, lived to the age of 104, greatly beloved by the British. The monarchy has, since the time of Queen Victoria  at least, left a legacy of compassion that continues with the British Crown to the present day.  The movie is a tribute to the currently peaceful reign of one of the longest running monarchies in British history.

'The King's Speech' also interests the audience by illuminating the topic of true leadership. Never before King George VI had a British monarch reigned while a previous one still lived. The dangers inherent in a temporarily ambiguous monarchy in England as  King Edward VIII held the throne is a central story behind the movie. Germany in the late 1930s was an  immediate threat to safety in the daily lives of all the British. 

The story of a vulnerable and beleaguered nation facing peril they wished would go away lies behind the story of a King with a disability he wished would, too. The King needed to be a strong speaker to better serve his subjects, not one "afraid of his own shadow" but one who could speak up in  a strong voice to both soothe and defend a nation.

The movie was directed by the British award-winner Tom Hooper starring the enormously talented Colin Firth and Helena Bonham Carter, already well-suited to this role.  The movie is advertised as "based on the incredible true story: when his nation needed a leader, when the people needed a voice, an ordinary man would help him find the courage." It was a  brilliant idea by the original playwright, David Seidler, to tell the story of the King's  relationship with his coach, Lionel Logue, played by Geoffrey Rush, a central character of the movie. The therapy that broke the King's stammer is a personal story, interestingly regal. Anger management was also an important issue the King had to work on with his therapist.

But  the real story is the King's long-term dependence on the therapist, and how hard all the people of Britain had to work for their survival as the storm clouds drew closer. Let's hope America can't draw a parallel somehow to the present day. It's a movie with an entertaining story from the past and many interesting lessons for the present.

Dinner and a Movie: Americans Try Dine-In Movie Theaters

AMC Dine-In Theaters

A Dine-In AMC Theater is an innovative way to see a movie and eat a relaxing meal at the same time.  Leather recliners at the Bridgewater Theater offer waiter/bar service at the press of a button along with very generous seat width and leg-room. Where else can one see a movie while being served, if so desired, a glass of wine and a salad, or a menu of heartier dishes and desserts?

 

Business people  and restaurant owners from around the world should visit these theaters for the new experience. It's surprisingly relaxing to have wait service and enjoy a movie at the same time. If it sounds too good to be true, please visit one -- this website  has further details. I really liked this new idea: a hotel/restaurant/shopping center combo with a dine-in theater. I don't know what, besides this competition, except litigation or tax incentives, could force traditional  movie theaters to offer better than the standard fare of over-priced soda/popcorn/nachos (which I have encouraged already). 

You probably know a few movie snobs. They won't go to movie theaters  because they can see everything at home with better privacy, cleanliness and food. But they have a new choice; not many home media rooms have the full package of services these theaters provide. They are exactly the audience now testing the Bridgewater Mall Dine-In Movie Theater, newly renovated and re-opened in December, 2010. With seven theaters, the entire cinema now has 684 seats. Aisles are wide enough to pass out food, and wait staff dressed in black are trained to speak quietly. Composite plateware with fork-friendly food together with movable tray tables and individual lighting make this experience resemble, even surpass, first class plane travel. The costs of seeing a movie quickly add up, and the varied menu and generous seating make this place actually a bargain. Seats can and no doubt will be reserved ahead.

It's great new way to see a movie with a few significant others, especially couples and lucky teenagers. We saw an excellent movie very conducive to watching while dining. Any movie would be great here, purely from the perspective of the best seats, where each one has a great view and lots of space, and the healthier food. "How Do You Know" is a sophisticated romantic comedy, dear to my heart, that announces heart-throb Paul Rudd, also in "The Cider House Rules" and "Knocked Up" in a major role, starring already huge Reese Witherspoon, Owen Wilson, and Jack Nicholson. 

A list of current Dine-In Theaters:

Atlanta

AMC Fork & Screen Buckhead 6

Dallas

AMC Grapevine Mills 30 *NOW OPEN*

Kansas City

AMC Studio 30AMC Mainstreet 6

New Jersey

AMC Essex Green 9 *NOW OPEN* AMC Bridgewater Commons 7 *NOW OPEN*  AMC Menlo Park 12 *COMING SOON* opening 12/15/2010 (full disclosure: no sponsorship by AMC) Personally, I can't watch 3D movies without feeling extremely nauseated; "Avatar" sent me to a doctor worried I had to sit out most of it. In gratitude, this was a completely different experience. It won't be long before we go back for another "dinner and a movie." Enjoy a Dine-In Theater near you if you can.

