earthinspace-1 Reviews

Oh, You Cowgirl! (2010 Video)

Deserves this: substantial production values & emotional content

[8/10 · 23 February 2024]

"A League of their Own" for Rodeo I have no connection that I know, with anyone involved with this film.

Piercing and sad that I can't find another copy of this film to share with more friends. The makers did a great work! The speakers and narrators never dole out trivia or routine history. It's up close and personal Gorgeous on several levels -- sound bed, great athletes, authentic stories, beautiful athletic women . . . Historical interest, historical music, historical views.

If you are interested in well-made cinema of any kind, or American history, and of course Don't miss it, if you are interested in horses or the romance of the old American West. If you are, it would be crazy to miss this and other films of its kind.

This film in particular has pleasant pacing, no sharp edges, yet never dull. It's brisk like a rodeo, and fresh like the wild air in the old days out West.

A labor of love by real artists, real cowgirls too I'd bet.

Rules Don't Apply (2016)

might they have overlooked something . . . this is a Best Picture of some year

[10/10 · 28 June 2017]

Do you remember that old friend or relation who said just the right things and You didn't know it 'til years later? They never won an Oscar nor even appeared on screen, but their influence helped You. I suspect this Motion Picture was a gift of that type. It's the little keepsake, like a windup music box or whatever would be new and exotic today, and they've left it behind for you to keep. And some day, some of us would treasure it. The intricate design will catch your eye -- one day or night, after a lot more of the river has flowed by. The great sweep of time will echo in the piano-box of the heart . . . and will anyone remember to hear it? For some persons who love the music, this film would be a catalyst, a prompt, for that reverie.

The subtle feelings of life will now be more understandable. You'll know you were in the presence of God's love -- a true God who shines through time and fiction as well as through science and contracts. It's profound and it's pretty easy to watch, or vice versa. Is it historically? Sorry, I don't know. I could look it up. That doesn't change anything about this review. The formula for a big hit in the movies is elusive or is it? Maybe they were trying for a hit, and maybe they were trying for something else

The Untold History of the United States (2012–2013)

Forgive Oliver Stone's conclusions-- they're often wrong. So what. Glean the Under-reported stories.

[6/10 · 22 December 2016]

These episodes are a good addition to the mental library of a serious history buff. For a big-picture treatment, this series does make quite a few boo-boos at the big-picture level.

Examples:

1) We hear several times a thesis that "Stalin always kept his word, so why didn't we make better friends with him?" Back at home, Stalin wasn't keeping his word very well. Should we have ignored what was occurring in the Soviet Union? Sure, there's occasional mention of Stalin's brutality. It seems thrown in, to avoid omitting it altogether.

2) We hear that Japan was ready to surrender and Truman wanted to use the bomb as leverage at Potsdam. That's a reasonable thesis. But that was only part of the picture. It cannot stand alone. If we examine everyone's motives at the time, as this film partly did, what emerges is not the simple feeling we get from the film: "America bad, Japan not as bad."

Still, it's fine to have these details offered up. They even mention the 45,000 Korean slaves who were in Hiroshima on that tragic day.

In hindsight, Oliver Stone's ideas are okay as learning opportunities. It's not fair to assume that Americans living in the mid-20th Century should have known then what we know now. But it's fair to second-guess them now as a meditation for future use. That will happen to our times too.

I've watched the first five episodes and plan to watch the rest.

An Open Secret (I) (2014)

I subjectively feel this film was fairly objective and fair

[9/10 · 13 December 2016]

This film explores a dynamite subject with extra care and precision. Other comments here are reasonable. The film only goes so far, and it is pretty careful. Its attitude is nearly perfect. I knocked off one point for the film's not trying to show how heterosexual culture is always grooming the kids for participation later, and the gay culture therefore has made some mistakes trying to invent a way forward in secret. The film is only talking about issues concerning the effects of male pedophiles in Hollywood, and can't cover everything. What they cover is done pretty well, and that's saying a lot for a topic which often can bring more anger or confusion or circumlocution than understanding. That's surely true of heterosexual pedophilia and exploitation of young adult women in Hollywood too. Probably some of the unhealthy interest in exploiting children and young adult women was incubated in persons whose sexual development occurred in an atmosphere of fear and secrecy, or too much privilege and not enough guidance. Watching this film might help many persons avoid mistakes in behavior and mistakes in interpretation. It could help parents and the public form and implement better oversight without being too intrusive.

