Everything Nonfiction

Review of Every Little Step

Review of Every Little Step directed by James D. Stern and Adam Del Deo
Rating *****

I added this documentary to my queue based solely on the brief synopsis I read online, which basically said that it was about the auditioning process for a revival of the musical A Chorus Line. I haven't seen the play or the movie version, but I thought it sounded like an interesting premise. Sort of a Dancing With The Stars meets American Idol. The film, however, is about much more than just the auditioning process. It's also about the creative forces behind the original A Chorus Line and the genesis behind its creation.

Turns out that the whole thing started with the title and a simple idea. Michael Bennett, who was one of the co-creators and a dancer himself, decided to tape a group of dancers who agreed to tell their personal stories. He had the title A Chorus Line before the recordings even began. The musical evolved from the transcripts of the recordings.

The documentary inter-cuts the recent auditions with audio clips from the original recordings, interviews with some of the creators past and present, and archival footage from some of the original cast members. The end result is a compelling film that works on many different levels. You don't have to be a dancer or a fan of musicals to get something out of this film. Anyone can relate to the struggles the dancers go through. We all compete on some level whether it be for a job or for business. We've all experienced success and failure.

Of the many auditions that are shown throughout the film, Jason Tam's audition for the part of Paul is worth the price of admission. You won't be able to take your eyes off the screen.

With three thousand people competing for just twenty or so spots, you know that there is going to be some disappointment. But in the end, you root for those who make the cut. They each deserved to be there. Their joy is genuine and you you know what it took to get there.

The DVD had some extra interviews and an audio commentary, which is rare for documentaries. I can't imagine anyone not liking this film.

Review of I Am Trying To Break Your Heart

Review of I Am Trying To Break Your Heart directed by Sam Jones
Rating ***

This is a 2002 documentary about a musical group I had never hear of. The premise is that the director wanted to film the band as they worked on their upcoming album. I've seen similar films like this. Most notably is Metallica's Some Kind Of Monster.As in the Metallica film, the group's dynamics are interrupted and there are plenty of creative differences. In this film, the discord leads to the group being dropped by their label.

After watching this film I can't say I came away as a new fan of Wilco. Their music permeates the 92 minutes of the film, but in all honesty in all that time I did not hear a single tune that had even the slightest hint of a catchy hook or melody. Every song sounded the same, and the lyrics from lead singer and writer Jeff Tweedy were rendered indecipherable by his delivery. Now that I've offended all of you Wilco fans, I can say that the behind the scenes footage of the band trying to finish this album was interesting. While the film didn't delve into the creative process as much as I would have liked, there definitely were some interesting parallels between the music business and the publishing business as it exists today.

The creative differences center around the band's main creative force Jeff Tweedy and musician Jay Bennett. I liked Jay and felt he had a lot more potential than Jeff. Before writing this post I Googled Jay's name. I'll tell you what I discovered in a minute.

When the band finally finishes the album and delivers it to Reprise records, the album is not well received. The executives at the record label think that changes are needed. Many writers have experienced the same kind of response from their publisher or editor. Jeff refuses to make changes. You have to admire him for standing his ground. But a lot of times a final product benefits from varying viewpoints. I am a strong believer in collaboration. As a writer, I take in as much feedback as possible. I don't always agree, but I'm smart enough to listen. From what I've heard from the album they should have made the changes. I will say that the band never got any specific information on what changes the executives thought were necessary. So you can't argue with their artistic choice. In the end, the label released the band from their contract.

In an unusual twist, however, the label let the band keep the rights to the album, even though they funded the recording of the album. That shows you how little they thought of the end product. The remainder of the film covers the eight month search for a new label. The band did do some streaming of the album on their web site and this created interest. I'm sure the controversy and this film helped as well.

The film ends with the group finding a new label and the album going on to critical success. Whether or not the album received financial success I can't say. A visit to Amazon showed over 600 reviews with half being five star and the other half broken fairly evenly between four stars to one star. A number of people agreed with me about the album's merit. More disagreed. So score one for Wilco.

Now about Jay Bennett. A Google search turned up news of his premature death early this year from an overdose of pain killers. A visit to the Wilco web site shows that the band appears to be doing well. I wasn't able to find out much about what jay had been up to since leaving Wilco.

There is plenty to like about this film even if you're not a Wilco fan. If you are a fan, then definitely check this one out.

Review of Blindsight

Review of Blindsight directed by Lucy Walker
Rating ****

When I first read about this documentary, I thought it was about the story of Eric Weihenmayer, who became the first blind person to scale Mt Everest. If you look at the image used to promote the film, you see a lone individual with arms upraised. But just minutes into the film it becomes apparent that this is not Eric's story at all. This is the story of six blind children from Tibet who embark on a journey with Eric to scale a mountain next to Everest.

The whole thing starts with a letter to Eric from Sabriye Tenberken, who runs a school for the blind in Tibet. Sabriye invites Eric to Tibet to speak with her students about his amazing accomplishment. Eric comes up with the idea of selecting six students to embark on a climb to Lhakpa Ri, a peak near Everest.

Each of the six blind students has their own individual guide to help them scale the mountain. They undergo some minimal training before heading out to the Himalayas. Interspersed with the story of the climb expedition are the individual stories of the six children. This is where the film excels. The problems we deal with daily don't come close to the hardships these children have had.

All of the children stand out in their own way. There's Gynshen (I think this is the right name), who's mother diminishes him and talks about what a relief it was to get rid of him (all while he's standing there listening). There's Tashi, who's story is right out of Slumdog Millionaire. He's taken from his family and forced to beg for a couple who beats him when he doesn't produce. He eventually runs away, but he's blind and unable to do much of anything without assistance. His reunion with his family is one of the more emotional scenes in the movie.

The whole idea behind the film, though, is flawed. Eric grew up in the Rockies. He's a trained climber. He's experienced. Just because he was able to climb Mt. Everest doesn't mean that he can take any blind kid off the street and give them a few days of training and expect them to do the same. The mountain that is his goal is over 23,000 feet high. And they are planning to do this climb without oxygen. Had they chosen a more reasonable goal, I think they would have accomplished more.

Despite what happens on the mountain (no spoiler here), there's no doubt that the six children who undertook this challenge have gained much from the experience and continue to benefit from their participation. The filmmakers give updates on all of the children at the end of the film. Gynshen's story was my favorite. he started his own Braille publishing company and has done well enough that he sends money back to his family. Watching his mother talk about her son with pride says everything about this movie and what it's about.

The DVD had some extras worth watching. You can find out more at www.blindsightthemovie.com.

Review of Guerrilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst

Review of Guerrilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst directed by Robert Stone
Rating *****

One of the great things about art is that once it enters the public domain it remains there for eternity, waiting to be discovered anew. The Internet makes everything accessible. This documentary was first released in 2003. I'm not exactly sure how it came to my attention. I think I might have been browsing new DVD releases on the Blockbuster site. How I learned about it isn't important, what is important is that I discovered it. Had this film been released this year I would still have found it just as smart, interesting, and entertaining.