Slavery: An Important Old Problem Revisited with an Expert: Kevin Bales, President of Free the Slaves

Did you know there are 27 million slaves in the world in 2010 and that many of them have been slaves for generations? So says Kevin Bales, President of Free the Slaves, U.S. sister organization of the world's oldest human rights organization, Anti-Slavery International.

Here are excerpts as a quick synopsis from an interview by Bales on Big Think with apologies for errors.

Slavery has always been the same thing. It's about a person who's completely controlled by another. 

There are many types of slavery, many of which have been unaltered for hundreds of years. In the 20th century, the price of human beings collapsed and changed the dynamics of slavery. There has been a population explosion in the world. Lack of the rule of law has made people vulnerable to slavery. Huge population and lack of the rule of law has an overlap, whereby people live on extreme deprivation and citizens are harvested, and there is a glut of humans. A given is the pool of potentially slaveable population group of 700 million. The number of 27 million could be far higher and thankfully, it isn't.

Nowadays enslavement starts with asking the question: "do you want a job?" Slaves are not initially usually taken by violence, or bought. People walk into slavery, as we all would, sometimes to feed children and then the enslaved are separated, and the threat of violence begins.

There is not a single way to stop slavery. There is not a silver bullet. Liberation workers do the dangerous work of kidnapping the enslaved. Community organization has to stop it. Direct intervention creates liberation. We wish governments would step in and stop it and do what they should do.

Domestic servitude is a form of slavery. Stopping slavery in any random location requires the sharp eyes of people around to liberate the enslaved. 

Warning signs of slavery:

• underage of employment
• not in school during school hours
• not well dressed
• working all hours
• frightened 
• hungry 
• injured
• fearful
• not knowing where they are
• sleep-deprived 

Slavery is a hidden crime. It's impossible to collect solid numbers. The academic world and the United Nations have estimated there are 27 million slaves in the world at the present time, plus or minus 5 million. 

Slavery is worst in: 

• India (largest number) 
• Burma (worst percentage-wise) 
• Nepal
• Pakistan (hereditary forms)
• Japan (worst in that police overlook it; they could improve it)
• Congo 
• 1 in 10 children live in slavery in Haiti (at Freetheslaves.net)

Governments could do better, even in America.

Myth: Slavery is not in America. Truth: It is.

Myth: Slaves are all prostitutes. Truth: America has numbers of 50,000 or more slaves. In U.S. sexual exploitation (prostitution) is less than half of that number. But it exists all around, and we are unaware of it.

The U.S. has always had slavery. We could be a slave-free country. The government has promised we will have a slave-free country. 17,000 are brought into America each year to be slaves, same number as homicides, but much less is spent on slaves than homicides. A crime almost as serious as murder getting little attention.

Slavery is prehistoric. It existed then in a fairly sophisticated way. Violence exploited people. Familial exploitation existed.  Changed from family exploitation to animal domestication model, e.g. Aristotle: the "ox is the poor man's slave".

Slaves are pre-legal; 30% of code of Hammurabi is about slavery. It is pre-monetary; slaves come after records of money. Slaves do not exist in every society. Slavery as a semi-permanent condition has evolved over 5,000 years. Slavery bankrolled payrolls of army legions and is linked to productive regional growth. Now, slavery generally involves the physical possession of people temporarily, rather than land.

Amazon: Joseph, Original Soundcast

Jane Fonda On How Car Scenes Are Filmed

Have you ever wondered how car scenes are made in movies? Jane Fonda is in Paris to act in a French movie called "Et Si On Vivait Tous Ensemble" . Luckily for us, she is leaking open secrets in her blog of which I am a fan. Here she explains how it's done:

"I wanted to show how we shoot car scenes…with the car mounted on a flat bed , the cameras attached in front and the whole is being pulled by another truck. This isn’t the only way to shoot car scenes but a common way, and, in our case, essential because [actor] Guy Bedos doesn’t drive."

Photos: Jane Fonda
http://janefonda.com/category/my-blog/

"Date Night" : How They Lived Happily Ever After

Did you notice that according to the movie columnists at Rotten Tomatoes, men are mostly giving "Date Night" average reviews, while women reviewers loved it? It's easy to guess which way this review is going to go, from a female reviewer.