Amanda Knox (2016)

Succeeds as documentary in a sensitive international controversy

[8/10 · 1 October 2016]

A person who followed the case closely might feel a variety of emotions. Because the film approaches the crux of the situation very directly, it's not for the faint of heart, and it's not entertainment. Several participants in this case tell the story in their own words, with their own observations about what went wrong -- interwoven with news reports from the case. These first hand accounts include empathy for what the other side may have been thinking. They don't speak guardedly, I think. It's very blunt. The story, as told in this film, leaves out a lot of details which would add up to an epic if ever told fully; but with the omissions, we get a stream of useful and direct insights.

I agree with critics who feel the film was too easy on the prosecution mistakes. It's just probable this softball approach was necessary in order to make the film. The prosecutor is allowed to allege, after the final verdict, many things he was unable to prove or even demonstrate during the trial. He says Amanda's a liar etc. That's how his system works -- no accountability, no four years of prison for Mignini. The prosecutor still seems to believe his intuition might just be better than all the evidence. Every character is revealed in more depth. A low-information viewer might still believe the prosecutor's delusions. The film's weak point was not trying to expose the uncomprehending, privileged corruption of mind & process which were the prosecution's ( & sensational media's ) whole approach. Surely these were omitted for diplomatic reasons, but the point still oozes through the speakers.

Waking Up Horton (1998)

Worse than the worst film ever made, except it's for kids . . with much love

[9/10 · 25 May 2016]

This film's theme of love conquering greed causes suffering with scenes that are sometimes five seconds too long, and we generally avoid films like that. The film has a tiny viewing audience -- possibly unusual persons themselves -- and maybe 3 of 10 persons will tolerate it.

"Entertain us!" we silently demand. Is that all that matters in life? I think some kids would like this show, while others would focus on its strange moments and reject it for un-conformity.

There are some good lines and deep kindness in the shadows of this film.

Here's a glimpse at the story: A young man dies before he settles down and matures enough to achieve his purpose in life of being a Medicine Man. His mentor/grandmother knows it is too soon for his life to end, because he was in training in a spiritual way, so she turns him into a crow that is wandering for 100 years. Suddenly he is summoned by some children and arrives at a movie set (near Big Bear Lake, where part of "Gone with the Wind" was filmed. They don't mention that in the film -- it's just from the background information). He is supposed to help the kids who summoned him. He still doesn't behave very maturely. The kids are very annoyed and banish him. But he has nowhere to go and begs for a chance to redeem himself. It is an alternate version of the spiritual life, compared to our big religions and their legends and promises.

A movie-watcher is accustomed to being fed with all the scientific emotional flavors and enhancers. Instead of junk food, this movie is more like the picnic where all the food was joke food and we're never going to forgive our friend who is a magician, for luring us on that picnic. Except we do, because our friend really loves us.

Give My Regards to Broad Street (1984)

This Film Ages Well and Some Day They'll Be So Glad This Film Was Made

[10/10 · 27 March 2016]

I saw this by invitation when it first played in Seattle. In the 1980s, we were awash in the wake of the Sixties, and I suspect lots of audience members felt as I did, and as the "5" rating here implies. I was stressed by regimentation in that year, and could not shake loose enough to enjoy it nearly as well as I did when watching a week ago.

We, who are appreciators of Beatles and ex-Beatles music, would be poorer without this film. Ringo Starr, George Martin, and several more apparitions appear by grace for your nostalgic pleasure.

By this film, we're given several more songs and video scenes that are fully alive as creative avenues in the Beatles tradition. The theme is anxiety. The music is awesome. The Love is real.

North Sea Texas (2011)

Portrays the suffering of youthful unrequited love & exploitation

[6/10 · 26 January 2016]

...partial spoiler about general themes.

You've heard this film is about a gay boy named Pim. That label is cargo in our societal theories of life. Pim's only about 14, and he might still be a father and family man some day. I choose not to take sides on theories of sexuality here, and to blur my eyes when considering the moral vision of this film. No nudity in the film, by the way. The story's about a neglected boy whose first feelings are that he's attracted to a boy. When the boy, to whom Pim's attracted, overtly returns the attraction -- literally seduces Pim -- all Pim gets from it is a roll in the sack. The other boy's not seeing Pim as a permanent friend. Young persons are inexperienced and cannot be expected to see all that's coming from their experiences. We adults realize we do not know what's going on, and maybe we forget how much more painful it can be, or was, when we were that age.

Lots of moments of uncertainty and awkwardness are woven together into a decent film. Clearly, the loneliness is not ended by a few episodes of sexual gratification. So that moral tone does not mislead a person who watches this film to understand themselves.