I was seventeen when Patty Hearst was kidnapped. It was a sensational story that I followed like everyone else in the country. But my parents weren't readers and neither was I at the time. So my version of the story came solely from the nightly news. This film gives a much more complete picture of what took place.

The story is told through a combination of interviews, movie clips, and archival footage. Interestingly, some of the main people involved in this story, including Patty Hearst, aren't included in the interviews. More on that later. The film relies heavily on interviews with two men: Russ Little and Mike Bortin. Both were members of the group who pulled off the kidnapping, but neither of them took part or were even aware of the plot. Russ Little was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the killing of a black school administrator. In the film, he claims to have had nothing to do with the killing, and I find him believable. His fate was ultimately tied to the actions of the other members of the SLA or Symbionese Liberation Army. Mike Bortin joined the group after the kidnapping. Having been there at the time and knowing the participants, but without having any fear of self incrimination, both men are able to tell their story in an unbiased manner.

For anyone who isn't familiar with the Patty Hearst story, and that could be a lot people under the age of thirty, Patty was the daughter of William Randolph Hearst, a wealthy media magnate. What makes the story so compelling is that Patty eventually sympathized with her captors and even took place in some criminal activities, including a bank robbery. She went from kidnapped victim to wanted terrorist. When she was eventually captured she was put on trial and eventually sentenced to seven years in prison.

The filmmaker claims, and I believe rightfully so, that the Patty Hearst story was the first time where a news event became a worldwide media event. Thanks in large part to new technology that allowed for live news broadcasts. Today a news story can travel the world in a matter of seconds. Satellite TV, the Internet, blogs, Twitter, all of this can catapult a story into the limelight with great alacrity. Here are just two examples: the ditching of Flight 1549 and balloon boy.

But that isn't the only prescient thing about this film. The whole idea of political terrorism can be seen in the actions of the SLA. The film was released six years ago about an event that took place more than thirty years ago, and it is still relevant today.

The disc has a number of extras including an excellent audio commentary by director Robert Stone. In the commentary, he explains his reasoning for not including interviews with Patty Hearst and some of the other central characters. He makes some good points, but I would have loved to have heard from Patty herself about the film even if it would have been as an extra on the DVD. This film might be six years old, but it was new for me. And if you haven't seen it, add it to your queue right now.

Review of Touching The Void

Review of Touching The Void Directed by Kevin MacDonald
Rating *****

Touching the Voidtells the true story of two climbers, Joe Simpson and Simon Yates, who set out to climb one of the highest mountain peaks in Peru -- the Siula Grande. The documentary is based on the book written by Joe Simpson.

The Siula Grande in the Peruvian Andes is a 21,000 foot mountain that no other climber had conquered, at least not from the west face. The book from which this documentary is based on is an international best seller. But telling the story through film presented a number of difficulties that doomed earlier attempts. Besides the dangerous location, the story involves just two climbers who become separated on the way down from the mountain. How then do you keep the story moving? Even when the two climbers are together dialogue between them would have been difficult. The director, Kevin MacDonald, came up with an ingenious (and I think totally original) idea of having the two climbers tell their story in a conversational manner while depicting the scenes through accurate recreations. The end result is a hybrid nonfiction film/documentary.

The recreation of the climb and of the events that followed were so authentic that I had, at first, thought that I was watching the actual climb and descent. It wasn't until Joe Simpson broke his leg in a fall that I realized that I was watching a recreation.

The main drama in this story begins when Joe Simpson slides down the face of the mountain and ends up breaking his leg. This happens early on in the descent. When his climbing partner, Simon Yates, reaches him, he has a difficult decision to make. Getting an injured climber down from a peak in the conditions that existed was practically impossible. But Simon came up with a plan to lower Joe using two ropes tied together. It was dangerous and difficult. At one point Joe finds himself dangling over a crevice in midair. Simon can't see what has happened to his friend; he can only feel the weight at the end of the line. After contemplating his options, Simon makes the decision to cut the rope. He is sure that he is sending his friend to his death, but Joe survives the fall. Simon climbs down the mountain and joins up with another companion who had remained behind at the base camp.

Joe soon realizes that he can't just stay where he is. His only chance for survival is to find a way out of the crevice and down the mountain. And he has to do this with a broken leg and no food and water. It's a survival story every bit as compelling as the Endurance story.

The recreation of this story is first rate both in the cinematography and in the acting by Brendan Mackey who portrays Joe Simpson and Nicholas Aaron who portrays Simon Yates. I've read climbing stories before, but not being a climber it was hard for me to visualize what I was reading. This film brings the story to life in a way that could not have been more realistic unless you had been there on the mountain.

The DVD has some excellent extras that complete the story. This is a first rate documentary that I highly recommend.

MSNBC Documentary Why Planes Crash

MSNBC Documentary Why Planes Crash: Brace For Impact

Normally this is the place where I review documentary films, but since I took part in this documentary I don't want to appear as a self promoter. Having said that, you should definitely see this documentary. The producer, Caroline Sommers, was asked to do a documentary on the Hudson ditching. She decided instead to do a documentary on the subject of ditchings. Besides the USAir 1549 ditching, the documentary covers the 1956 ditching of a PanAm Clipper, the 1996 ditching of an Ethiopian Boeing 767 off the coast of Africa, and the ditching I wrote about in my book 35 Miles From Shorethe 1970 ditching of ALM 980.

The animations used to recreate the ditchings are first rate, especially the ALM ditching in the Caribbean. You'll also get a chance to hear directly from some of the passengers and crew involved in the various ditchings, including Balsey DeWitt, the former captain of ALM 980.

Since the scope of the film is what happened that led to the various ditchings, it does not go into the various rescue operations that followed the ditchings. I hope this part of the story will be covered in a future documentary. In the interim, you can certainly learn the whole story by reading the book. Okay so I'm a self promoter. If you haven't seen the documentary you can still catch it tonight in repeat showings at 11:00 pm central and 2:00 am central time. If you miss these, I'm sure there will be other opportunities to catch it on MSNBC.

Review of Food Inc.

Review of Food Inc. By Robert Kenner
Rating ****

When I read Michael Pollan's book Omnivore's Dilemma, I knew that a documentary on this subject was sure to follow. No matter how well the author was able to describe what he saw and discovered as he researched his book, I wanted to follow in his footsteps. This film does an excellent job of putting images behind such books as Omnivore's Dilemma, Fast Food Nation, and Skinny BItch.

The film touches on a number of important topics: The industrialization of food, inhumane treatment of animals, overuse of corn, health risks of meat factories, environmental impact of food production, lack of government oversight, obesity, organic food, genetically engineered seeds. There is so much to cover that no one topic gets the thorough examination that it deserves. The filmmakers spend even less time on discussing possible solutions. Note to some enterprising producer: there is enough material here for a four or five part series.