The advanced level of humor about marital challenges is new and welcome, and that's a lot to achieve in a romantic comedy these days. So I would recommend it when you could use more humor about marriage in your life. It would be interesting to survey whether this movie pleased the married segment more as I would expect, especially mothers, although lots of men and kids were in my theater audience.

Dinner at a fancy New York restaurant weaves a New Jersey couple into an outlandish plot and involves far more adventure than they and the audience could have dreamed. Scenes of New York were wonderfully panoramic and realistic and their little house in New Jersey was an idyllic haven. "Date Night" is R-rated for good reason, having to do with the place where certain scenes happen.  It was great as an entertaining, escapist movie, albeit one with an unbelievable plot. Part thriller, a dangerous-looking and frightening car chase scared me out of my socks.

"Date Night" ends surprisingly, spectacularly and satisfyingly for the well-cast Steve Carell who plays a lawyer and father and his real estate wife, played by Tina Fey. Leighton Meester plays a realistic baby-sitter who can charge exorbitant prices; babysitters will enjoy this movie, too.

A few scenes could have been edited more tightly, and emotions shown by the characters could have matched the scenes more skilfully and some of Tina Fey's lines appear made-on-the-spot. Despite all that, the movie displays significant effort. I thoroughly enjoyed this undemanding, funny instant classic.

Just be sure to have a ladder  nearby to climb when your car catapults into the Hudson River. Was this meant to be a toned-down echo of the plane that landed in the Hudson River where ferry boats picked up passengers? Put "Date Night" on your movie list.

Healthful Food at Movie Theaters? If Only ~

While refreshments at movie theaters can easily double the cost of movie tickets, most  theaters do not allow customers to carry in as much as a pre-owned bottle of water, let alone healthful food. What's a caring, health-conscious movie-goer to do?

Movie houses sell captive audiences ever-larger paper cups of soda and oversize packages of popcorn. With monopolistic power, they sell sodas, popcorn, tacos and cheese, hot dogs, chocolate bars and crispy dry chips to customers bereft of healthy alternatives. These are not good foods for employees or kids or for movie aficionados.

Movie theaters would benefit society if they would at least offer smaller soda cups and popcorn without fat as an option. It's a well-known societal problem in America that oils and sugars contribute to child obesity. Hot dogs and pretzels may be among the more healthful foods at movie houses now, but many customers often won't buy them for religious or personal reasons. Bottled water and nuts are the most healthful choices, nutritionists say.

It's time for movie theater owners and managers to wake up and take responsible initiative and work harder to offer us all a greater variety of healthful comfort foods. They're late to the party, in fact. If they offer good food, it will be bought. They should look at the popularity of juice bars. It is a disservice to overcharge customers for basic snacks and under-deliver healthy choices. If they continue to equate junk food with "fun food" they aren't helping improve nutritional challenges.

If only movie theaters would modernize snack bars and offer bananas, whole wheat sandwiches and sandwich wraps, bean dips, granola bars, oranges, clean apples and vegetables wrapped in plastic, dried vegetables and fruit, real fruit juices, yogurt drinks and dairy products. What a dream!  Starbucks could be a positive example to them.

Movie houses, especially big ones in the northeastern United States, have nothing less than a societal responsibility to offer foods with better nutritional value. Not everyone eats at home before a show, at least not in this busy, rushed society. Customers would prefer to make healthful choices. They occasionally watch movies during dinner hours and would welcome the opportunity to choose wholesome organic fare. Movie theaters should react positively since they are in the business of purveying food. Please let me know in your comments if you have noticed any movie theaters with healthy food snacks.

"Julie and Julia": Useful Lessons from a Worthwhile Movie

Julie and Julia is a fabulous film. Meryl Streep and Amy Adams star in this adorably endearing film about cooking and food.

A few short lessons from the movie:

1. It's good to have a passion.
2. Both women had definite goals.
3. Meeting their goals were achievements that brought them success.
4. Their men supported them psychologically, emotionally and helped run errands and fix problems. Without them, they wouldn't have achieved their goals successfully.
5. Blogs aren't necessarily evil time-wasters for either writer or reader.
   

It's also a great advertisement for Julia Child's first book, "Mastering the Art of French Cooking".



Everyone who sees "Julie and Julia" seems to love it, including this reviewer. The movie did follow the book of her early married life, "My Life in France" by Julia Child with Alex Prud'homme to some extent, with much left out. That book is fabulous, too.