What Pim, like many young persons, does not yet know is, how to grow relationships which really blossom into a friendship that lasts. Like most of us, that's just the tip of the iceberg of what he doesn't know. For some, the taboos are confusing to some members of society because bullying is widespread in society, based on anything that makes a person into a member of a minority. Their feelings could not be openly discussed with a careless majority.

Time Out of Mind (2014)

Oh, #~%& Yeah!

[10/10 · 11 January 2016]

Brain slog happens out there. A well-made film shows and suggests with scenes that slip into the next like a dream, yet with all the gritty truth of doing what you have to do to cross the street without getting knocked over. The shelters I remember were different and still, this film captured them.

Not wanting to say a lot of words right now. A lot of what's good in the film is what they don't say. There is silence for time to grok and drink in all the other stimuli, and there are toned-down dramatic pauses, as between notes of music.

In response to some of the other comments -- You pegged it with some real writing in those comments & this film with references to mind-fog that's related to hunger, and the ambiance of being homeless all day and all night -- these are shown, felt, and quickly inhaled by the audience member who tunes in closely. There is a lot of there, there.

Musician (2007)

95% ready for release... Probably will be very good with that other 5%

[6/10 · 13 December 2015]

Great idea for a film and worth remaking -- even with most of the same footage. Inspired by Studs Terkel's book _Working_ ... the cover says. I read that book and greatly admired it almost 35 years ago. There's no rule against commentary... there sure was plenty in the book -- by the subjects themselves.

I wish someone would weave this film together more.

(A "fly on the wall" is not a point of view. Personally, I like to have a couple of houseflies in the room. I find them comforting and beautiful. But I don't wait for them to tell the story of musicians.)

The film makers may have believed narration or commentary would detract from the flow. And it's a huge chore to do it well -- narration for this film would be like the effort of producing a three or four excellent songs -- a huge effort!

The film was released in a hectic time in our country, which may have compressed the film makers' budgets or personal time. Good production values --- worthy on-screen subjects and sound -- just needs more of the excellent emcee work which the film makers surely can arrange.

The Last Game (1995)

Watchable, pleasant, wholesome, touching, unique

[9/10 · 20 November 2015]

It's a family film that kids might like. There are a couple of plot turns which are unlikely in real life. That may bother you in some moods; for me, these child-like turns added to the film's dream-like quality. The sound track in the first few minutes, starting with opening credits, is annoying enough to take off a star or two. The scenes are framed pleasantly. The story is easy to follow. The lighting is good. The people are likable.

One character in the film is hard-of-hearing, and the story is about her family life, her father's life, and finding her focus. If the acting or production values seem home-made, that's no reason to enjoy it less. If everything about this movie were given high-end production values, it would please the snobs more (which all of us can be sometimes), but it wouldn't be any better.

The film makes a story from life's little problems. It's not an escapist film the way most entertainment-driven movies are.

Still, it's not going to make You want to escape, either. If you like people, you'll like these people and this family film of redemption and growth.

Affirms life through adequate story-telling.

The War at Home (1996)

A masterpiece in its genre of family drama, for sustained humanity

[10/10 · 14 November 2015]

There's a partial spoiler at the end of this review, in about three lines, after the row of asterisks.

This review might fail to make its point but I liked the movie. This film places some people in the spotlight when they don't know we're watching. How do people really behave at home? We've had so many good shows on life at home! From those, we may reasonably conclude that people behave at home in a way which indicates they're trying to entertain us while they iron, hang up a coat, or sit on a couch. Their emotional life is attuned to gratifying our emotional life. This film may be trying to gratify us emotionally too; how it does so ...is unusual. The characters each have an inner life and a point of view that seems not to have been written by someone else, but to be part of a long term beam of life that character is riding, with inner demons and inner angels. So they make mistakes, show their inexperience, grow, and are still immature in a way that we can relate to. We're only part way home ourselves.

***** ******** *********** ********* ******* ****** ******** ******* Spoiler alert: One reviewer wrote a respectable opinion that the film is mistaken if it is implying that "only vets involved in atrocities had emotional problems" creating ... " a disservice to all who served." So many things might be said in response. I'd rather just cite it, respectfully, and say no more.