What the film lacks in depth it makes up for in visuals and presentation. From the opening credits you get the sense that a lot of time and effort went into the making of this film. The two main narrators/interviewees are Michael Pollan and Eric Schlosser, author of the book Fast Food Nation and a co-producer of the film. It was their words that inspired the film, so it only makes sense that they be the ones to tell the story.

The film uses a mixture of interviews, archival footage, hidden camera video, and aerial photography to condense a complex topic into an easy to assimilate 93 minute film. But having read the books I would have liked to have seen more. A lot of what was described in the books was missing in the film, especially the inhumane treatment of animals. It's too bad that the filmmakers were unable to interview anyone from the big corporations that run the food factories. I would have loved to hear what they had to say. Unfortunately, not only did they decline to be interviewed, but they blocked the filmmakers efforts at every opportunity. One of the stronger parts of the film concerned the efforts of Monsanto to intimidate and threaten anyone who tried to challenge them on their seed patents.

I was glad to see that the filmmakers decided to interview Joe Salatin, owner of Polyface Farms. Michael Pollan goes into great detail on how Polyface is the ideal example of how a farm should work. But here again time restraints prevented the whole story of Polyface from being told.

This film is sure to be seen by a wide audience, which is good. The more people know about where their food comes from the more likelihood there will be a demand for change. For a more an in depth look at the subject, I recommend reading any or all of the books mentioned in this post.

 

Review of Encounters at the End of the World

Review of Encounters at the End of the World written and directed by Werner Herzog
Rating *** 1/2

This film received an Oscar nomination for best documentary in 2008. I thought it was good, but I felt that there were a number of films that should have been nominated ahead of this one including Dear Zachery and My Kid Could Paint That. Having said that, I can certainly recommend this film.

This film is similar to what you might find on the Discovery Channel or National Geographic. It is perhaps a few notches above the typical documentary found on those channels thanks to some stunning visuals and an imaginative sound track.

Werner Herzog narrates the film, which comes across a little like a home movie. The whole idea behind the film is to show what it's like at the South Pole both above and below the ice and to meet the various individuals who live and work there. Along the way Werner introduces the viewers to a wide range of scientists and researchers including a cell biologist, a vulcanologist, an iceberg expert, a penguin expert, and a number of other colorful characters.

There is no story arc. The film simply jumps from one researcher to the next with nothing connecting them except the harsh climate and desolate environment. Still Werner manages to educate and entertain with the cool underwater/under the ice video along with the choir-like voices that accompany much of the footage. There is a certain otherworldly quality to the film. This is especially true during the seal segment where the recorded sounds from the seals communicating with each other sounds like something out of a Star Track movie.

The disc has an audio commentary and some extras including expanded interviews and some additional underwater footage set to its own new age soundtrack.

Review of Cocaine Cowboys

Review of Cocaine Cowboys directed by Billy Corben
Rating ****

This documentary is the first of two documentaries dealing with the early days of the cocaine trade. I actually saw the Cocaine Cowboys II documentary first. That film led me to this one. The two films work together because they cover different time periods. The second film is a natural extension of the first and includes some of the same characters.

The first part of the film revolves around two entrepreneurs who see the cocaine and drug trade as a quick way to make a lot of money. Jon Roberts is the middleman between the supplier and the wholesaler. Mickey Monday handles the transportation side of the equation. Both men come across as reasonable and likable despite their lack of accountability for the many lives destroyed by the drugs they supplied. Neither of them acknowledges the moral implications of their deeds. They were in it for the  money, and they both did extremely well.

Things took a turn for the worst when the various drug cartels started fighting amongst themselves and violence erupted in Miami, Florida where most of the cocaine trade in the U.S. originated.This is the point where the hired assassin Rivi is introduced. He too comes across as likable, if you can get past the fact that he is responsible for over thirty-plus deaths, including a child. He talks about killing people like you and I might talk about a round of golf.

The violence that Miami suffered at the hands of these "Cocaine Cowboys" is not that dissimilar to the violence going on in Mexico right now. That gives the film relevance even though this documentary was released three years ago.

Much of the violence that occurred in Miami in the late seventies and early eighties was directly tied to one individual - Griselda Blanco. Her story is told more fully in Cocaine Cowboys II. She is known as the godmother of cocaine. She is a ruthless murderer who due to an unfortunate set of circumstances served only a few years in prison and today remains a free woman.

Jon Roberts and Mickey Monday both spent time in prison. One could argue that they didn't spend enough time. Many of the users of the drugs they supplied are still in prison. The filmmakers never asked, but I'm guessing that both would make the same decisions if given the same set of circumstances. As for Rivi, he will spend the remainder of his days behind bars.

The DVD has an audio commentary. I recommend putting both of these films in your Que. Watch them on separate nights.

Review of Man on Wire

Review of Man on Wire directed by James Marsh
Rating ****

Man on Wiretells the story of Philippe Petit and his successful wire-walking attempt across the two World Trade Center towers on August 7, 1974. The film uses a combination of archival footage and photos, recreations, and interviews with Philippe and his co-conspirators. I say co-conspirators because the crossing required some subterfuge among a number of individuals.

The filmmakers use a framing device where they begin with the men entering the World Trade center under assumed identities. They then leave the men hiding under tarps to avoid detection by guards while they fill in the back story. The technique would be great if this were a narrative treatment, but I found it a bit confusing. I kept thinking that they were just getting their equipment in place for a later attempt.

The feat itself is worthy of admiration. This wasn't a spur of the moment decision. It was an obsession that had begun before the towers were even built. The story of how they pulled it off is a compelling one. It would have been great had they documented the crossing with more live video, but the still images and recreations help to fill in the missing footage.

The film touches on Philippe's background. He was a street performer in France where he entertained as a mime, juggler, and wire walker. He had a single-minded focus on attempting the crossing between the two towers. If there was something missing from the film, it was an explanation of how he managed to fund himself before and after the event. Other than a brief period of fame immediately after the event, I don't see how he benefited. His co-conspirators certainly didn't benefit. One was deported.

This documentary is up for an Academy award in the best documentary category. It is considered a front runner. I can't comment on that since I have not seen the other entries, which is too bad because I would have loved to have seen all five films. My favorite documentary from last year remains Dear Zachary.

Review of American Teen

Review of American Teen directed by Nanette Burstein
Rating *****

This is a great documentary. Just about everyone can find something or someone who they can identify with. I haven't been to high school in a few years, okay a few decades, but some things never change. And what's true in high school is also true out in the real world. The same personality traits developed in high school can be found in any business environment.

An early concern I had going into the film was that it was going to have a Big Brother-like reality show feel. After all, how can anyone act natural knowing that your every move is being monitored by a camera and sound crew? But this film is far above any reality show. It really is a voyeuristic experience. The kids in the film seem to be oblivious to the camera.

If there are any lessons to be learned from this film, it's that people can change. I know from my own experience that things changed for me once I left high school. Going to college gave me a fresh start.