Definitely a movie to inspire a round of cooking. Makes for pleasant entertainment, and what an upscale theater audience.


Wikimedia:National Museum of American History

The Julia Child exhibit we saw last weekend in Washington's National Museum of American History was her kitchen in Cambridge Massachusetts, here:


The Jeremiad: Julia Child's Kitchen

Having worked my way through every recipe in "Le Cordon Bleu At Home"(except a couple) and videos, I can truly sympathize with many of the challenges faced by these busy cooks. Of course, had I blogged about it, I certainly wouldn't have hoped for a free lesson at the Cordon Bleu.



In the movie, Julie Powell always hoped to meet Julia Child. Yet it seems slightly presumptuous to me that a food blogger should have really hoped for an actual meeting with the great chef, as Julie did in the movie. I can see why she hoped; she's a good writer. But whether she's a talented chef or merely an interested cook who's a talented writer remains to be proved. It's unlikely that a blogger starting to experience and write about politics would be able to meet a President. Julia Child was a very busy celebrity and had millions of fans.

Don't we all have some interest in cooking?

For more about Julia Child: Appetite for Life: The Biography of Julia Child, by Noel Riley Fitch.

“Knowing”: Hurry To See This Movie!

Nicholas Cage



PG-13, 130 min.



Directed by Alex Proyas, Nicholas Cage stars in "Knowing", an ambitious, high-budget drama/mystery/thriller movie that starts small and ends huge. The movie begins in 1959, in a wonderful, large classroom taught by Miss Taylor (Danielle Carter) in Dawes Elementary School situated in Lexington, Massachusetts. A time capsule is planted ceremonially and fifty years later in 2009, it’s taken from the ground, again with Miss Taylor (this time played by Alethea McGrath) nearby, cutting a ribbon and giving out envelopes. After that, everything that happens appears random, until it becomes clear that many of these odd events are connected and not random at all.



Cage plays John Koestler, an MIT astrophysics professor, widow and caring father, who in 2009 is able to put together a puzzle written onto a paper from the time capsule and, despite some initial skepticism, realizes that certain tragic events are about to happen. He gradually discovers exactly when they will happen and GPS coordinates show exact locations. He informs his skeptical colleague, his father, his son Caleb, played perfectly and sensitively by Chandler Canterbury, and Diana Wayland. Wayland, whose mother predicts the future events discovered by Koestler, is played by Rose Byrne with sensitivity, compassion and intelligence and becomes Koestler's new interest.



Yes, the trailer will tell you this, but the movie somehow becomes ever more broadly compelling and increasingly impressive. Officially all set in America, it’s filmed in many locations, with vistas and views, a Victorian home and a buckyball-shaped astrophysics building, an American subway and highway, New York City, Australia for the school scene and most of the alien scenes. There is drama and excitement created with special effects that get more spectacular until the end of the film.



It’s quite an exciting action thriller and enjoyable, despite many realistic crash scenes. There’s a fiery plane crash at close range, a long subway crash scene and vehicle crashes all filmed just feet away, giving the audience the feeling of being there. Mystery and suspense build with music, shadows, squeaks, drafty whistles, alien appearances and imaginings. The alien space-ship scene is as impressive as the ‘we’re here’ movie, E.T. Then there’s the final horrifying destruction scene.



Expensive, complicated, fast-moving special effects are balanced with tender, emotional moments. John Koestler (Cage) works hard to raise his son and to have good relationships. A convincing multi-generational dimension complements the cleverly-wrought fifty-year span of the movie. Koestler's findings have shocked him to his core, and his character winds up eventually in an emotional collapse caused by tragic events in this race-against-time schedule. He ultimately rushes to reach his father's house in Manhattan before the shocking conclusion.



“Knowing” is an instant classic, and an amalgamation of many old movies. While it's shocking for those living near New York City, it’s sure to join the list of “Best Destruction Movies of New York City”, like A.I.--Artificial Intelligence, Independence Day, Deep Impact and The Day after Tomorrow. Of course, this time it’s the entire planet that gets hit by a solar storm, and there’s nowhere to hide.



Intelligence is an important factor in “Knowing”, but this plot tells us that ultimately, it won’t save all of us. (It's a movie, so we just happily and temporarily suspend our disbelief reminded, as Lord Keynes has said, that "in the long run, we're all dead"). The idea is that intelligence might have saved John Koestler (Cage), if only he had been open to relationships with aliens. Instead the children, Caleb and Abby, become young Adam and Eve figures, are saved by the aliens (who have been speaking inside their heads) to continue life on a new planet. Young Lara Robinson plays both Lucinda Embry (author of the 1959 paper) and her granddaughter, Abby Wayland, with quiet authority.