Inside the Court of Henry VIII (2015)

There are gaps between this film & the realm of knowledge

[2/10 · 26 October 2015]

It's not hard to find information about the period of Henry VIII and a few bits of it have found their way into this film. Mostly, though, this film is rhetoric with moving pictures. 1) They say Henry VIII's reign began with the nation in a wave of optimism similar to when President Kennedy took over in the U.S.A. in 1960. But in Henry VIII's time, literacy was only 10%. There was no radio or telegraph to carry this euphoria to far-away provinces where most labored by hand to obtain a little slack & a supply for each winter. 2) This film says 10s of thousands were executed by Henry VIII for the Pilgrimage of Grace, yet other sources say 216 were executed. If the film would be more complete and cite its sources on this and other matters, we'd feel better informed. 3) Henry VIII, we're told, had no virtues. One is tempted to go along with the film's theme, and throw tomatoes at the screen when they display their normal-looking actor in king's clothes for us, and continue their windy chorus of detraction: "He was horrible in every way. Nothing good that he did was by intention. It was all in service of his terrible motives. He is a comic book monster." The actor who plays Henry VIII is almost always caught just sitting there, barely moving, or lying on a deathbed with his oozing sores. That's the work of the king! For believing that analysis, we're given the prize of being told the USA wouldn't exist _in its present form_ if not for him. Well, that sounds like an insult to the USA, considering the context of their remark. 4) Cardinal Wolsey, we're told, was ruined by the man he'd tried to serve. We're assured that Wolsey's life was shortened by the terrible stress of betrayal by such a bad Henry. This seems a weak point when we reflect Wolsey's life was as long as the king's, and longer than the life of Pope Leo X, who was born about two years earlier than Wolsey. 5) We're told that Henry VIII considered the Pope to be the enemy of God, because the Pope wouldn't grant him a divorce. That's the motivation that is emphasized for Henry's England claiming to have its own jurisdiction in the faith. "Crazy religious people," the film seems to say. In my humble opinion, this film has too many stylish paragraphs full of repetitious rhetoric, and too little verbiage is devoted to facts & sources of facts.

Constantine's Sword (2007)

Ambitious! could be more anthropological instead of taking sides

[6/10 · 4 June 2013]

It wasn't the message of Jesus which moved masses of humans to fighting. It was the natural history of humans. Each camp has its own view, whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist or other religions. It would be hard to weave this all into a story that's easy to follow, but without being complete (in a summary form) and balanced, we have the appearance of taking sides. Should Christians drop their guard if Muslims do not? Should injustice-- such as anti-Semitism-- be the grounds for bias in the _other direction? Should liberals be mad when a conservative preacher finds his gay side after all? Modern thinkers could be tolerant and understanding of a human being's journey to self-awareness.

The film is probably trying to make the world better and tackle some of the most difficult issues -- human violence and hypocrisy. But once that's resolved, humans are still leaving a huge & increasing ecological footprint on the biosphere. Violence against non-humans is a major problem too! With religion, historical rigor and intelligence, this film's aspirations are higher than other films. So, the design of those higher realms should still be rigorous, to sustain the weight of reason and knowledge.

And so, I'd like the filmmakers to see their calling as being.... to persuade _all sides that what's good in their theology should not impel us to mass destruction. Without the inclusive listing of atrocities by both sides ... indirectly... any story encourages the regimented opponents of Christianity... to attack. Or, if one thinks the balance is really tipped against Christians, one needs to make a full case of that in a chapter with citations for alert scholars.

Some reviewers have already revealed sides of this vast topic area which the author and filmmaker could use, next time they explain things. We're all descendants of epic struggles for dominance. It's a good topic and in this film, it is told with blunt intelligence. It's a very difficult film to make and very high-minded of them to try. This film's bravery, research and sentiment for good.... earn six stars from me... for a movie that I'm not yet satisfied with. This film was rather quiet on the universal question-- that of whether our nature gives rise to religion or whether religious ideas deserve separate consideration.

The Ghosts of Dickens' Past (1998)

rises above its own cliché to achieve beautiful art

[8/10 · 6 January 2013]

Good ghost story with only about one second of special effects. The film earned a cinematography prize and it really shows. I was rolling my eyes a few times, doubting whether it was accurate. By the end, it seems this quirky fictional approach may add more to the body of Dickens memorabilia than another non-fiction telling. Some parts of the film earn about a 6 but over all, the parts add up to more than their sum. The music is really, really nice. The settings, costumes, and characters felt pretty authentic... except for being too clean everywhere. It's even authentic that the film doesn't quite satisfy in the end --- the main storyline just says what it came to say, in an eerie way, and then disappears without much conceited style. It leaves a few questions unanswered. We are almost disappointed in the author Dickens... because, after all, he was merely a human being... but he was having a supernatural experience. I just picked this film up at a thrift store or I'd never have seen it. All three of us liked it.