While the kids were the focus of the film, there were other stories to follow. The story of Erica and how her innocent attempt to get attention by sending a topless photo of herself to her boyfriend resulted in cruel attacks by her fellow students. Her photo had spread throughout the school at lightening speed thanks to the Internet and the easily transferable jpg file. I felt sorry for her because she was a beautiful girl who had to endure a lot of humiliation. Then there were the stories of the less than supportive parents. Like Colin's dad whose pressure on his son to get a basketball scholarship almost backfired.

Of all the seven kids that were followed during their final year of high school, I most identified with Hannah. She is a creative type like me and an independent sole. I just know that she is going to accomplish her goals. When she set off for San Francisco with only a dream and not much more, I cried along with her.

Life is not always fair. All of the kids in the film experience failure of one sort or another and they all manage to rebound. You just know that there will be a follow-up film ten years down the road to see how everyone is doing.

The DVD had a few extras but was lacking an audio commentary, which I would have liked to have heard. You can watch some trailers at www.americanteenthemovie.com.

Review of Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

Review of Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson written and directed by Alex Gibney
Rating *** 1/2

I have not read any of Hunter Thompson's work. He was before my time. But this film gives a very rounded look at a unique individual with a unique voice. The film covers Hunter Thompson from the early sixties through his death by suicide in the mid seventies.

The film interweaves footage of Hunter along with interviews and some bazaar recreations. Few writers have as much video coverage as Hunter did. Hunter Thompson was very much the voice of the sixties as was Bob Dylan and other sixties radicals. His main flaw was an addiction to alcohol and drugs and, according to those close to him, depression.

Johnny Depp narrates part of the film by reading Hunter Thompson's own words. The overall effect of the various pieces makes for a smooth telling of this somewhat tragic story. Since part of Hunter's career involved covering political campaigns for Rolling Stone magazine, there are guest appearances by several prominent politicians including George McGovern, Gary Hart, and Jimmy Carter. The piece with Jimmy Carter was my favorite. Hunter had gone to a speech of Jimmy Carter's with no intention of writing anything let alone paying attention. But when Jimmy Carter started talking about the inequities of the Justice system, Hunter ran for his tape recorder. He became a supporter of Jimmy Carter.

The CD had some extras including an audio commentary

Review of Where in the World id Osama Bin laden?

Review of Where in the World is Osama Bin laden written and directed by Morgan Spurlock
Rating ***

This latest documentary by Morgan Spurlock uses the humor in the premise of searching for Osama Bin Laden as a way to examine different cultures in the Middle East and the anti U.S. fervor that exists in the region. The end result is an entertaining and enlightening look at the Middle East as seen from a different perspective than what can be seen on the nightly news.

The idea behind the premise of searching for Osama Bin Laden is that Morgan and his wife are expecting their first child. Morgan doesn't want his child to grow up under the threat of terrorism, so he sets off to try to understand where this threat emanates from. Using a video game metaphor as a device to help frame the film, Morgan visits the following mid-east countries: Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Israel, and Palestine.

While Morgan is off talking with the locals at each stop, the film provides updates on his wife back home. If there is one thing that can be learned from this film it is that the anti American sentiment is universal throughout the region. At the same time, it is obvious that this negative view is directed almost entirely at the U.S. Government and its policies and not against the American people. The majority of the people that Morgan encounters on his visits are cordial and hospitable, with one exception. Morgan's visit to Israel was met with hostility. Not only couldn't he find anyone willing to talk to him, he eventually was forced to leave the area by an angry mob who had no clue who he was or why he was there. This scene was contrasted with an earlier visit to Palestine where he had no problem finding people willing to talk. The tension between the two neighbors was evident. At one point Morgan visits a school that was damaged by a rocket attack. He sits among the rubble pondering what it would be like to have his own child have to grow up under the same circumstances. It was scenes like this that elevated the film, especially in light of recent developments in Israel.

I have no desire to force my feelings and ideology on another person or culture, but I simply don't understand the reason behind treating women like second class citizens. Whether it's Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, no society will ever prosper that doesn't give equal opportunities to all of its citizens. I don't care how much money the Saudis have. They are as backward a nation as any in the region.

The film ends with Morgan returning in time for the birth of his son. He didn't find Osama Bin Laden, but he did make some new friends. The DVD had very few extras and no audio commentary.

Review of Standard Operating Procedure

Review of Standard Operating Procedure by Errol Morris
Rating *****

The theme od this film can be summed up with a quote from one of the interviewees. The quote, paraphrased here, goes: "A picture shows only what was happening in a fraction of a second. It doesn't show what was happening before the picture was taken; it doesn't show what was happening after the picture was taken; and it doesn't show what was happening outside the frame." Yet it was pictures that changed the lives of several soldiers who became scapegoats for what, as the title suggests, was standard operating procedure.

The story of what happened in Iraq at the Abu Ghraib prison has been told before. I have reviewed two documentaries on the subject on this blog: Ghosts of Abu Ghraib and Taxi to the Dark Side. I gave both films five star ratings. Taxi to the Dark Side won last year's Oscar for best documentary. So I wasn't sure how I was going to react to yet another film on the same subject. As good as the other two films were, this film was even better.

The main difference between this film and the two previous films is that we get to hear from the actual participants in great detail and with hindsight afforded by time. Since all three films cover the same topic, it is no surprise that we see many of the same people. The focus in this film, however, is squarely on the pictures that started the controversy, the people who took the pictures, and the soldiers who were ultimately punished.

Everything about this film stands out. If all you had were the interviews with the participants along with the photos they took, you would have a compelling story. But Errol Morris elevates this documentary with visually creative reenactments and a subtle soundtrack that sets the mood. His use of ghost-like images is especially effective.

Another device used in the film to great effect is the use of letters written by Sabrina Harman to her partner back in the states. Errol has Sabrina reading excerpts of the letters while various images tied to the letters are intercut. The letters are important because they describe what was happening at Abu Ghraib before the controversy hit. They cover everything from when they first got to Iraq to the investigation that followed.

All of the interviews are candid and insightful. You can't help but feel for the soldiers who were basically following orders. Did they go overboard? Yes. Should they have been punished to the extent that they were? Absolutely not. They are guilty of poor judgment. The sad part about this story is that the real people behind the abuse have gone unpunished. The interrogators who tortured prisoners, some who died as a result, have gotten off Scott free. Fortunately, films like this one document the truth and the real perpetrators can't escape history. General Sanchez will never be able to deny his culpability. Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and President Bush each share blame as well as the officers and interrogators at Abu Ghraib. General Karpinski is much less culpable than I at first thought, but this happened under her watch. Had she visited the prison unannounced at night when the abuse took place, then none of this would have happened.

While I was impressed with everyone who agreed to be interviewed for this film, I was especially impressed with Tim Dugan, Sabrina Harman, and Lynndie England. TIm Dugan gave the perspective of Abu Ghraib from someone not in the military. Sabrina Harman's personal story highlighted the wrongfullness of the punishement they recieved and could have received. And Lynndie England, who became pregnant while in Iraq, put it all into perspective by pointing out that had she not gone to Iraq she wouldn't have her son.