Why are the aliens blond and attractively human-like rather than, say, purple monsters? (Maybe they were meant to look credible?). While these silent predators look piercingly intelligent, they're also a bit extravagant as they keep unexpectedly appearing, then mysteriously disappearing, building drama accompanied by ominous music and awesome special effects.



How were these special effects created? The crash scenes, the alien and spaceship scenes, and the Manhattan destruction scenes all took huge budgets and incredible computer wizardry.



"Knowing" is well worth watching, highly recommended for escapism at its finest. As far-fetched as its story sounds, the movie works as enjoyable entertainment, whether or not it convinces us that intelligence won't save us from the greater forces of nature, that nature is stronger than man (except for the two children, and a few other lucky ones). Wonder if Part Two is around the corner, about the children growing up?



It's such an ambitious movie that it deserves to win Academy Awards for Best Special Effects, Best Screenplay, Best Director, and Best Actor.

'Revolutionary Road': A Review of the Movie

This is a powerfully emotional movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, definitely a must-see of former 'Titanic' actors. An instantly classic movie, it reminds me of the Julianne Moore movie, 'Far from Heaven' (2002). Both are set in 1950s Connecticut and concern marital tensions, albeit with a different focus. It also is reminiscent of "Fatal Attraction" and high school staples "Ethan Frome", "Death of a Salesman" and "The Glass Menagerie".



Set in 1955, before the women's movement and color television get into full swing, 'Revolutionary Road' can be viewed as a classic cautionary tale. But if so, what does it caution against, married life in suburbia? Nowadays, don't the greatest percentage of young couples in America with or without children, interested in education and producing for society, live after all in the suburbs? Why see the movie and where is the storyline going? Not to worry. Every movie is a risk to invest time in, but this is a classic movie. It's very interesting and worthwhile and thoughtful.

The movie could have been set outside any large American city and the main setting is typical of upper-middle-class suburbia. Sam Mendes, director, and husband of Kate Winslet, stays close to the book by Robert Yates, summarized here. The story races through a couple's range of experiences in early married life. The houses would nowadays get endlessly renovated and expanded. The suited male commuters and stereotypical typing pool portray the post-war era. Already, computers are seen as the great corporate hope for the future.

While 'Revolutionary Road' is a movie that is beautiful and heart-rending, it does make one get caught up in the moment, and feel as they are feeling. Certainly, suburban family life is worthy of a closer look and exploration. But the movie will make you crave the flip-side, a movie about a normal, young family with happily married parents. Even so, surprisingly welcome it is that perfect stars portray such realistic emotional content in such pretty houses and the movie could have such a dramatic conclusion.

While such content is timeless, the male actors appear to be stereotypical of the era, but unusually reactionary and defensive, with the exception of the mentally-ill former mathematician played by Michael Shannon given to offensive outbursts. This is clearly set before the advent of modern psychiatric drugs that are designed to mellow and control such wild outpourings and to balance delicate interpersonal relationships. Other reviewers are saying that Shannon's character focuses on the truth, but I think he goes too far. Kathy Bates, also of 'Titanic' fame and mother of the former mathematician, plays the role of experienced real-estate agent whose husband ever-so-slowly tunes her out. Now that is a dysfunctional family. In fact, all of the three families, including the neighbor's family, are portrayed as dysfunctional by the end of the movie, and divorce is not mentioned.

"Revolutionary Road" would appear to be a low-budget movie, except for the pay of the main actors, showing again that story composition can make a successful film, even without expensive special effects. It definitely appears to be like an elaborate play, with two houses, an office, an apartment, a road, and two restaurants as settings. It's escapist, and revelatory at the same time. I do highly recommend this movie because of its timeless yet exciting content. It has an important future as a classic. Just saying.

"Slumdog Millionaire" movie review

This is a very original movie. Americans aren't normally shown this quality of a movie set in India, and it is exceptionally well-done. I think Indians should be proud of this movie and the way it portrays the country and shows its scenery and slices of socioeconomic strata.