The DVD has several extended scenes as well as an audio commentary by the director. If you really want to see documentaries at their best, then watch all three mentioned in this post. They're all excellent.

Review of Fuel

Review of Fuel written and directed by Josh Tickell
Rating *****

I've now had the opportunity to see four films at the St. Louis International Film Festival. Three of them were documentaries, including this one by Josh Tickell. While it doesn't tell a story like the compelling one told in Dear Zachary, it succeeds on a different level by its scope and message.

Josh Tickell spent eleven years bringing this film to fruition, and it is evident in the final product. It's as polished and provoking as any documentary I have seen. The film is an overview of several different types of alternative fuel sources and renewable energy, but it is primarily about biodiesel - a subject I have to admit I was totally unfamiliar with prior to seeing the film. Josh is convinced that biodiesel is one of the better replacements for gasoline. It's cheaper to produce, it's better for the environment, it gets better gas mileage, and it is possible to produce it without harming the environment or cutting into the food supply.

How is this possible? Josh begins the film by explaining how algae, one of the first living organisms to appear on earth, eventually became oil over millions of years. It is now possible to convert algae into biodiesel fuel in as little as three days. Any diesel engine can run on biodiesel without modification. It doesn't require any changes to the existing infrastructure. And it can be produced on a large scale fairly easily. Josh is so committed to spreading the word about biodiesel that he not only wrote several books on the subject, but he went to film school for the sole purpose of making this film. Now that's determination.

The film itself is engaging, informative, and visually stunning. Josh narrates the film. He also enlists the help of numerous celebrities to help tell the story. He uses animation to help fill in the blanks. The version of the film I saw was recently updated to include new information and to address certain issues that have arisen in just the few months since the film was released. I didn't get a chance to stick around after the film for the Q & A (I had an early morning departure) but for a film that took eleven years to make it was very topical. I'm not sure if the stuff about the auto industry was there before or added recently, either way the timing is perfect for Josh's message.

I'm sure you'll hear more about this film. If you get a chance to see it, do so. You won't be disappointed.

You can find out more by visiting Josh's web site. Click here.

Review of Dear Zachary

Review of Dear Zachary: A letter to a son about his father written and directed by Ken Kuenne
Rating *****

It's not often that I get to write about a film before most people have had a chance to see it. In this case, I had a chance to view the film at the St. Louis International Film Festival. It's only been out a few weeks. So you get to hear it here first: This is a must see film that should make it as an Oscar contender as best documentary.

Someone once said that a good story is one that makes you laugh and makes you cry. This film does that and moves you emotionally long after the film has ended. It's an extraordinary film.

Ken Kuenne, the writer/director, was childhood friends with Andrew Bagby. Ken states in the film that he was making movies almost from the time he was old enough to operate a camera. Andrew, and sometimes Andrew's parents, played bit parts in Ken's early movies. So when Andrew was found murdered in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, Ken decided to put together a short movie to give to Andrew's parents, David and Kate Bagby, to remember their son. This short personal film changed directions when Ken later learned that the woman accused of Andrew's murder was pregnant with Andrew's baby. At this point the film took on a different purpose. It became a film that little Zachary could watch, when he was old enough, to learn about his father. Things changed, however, in unexpected ways that no one could have anticipated. And what started out as a personal film became a film that had an important message and one that ultimately might result in laws being changed.

The police were quick to identify the person most likely responsible for Andrew's death. She was a former ex-girlfriend. Andrew and Shirly Turner worked together at a hospital in Newfoundland where they met. But as the police were closing in on Shirly, she fled the country and returned to Newfoundland. As she awaited extradition, the Canadian justice system inexplicably released Shirly on bail. This forced David and Kate Bagby to relocate to Newfoundland in order to fight for visitation rights with their new grandson Zachary. If this sounds a little bizarre, it gets much worse.

As the legal system drags on, Shirly is returned to prison. But in order for David and Kate Bagby to gain temporary custody, they are forced to grant visitation rights to Shirly, the woman responsible for the death of their child. This awkward relationship continues as Shirly is once again released on bail.

How this all unfolds and the unexpected turns the story takes is as compelling as anything you've seen. Ken Kuenne is a talented filmmaker and he expertly weaves together the tale with interviews, rapid fire editing, his own archival footage, and a feature film-like score that Ken composed himself. By the end of the documentary you feel as though you have a personal relationship with all of the key people in the film, especially Andrew who reminded me of Jack Black.

Andrew's father, David Bagby, wrote a book about the murder called Dance with the Devil: A Memoir of Murder and Loss. There is also a web site dedicated to the film at www.dearzachary.com. Here you will find out much more about the film as well as information pertaining to a December 7 showing of the film on MSNBC. You can also learn more at www.andrewbagly.com.

Review of After Innoncence

Review of After Innocence written by Marc Simon and Jessica Sanders. Directed by Jessica Sanders.
Rating *** 1/2

Anyone who has read this blog knows that I am a critic of the justice system and capital punishment. I am especially drawn to stories of the wrongfullyy accused. This film looks at seven cases of wrongful convictions and what happens to the men after they are freed and returned to society.

Jessica Sanders, the writer and director, was fortunate to come up with the idea for this film around the same time as the ten year anniversary of the Innocence Project. The Innocence Project is the organization started by lawyers Barry Scheck and Peter Neufield to free innocent people from prison through the use of DNA evidence.

It was at this event that Jessica met the men who would later be profiled in the film. In addition to telling the stories of the freed men, Jessica smartly frames the film around the efforts of the Innocent Project to free Wilton Dedge, who was wrongfully convicted of rape. She could not have picked a better case to profile. Wilton was convicted primarily on the victim's identification and hair evidence found at the scene. When the Innocence Project lawyers proved through DNA testing that the hair evidence did not belong to Wilton Dedge, the prosecutor refused to release Wilton and instead delayed a hearing on the case for three years.

The only thing worst than losing your freedom is to lose your freedom after having been wrongfully convicted. In the case of Wilton Dedge, he spent over 22 years in prison. When the prosecutor in the case is interviewed, he proudly displays a police composite picture made by the victim to that of a picture of Wilton Dedge as if to say here's all the proof you need. Forget the fact that he didn't fit the physical description of the attacker given to the police by the victim. Forget the fact that he had alibi witnesses. The prosecutor had his picture. His attempt to keep Wilton Dedge in prison despite evidence of his innocencee is truly pitiful.

As bad as it is for innocent men and women to be wrongfully convicted, what happens afterwords is often even more tragic. For one, the people who made the mistakes that led to the wrongful convictions rarely admit to their errors. In fact, they go out of their way to suppress evidence, delay hearings, and whatever else it takes to keep the truth from getting out. Even when the truth is presented, they steadfastly hang on to their belief that the men are guilty.

To make matters worst, many states have no compensation laws for those wrongfully convicted. Can you imagine spending decades in prison for a crime you did not commit, and then upon the conviction being overturned you are not even offered as much as an apology? How is that possible? Sorry, we made a mistake. Good luck with everything. Then when these men take their cases to court to fight for compensation, the compensation laws that are passed are not retroactive.

Not receiving compensation is bad enough, but it doesn't end there. Many of these states don't offer these men any help once they're released. No help with employment, housing, training, therapy, health care. The filmmakers point out that paroled offenders are treated better. The states often refuse to expunge the records. In one case in the film the state would only expunge the record for a $6,000 fee. Then, as an added slap in the face, the courts responsible for the wrongful convictions refuse to enter the new DNA evidence into the FBI data base. Why? Because they might have a match, which would be even more irrefutable evidence that they made a mistake. So they'll let a guilty man go free just to cover their own buts.

This film was originally released in 2005 as a Showtime special. I had to wait three months for Blockbuster to get me the film, which means they only have few copies on hand. Too bad, because this film needs to be seen by more people. The DVD had some nice extras including updates on the men in the film.

Review of The Rape of Europa

Review of The Rape of Europa written and directed by Nicole Newham, Richard Berge, Bonnie Cohen
Rating *** 1/2

This documentary is based on a book by the same name by author Lynn Nicholas. The film and book tell the story of how the Germans, and later the Russians, stole precious artwork, sculptures, and other artifacts throughout Europe for their own personal use. It's a fascinating story.

I've heard bits and pieces of this story over the years. But this film examines it in detail using a wealth of archival footage and interviews.

One of the claims by the filmmakers, and I assume the author of the book, is that at least some of the military advances during the war were motivated by the desire of Hitler and others to steal artwork. Besides Hitler, the other person who stole art for his own benefit was the head of the German air force. This guy, whose name I can not spell, probably aided in the German's demise. While his air force was involved in critical battles, he was out viewing art galleries in France and then taking what he wanted for his private collection. Even Hitler, who was an artist himself, was obsessed with creating the largest art gallery in the world. Forget the fact that the art was stolen and that much of it came from people who were later killed in concentration camps.

Despite the interesting story, the film drags some. I think it has to do with the dry delivery of the narrator Joan Allen. She comes across as an actor reading a script instead of someone telling a story. I also think that the most dramatic part of the story, the search and discovery of the missing art, was glossed over. To me, that is the part of the story that was the most compelling. But it is presented here as an afterthought.

I didn't know anything about the "monument" soldiers whose main job was to find and identify important artwork, galleries, and monuments before and after a bombing and invasion. Our military leaders apparently didn't have the same concern, considering how they allowed the looting of Iraq's museum in the immediate days after the invasion.

Lastly, it's a shame that the Russians have decided to not return much of their stolen artwork to the rightful owners. They need to do the right thing. It might go a long way to repairing their tarnished image.

Review of Bigger, Stronger, Faster

Review of Bigger, Stronger, Faster directed by Christopher Bell
Rating ****

This film is a well balanced look at steroid use. The writers frame the film around writer/director Chris Bell's own family. Two of his brothers use steroids. One who hopes to make it in professional wrestling and the other who competes in weight lifting competitions. The film looks at all sides of the issue from those who use steroids as a performance enhancement to those who use it for medical benefits.

I was surprised to learn how much my perception of steroid use has been shaped by overblown media coverage. I've always thought that steroids were a major health risk that could also lead to depression and mood swings such as "'roid rage." But when the filmmakers put up a series of statistics comparing steroid use with other societal problems such as alcohol and tobacco, steroids don't compare.

Still, there are problems associated with steroid use. There are side effects as with any drug. They are illegal without a prescription. And they do give an unfair advantage in competitions with athletes who do not use steroids.

The film uses a mixture of interviews, graphics, animation, and archival footage to weave an interesting story. The archival footage is especially put to good use. There are clips from movies by Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger, both admitted steroid users. There are clips and interviews with professional athletes like Ben Johnson and Carl Lewis. The film covers the use of steroids in professional sports as well as the Olympics. But they also compare steroid use with other forms of performance enhancement. They use Tiger woods as an example. Tiger had laser eye surgery that improved his eyesight to 20/15. Does that give him an unfair advantage? The filmmakers interview professional musicians who use beta blockers to help control anxiety before a performance. They talk to accused steroid user Floyd Landis who denies using steroids but admits to sleeping in an altitude chamber, which changes his blood chemistry giving him better oxygen control. Is that cheating or is it just someone trying anything they can to improve their performance? The film also points out that taking steroids alone will not make someone a super athlete. It still takes training and skill to succeed.

One of the more interesting segments in the film was when Chris decided to go into the supplement business. He hired a couple of illegal immigrants off the street and, using off the shelf ingredients, made his own performance enhancement supplement. The pills he made cost him about $1.60 a bottle to make and could be sold for as much as $60 a bottle. And because they were supplements they were not subject to testing by the FDA. That's a whole other subject. To promote his new supplement, he hired models to pose for pictures that would be put on the label. The male model he hired happened to be a model used for other supplements. But when interviewed he admitted that his physic was mostly the result of steroid use and not the supplements he was touting.

The bottom line is that steroids should definitely be banned from professional sports. But the casual user should not be made to feel like a criminal any more than someone who has a few drinks after work. Everyone has their vices.

The DVD has a behind the scenes short but no audio commentary.

Review of Nanking

Review of Nanking directed by Bill Guttentag and Dan Sturman
Rating **** 1/2

Nanking is the true story of what happened in 1937 when the Japanese invaded China. If anyone ever questioned the need for a strong military, they only need to watch this film.

This is a story about what happens when a group of people, in this case unsupervised Japanese soldiers, are given absolute power over a less fortunate group of people. The end result is mass murder, rape, and uncontrolled looting. You would have thought that this kind of thing was relegated to the seventeenth century and earlier. But we've seen it time and again in places like Rwanda, Darfur, and Yugoslavia. Though I'm not sure that even those examples can compare to what happened in Nanking, mostly because of the swiftness with which it happened. In a time span of just two weeks the Japanese murdered an estimated 250,000 people and committed an estimated 20,000 rapes.

Nanking was the capital city of China in 1937. The city was first subjected to weeks of relentless bombings. Those who had the resources fled to the countryside. Those left behind would face a living hell. As the Japanese ground soldiers advanced on the city with little or no resistance, they murdered indiscriminately. After reaching Nanking they settled in and really got serious with the killings and rapes.

The story is told from various viewpoints including some of the actual Japanese soldiers who participated in the atrocities. More on that later. The primary story involves a group of westerners who tried to create a safety zone for refugees. Their efforts were only partially successful. While they saved countless lives, the Japanese soldiers showed little respect for the safety zone and repeatedly entered the zone to snatch suspected Chinese soldiers. Since they couldn't determine who were soldiers and who wasn't, they basically gathered up everyone who was male and the right age. They them summarily executed them.