It takes awhile for the Slumdog story to get into its stride, and some scenes are off-putting. There are many very imaginative scenes; orphans and orphanages in modern India (makes me wonder if there are any like this now), Muslims on a rampage setting fires, and little boys standing atop moving trains and even hanging on the side and jumping on and off them. There are scenes of beggar children and main actor Dev Patel's interrogation really go far beyond what audiences here usually see. The child actors appear to be expected to do far more than American movies usually show children doing.

There are very many changes of scenery over many years. The changing face of the city, presumably of Mumbai, the filthiness of slums, the masses of passengers at trains stations are brought up close, raw and believable, but at the same time not overdone. It's well worth watching through to the end, and even through the credits. The music and settings are very strong features. The story ends happily for the main character and it leaves you satisfied that goodness is rewarded, even if some of the bad guys appear to go unpunished.

I am surprised at how riveting and strong the entire movie is. The entire packed audience sat still and spellbound throughout, mesmerized by the glowing and effective performances and skilful editing and direction. I felt a range of emotions, happy, sad, angry at injustices, sympathetic to the poor, and it made me laugh as well. There is also an unexpected blend of romance and action, considering that the movie features a popular television show, the corrupt Indian version of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire".

Okay, this may sound naive, but why aren't human rights groups and lawyers busier in India? If this movie is any indication, they have a lot of work to do.

I think if any movie this year is going to get awards for originality and photography, Slumdog Millionaire would be a good pick.

Brideshead Revisited

This movie is a masterpiece. It deserves a long review, but I will keep it short.

It's a romance whose hero Charles (Matthew Goode), although sympathetic, displays the flaw of uncontrollable envy. He will do anything to obtain Brideshead, a country house in England that he grows to desire as his own. He has a strong platonic or suggestively homosexual friendship with the owner's son Sebastian "Lord" Flyte (Ben Whishaw) who first meets him and invites him around. He then develops a romantic interest in daughter Julia (Hayley Atwell).

The story winds its way around the ambitious efforts of the "Painter/Artist from Paddington" to do anything to win Brideshead as his home. His envious desire motivates him to develop his friendship with the family. Brideshead's owners are notably acted by Lord Marchmain (Michael Gambon) and Lady Marchmain (Emma Thompson).

The movie ends twenty years later with military occupation during the Second World War. The hero visits the house as a military man and remembers his past. This section, set at Brideshead, is mercifully brief.

It's an enjoyable movie following a complex family and their friendships. References by all to education, economic circumstances, religion and alcohol addiction permeate the hero's experience with the family. "Responsibility to the family" and being of service are illustrated as foundations of friendship.

The movie keeps emphasizing the role of religion in this family. It shows that a powerful attraction of religion is its ability to save a person from himself (or herself). But within the dysfunctional relationships in this movie, religion both builds self-awareness and divides family connections and friendships. All ultimately grow and learn to stay true to their beliefs.

The photography of England in the countryside, Oxford, London, Venice and Morocco is very flawless and beautiful.

It is all carefully and perfectly acted by beautiful people in precious surroundings and well worth watching for escapism, its interesting and entertaining story and memorable romances. "Brideshead Revisited" is most likely the "most beautiful movie" of 2008.

"Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2"

I really enjoyed watching this movie even more than I loved seeing the first "Traveling Pants". Both movies have many scenes filmed in the spectacularly beautiful Greek island of Santorini. The first "Traveling Pants" movie inspired me to look at the island's breathtaking cliffs on a visit there last year. "Traveling Pants 2" returns to this photogenic island again. Other scenes are taken in New York and various college campuses in the U.S. and abroad, perhaps in Turkey.

The story revolves around the adventures of four girlfriends who share a pair of jeans that they hope will keep them emotionally connected. It seems to work and they stay friends to the end, albeit with some bumps in the road. They each have the jeans for a short period of time and pass them along, rotating them. It's a clever idea! But this movie is all about emotional transformation. Each of the characters learns and grows from unique life experiences.

Bridget, played very sensitively by Blake Lively reconnects with her grandmother (Blyth Danner) after an educational anthropological dig in Turkey, though not where I've been in Turkey (also filmed spectacularly well). She learns about her father's attempts to shield her following the painful death of her mother, and has to understand her own feelings, maturing and growing beyond her special loss.

Carmen, a Yale rising sophomore played by America Ferrera finds love and semi-professional development unexpectedly in Vermont while away from her pregnant mother. Julia, her beautiful blonde Yale friend played by Rachel Nichols was also very convincingly portrayed and well-acted.