Much of the story is told by actors who read letters written by people who were there. I've never seen this done before, but it works exceptionally well. A mix of archival footage, images, interviews, and reenactments balance out the rest of the film.

There is no excuse that the Japanese can give to explain what happened in Nanking. The sad part about it is when the filmmakers interviewed some of the soldiers who participated in the killings and rapes, they didn't seem the least bit bothered by what they had done. They displayed the same lack of compassion and morals that led to the killings. If it's any consolation, none of them looked like they were living a life of luxury.

The Japanese people today bare no responsibility for what happened anymore than the German people today bare responsibility for what the Nazis did in the concentration camps. But we all need to watch films like this in order to not let it happen again.

This was an HBO film. The DVD had no extras.

Review of Taxi to the Dark Side

Review of Taxi to the Dark Side directed by Alex Gibney
Rating *****

This film won the Oscar for best documentary. It's another great film about the abuses of power in the Bush presidency. This film's merit comes mostly from the message of the story. In summary, that message is that any nation that undertakes torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners undermines the integrity of that nation and puts its people and military under the threat of retaliation.

While the theme of the movie is about our government's use of torture as a matter of policy, the storyline that is used to illustrate this policy concerns an Afghan taxi driver by the name of Dilawar. Dilawar was turned over to the U.S military by an Afghan warlord who claimed that Dilawar and three of his passengers were responsible for a rocket attack against a U.S. military base. Three days later, after beatings and other mistreatment by interrogators, he died. His death was ruled a homicide. The worst part about it is that he was innocent. The warlord who turned him in was the person responsible for the rocket attacks.

This film touches on many of the same themes as other books and films that I have covered on this blog: No End in Sight, Frontline's Bush's War, Ghosts of Abu Ghraib, and Enemy Combatant by Moazzam Begg, who appears in this film. They all tell a similar story.

Here are a few facts that the film brings out: There have been over a hundred deaths of prisoners while in the custody of U.S. forces. Ninety-three per cent of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay Cuba were handed over to the U.S. forces by Afghan and Pakistan citizens (for a reward) and not captured by the U.S. military. Those people being held in Guantanamo are being held without charge, without a timetable for their case to be reviewed, without the ability to see the evidence against them, and for the most part without any opportunity to put up a meaningful defense. Fortunately, there are some reasonable lawyers who have volunteered their time to help them despite the President's attempts to circumvent the law. Sure, there are a few bad people being held at Guantanamo. But the evidence points to there being more innocent people being held than guilty people. Just look at how many people have been brought to trial in the past seven years. The answer: one (I'll have more on that case in a later review.)

Intelligence derived through torture has no merit. One of the reasons given to justify the war in Iraq was information derived through torture that Saddam's forces received training in chemical and biological weapons. That information was later proved to be false.

The DVD has a couple of interviews with the director as well as an insightful audio commentary.

Review of Joe Louis: American Hero...Betrayed

Review of Joe Louis: American Hero...Betrayed written by Ouisie Shapiro
Rating ****

This is an HBO film about heavyweight champion Joe Louis. This film is similar in content to the Ken Burn's film Unforgivable Blackness, which was about the first black heavyweight boxing champion - Jack Johnson. Joe Louis's story takes place nineteen years later.

Both men overcame poverty and racial prejudices to reach the pinnacle of their sport. Both men achieved great fame and wealth. And both men were ultimately destroyed by those who could not see past their skin color. For Jack Johnson, his downfall began after he married a white woman. For Joe Louis, his troubles grew along with his earnings. At his peak, Jou Louis was earning $400,000 a year at a time when the average wage earner made only a couple thousand dollars a year. Some poor financial advice led him into trouble with the IRS. The penalties and interest grew to such an amount that he was unable to overcome it, despite every effort to remedy the situation. A good tax lawyer probably could have had the whole thing settled for a few thousand dollars. In this case, however, Joe Louis was driven to do anything he could to earn money to pay his debts including fighting past his prime and selling his name to anyone who would offer to pay him.

The film uses a mix of archival footage of Joe Louis along with interviews with various people including his son. This is a story that seems almost universal to anyone who has ever held a heavyweight title. Mohammad Ali, who makes a brief appearance in this film, has a similar tale. I've heard recently that Joe Frasier has even talked about fighting again.

Ken Burns' film gets the edge here mainly because it is longer and able to go a little more in depth.

Review of War Dance

Review of War/Dance directed by Sean and Andrea Fine
Rating *** 1/2

This is the story of a group of African refugees and their attempt to compete in a national music and dance competition. At least that is the thread that weaves through the film. A more accurate description is that this is a film about the struggles of Africans both young and old in war-torn northern Uganda. The focus of the film is on three young refugees: Dominic, Rose, and Nancy.

Anyone who pays even a little attention to the world around them knows of the suffering going on in places like Somalia, Uganda, Darfur, and Rwanda. I learned more after reading the book A Long Way Gone, a memoir by Ishmael Beah. Films like Hotel Rwanda and Darfur Now have also brought attention to the plight of the hundreds of thousands of people caught between the rebel fighters and the various military factions. This film takes it to a more personal level.

The structure of the film is to alternate between the preparations for the competition and the individual stories of Dominic, Rose, and Nancy. All three have suffered the loss of one or both of their parents at the hands of rebels. They are forced to live in a government camp. The individual stories are heart wrenching. The filmmakers wisely use the dance competition as a way to bring hope and balance to a film that easily could have been unbearable to watch.

I can't say that there is one story that is more heartbreaking than the others. They are equally heartbreaking. But the hardest part of the film for me personally was watching Nancy grieve for her father at his makeshift grave site.

After reading Ishmael Beah's book, I knew that it was possible for someone who has experienced unspeakable horrors and depravity to rise above it and accomplish great things. The people in this film are just as capable of great accomplishments if given the tools and the opportunity. Hopefully, if enough people see films like this they will find it in themselves to help those less fortunate.

The DVD had a few extras such as extended scenes, but no audio commentary.

Review of In The Shadow of the Moon

Review of In The Shadow of the Moon directed by David Sington
Rating *** 1/2

This is the story of the Apollo moon landings as told by the men who actually flew to the moon and back. I owe my current career to the Apollo space program. I grew up during the nascent stages of the space program. Like everyone else in the world, I was glued to my television when Neil Armstrong landed on the moon. But it was the flight of Apollo 13 that really convinced me that I wanted to be an astronaut. I can still remember standing in my backyard and looking up at the moon, knowing that there were three men in a tiny space capsule who might not make it back. I didn't become an astronaut, but like all of the early astronauts I did become a pilot.

This film doesn't cover the Apollo space program in detail as earlier films like the HBO mini series did. As a result, a lot of history is condensed, compressed, or just plain jumped over. Noticeably missing are interviews with some of the flight controllers such as Gene Kranz.