Lena, the cute "Greek-American" girl, played adorably by Alexis Bledel is well-developed as a sister, friend and love heroine. She chooses between two young men working to a satisfying conclusion with one of them.

Tibby, the "video-store girl"/ playwright played by Amber Tamblyn has emotional challenges worrying about a possible pregnancy, her relationship with her boyfriend, her friendship with America Ferrera, helping her with her mother's childbirth.

There were many male roles in the movie as well. All characters were played with depth, sincerity and sensitivity. I felt that all characters were on target and age appropriate with their concerns and problems. The way they helped each other solve love and life problems was beautiful and very modern and realistic. Photography was very complicated as scenes rotated following the characters (and the pants) but each scene segued into the next very seamlessly and understandably.

Other reviews I have read have not uniformly rated this movie highly, nevertheless, I enjoyed it a lot. The audience around me applauded after the end! Any time a reviewer pans a "chick flick" I have noticed the reviewer tends, almost always to be a man. Women will tend to give hot reviews, or at worst tentative or lukewarm, of this emerging group of female-oriented movies. In view of this, I must raise a virtual objection. I promise I won't write about most violent or male-oriented films at all because I have a problem sitting through some of them, let alone saying anything nice.

Moreover, maybe those male reviewers should be reminded that it is still a man's world and that they have the power with their unfavorable reviews to squelch this new category of female-targeted movies that is late but very welcome to very many of us. I can assure any reader that low-budget "chick flicks" like these tend to have most of the female half of the population gratefully (but maybe too quietly) loving them for giving us our chance in the limelight and at the very least admiring the guts and courage of the producers for making them.

Sadly, it is likely that these chick flicks will not win important critical awards. Indeed, they have so far usually been passed over for big awards, even as they have few if any special effects or expensive action-adventure machinery. But for lots of us, they are very satisfying, soothing and worthwhile for our souls. This is emotionally where we want to go for awhile and we are very happy we took the time out to see them.

Mamma Mia

I loved Mamma Mia! as I love Abba songs. It is true that there is a new Abba song played every five minutes or so. I certainly enjoyed it as a musical retrospective of the group's entire musical repertoire. But to sit and listen to their entire works all at the same time is almost too much of a good thing, even for a fan like me. Nevertheless, this is a fun movie to see.

I hope you like Abba's music and then you will find it worthwhile. I did not see the Broadway play, so I cannot compare, but it is a very entertaining movie as a musical comedy, rather than being politically important or educational or even very useful. I can see how the plot line, as limited as it is, might perhaps be most interesting or useful to anyone with similar issues involving suspect parentage. It's all sort of semi-timeless, the relevant events being the heroine's birth and now her wedding. This movie runs to a very unexpected romantic conclusion, without any assistance from DNA testing.

Mamma Mia! is not a great romance, but emotions play a major role most of the time. The dancing is rather surprising and unexpectedly relentless, organized and rehearsed, to say the least and the singing is sort of borderline in tune much of the time. It could definitely be more tightly edited and shortened without losing the sense and impact of the story. The costuming of the singers is hilarious!

The boyfriend and the male actors, in general, are two-dimensional. What you see it what you get. The boyfriend is mostly an accessory to the heroine. The possible father figures, major actors all, Pierce Brosnan, Stellan Skarsgard and Colin Firth, are almost cartoonishly filled out, although their yacht scene with the heroine appears really idyllic and fun.

I have to say that the way scenery is used is a very important part of the movie. The fantastic photography of the improbably calm Mediterranean Sea (at least at times) and the moonlit evenings, the white buildings of the island, the pine trees and rocky shorelines, the docks and boats, contribute to stunning, but realistic classic photography. It is inadvertently a tourism advertisement for Greece and the Greek Islands all the way through.

This movie is clearly Meryl Streep's as the dominating character. Her finest acting moments could be her singing and climbing the steep path up to the church. The remainder of the movie offers some of her most surprising movie moments, climbing, dancing, even bed-jumping and bannister-flying! Busy, emotional Streep has to be one of the most gifted and malleable actresses of all time. She dances, sings, changes her accents and appearance. She is so amazing! Of course, she has won so many awards, perhaps she did want something to make her feel more alive!

The film gives the impression of having been overwhelmingly fun to make for her, especially, and for the other actors and actresses. I wish I could hear if it was all as much fun as it looked. There are lots of extras in the movies dancing on the docks and all over the island, and genuine-looking islanders.

For the music and scenery, it is definitely worth seeing. And it is very, very funny.