The main focus of the film is the events leading up to the Apollo 11 space flight. Subsequent flights are talked about out of sequence. The astronauts from the other flights are there mainly to reflect on the historical Apollo 11 flight and to relate their personal experiences. Unfortunately, Neil Armstrong is missing from the film. For reasons only he can explain, he has decided to refrain from talking about his experiences as the first man to step foot on an other world.

The filmmakers made the decision to let the astronauts themselves tell the story. This works for the most part, but because of the condensed time it becomes necessary to provide explanatory information between various interviews. To accomplish this, the filmmakers use text overlays in place of narration. I would have preferred narration. I could barely read the small text and half the time it was off the screen before I could finish.

The film makes good use of archive film of the astronauts and early flights, often splitting the screen and showing the then and now side by side.

The DVD has an audio commentary, which has some interesting background behind the making of the film. Anyone too young to have actually witnessed the moon landings should watch this film. Those of us who were lucky enough to see them, we'll also benefit from hearing from the men who were there.

Review of Cocaine Cowboy II

Review of Cocaine Cowboy II directed by Billy Corben
Rating *** 1/2

I've always been interested in stories about wrongful convictions and unjust sentences. This story shows the flip side of that equation with two people that should be spending their days in prison but instead roam free. In both cases the causes can be traced back to inept prosecutors and police and an imperfect justice system.

I have not seen the the first Cocaine Cowboys (it's in my que), so I can't compare this film to that one. But I definitely don't feel as though it was a disadvantage to see them out of order. This film stands on its own.

This is the story of Charles Cosby and Griselda Blanco who in the early nineties controlled a large part of the US cocaine trade. It's also a story about how human desires motivates our actions whether it be as a drug addict or the simple desire for love and affection (and sex).

Charles Cosby is a low level drug dealer who aspires to greater things. He very easily could have accomplished great things as a law abiding citizen had he chose that route. Instead, the quick and easy profits of drug money steered him towards a life of crime. His desire to do more and make more led him to Griselda Blanco, who was perhaps the head of the largest Cocaine business in history. You've probably heard of Pablo Escobar. Well Griselda was his mentor.

While Griselda is an unlikable character directly responsible for many deaths and damaged lives, Charles is a gregarious character whose only goal is the pursuit of money. He becomes fascinated with the story of Griselda and her accomplishments as the Godmother of cocaine. He writes to her in prison. After meeting Griselda and forming a romantic relationship with her, he takes the express elevator to the top of the cocaine trade. He becomes her number one contact on the outside, trumping even her own sons. Together they amass millions of dollars in drug money.

The filmmakers tell the story in a very unique style using a combination of interviews, images, and what they call animatics. The main method is to simply have Charles tell his story directly to the camera. While there is no narration and the story is told by the actual people involved, the director admits that he did many retakes of shots and gave direction just as you would in a feature film. Some might claim that that takes away from this as being a true documentary, but the effect is a seamless telling of the story. The animatics are basically two dimensional graphics that are cut and filmed in three dimensions. The animatics are used to dramatize scenes of action or violence and in one case sex. In the audio commentary the director states that they were going after a comic book hero or graphic novel look, and that's exactly the impression I had.

The actual story of Charles' rapid rise is an interesting one and it's told in a compelling way. But the fact that he has never been to prison and that Griselda, who is personally responsible for hundreds of murders, is now free because of a sex scandal in the prosecutors office leaves you with the impression that justice has not been served.

The film never explains to my satisfaction how Griselda ended up in prison and what her sentence was. They do talk about a cocaine shipment that came in from Columbia on a multi masted sail ship during the bicentennial celebration and how that led to her arrest. But there aren't enough details to piece it together. The other thing missing from the film is having Charles confronting the dark side of what he did and the damaged lives and families that resulted from his personal enrichment. It's covered in the audio commentary and in the extras, but they could have used more of that in the film. Instead the filmmakers portray Charles as a redemptive individual who now lives a peaceful, crime free existence with his family. The fact that there are thousands of individuals rotting away in prisons over what amounts to minor drug infractions while these two major players go free speaks to just how screwed up our justice system really is.

The DVD has some extras including an audio commentary and a behind the scenes making of short. After watching this movie I added the first Cocaine Cowboys to my cue. Unfortunately, an earlier film about a true life murder called Raw Deal isn't available at Blockbuster. But I'll be watching for more films from Billy Corben.

Review of Surfwise: The Amazing True Odyssey of the Paskowitz Family

Review of Surfwise: The Amazing True Odyssey of the Paskowitz Family directed by Doug Pray
Rating ****

This is an interesting look at a family that lived off the grid (way off). Today when you say that someone is living off the grid it usually means that they are not dependent on any outside agency for their existence. They might provide their own food and power for example. This story involves one man's idea of living off the grid who also happens to take his entire family with him.

Dorian Paskowitz is a successful doctor with a promising future. He becomes disillusioned with his life when he discovers that his wife is cheating on him. A second marriage also ends in divorce. This sets him on a quest for the meaning of life. What he decides is that happiness and health are not dependent on wealth but in living a life free of the pressures of modern day society. He embarks on a search to find the perfect woman. When he finds that woman, he immediately starts to build his family. By the time he's through he has fathered nine children -- eight sons and one daughter. This film tracks what happens to this family as they travel across the country living in a twenty-four foot camper.

Dorian discovers surfing and spends most of his waking hours in search of the perfect wave. He works odd jobs now and then in remote locations in order to provide some funds for his family. But for the most part the kids go hungry and have little in the way of creature comforts such as clothes, toys, and a home. What they do have is what some might call a Utopian existence. Every day is a vacation. They spend their days on the beach surfing and playing. They wander the country with no specific destination in mind. Dorian has sex with his wife in the camper while the kids sleep (or try to sleep).

Dorian is educated but he denies his children the same opportunity. So what at first looks like the ideal existence becomes a major detriment to the kids when they eventually leave the family and find that they are ill suited for living in normal society. This is the point where the film becomes more than just a look at one wacky family's alternative lifestyle to something much deeper. You get to see what impact this lifestyle had on the kids and Dorian and his wife over the years. This elevates the film and gives it relevance.

With no education, each of the kids struggle to make their way in the world. Most of them become involved in professional and competitive surfing, where they excel. But surfing can only take you so far. In the real world there are mortgages and car loans that have to be paid. Fortunately, they aren't completely illiterate. The one thing they did do as children was read. They became self educated through books. As you listen to each of them describe their upbringing you get the sense that they turned out okay despite their alternative lifestyle.

Still, there is an underlying bitterness toward their parents. The oldest son becomes estranged from the family for nearly seven years. In many ways they are not as close as you would think they would be having lived together in such a confined space for so long. When they have a family reunion at the end of the film, you definitely get the sense that they haven't been together at one time for many years. My mom has eleven brothers and sisters. They are all still living. They get together (most of them) every two years. They certainly stay in touch more frequently.

So what about Dorian and his wife and their Utopian existence? The film doesn't explain how he manages to pay for his residence in Hawaii where he lives. I'm guessing that his sole income is from the very government that he tried to distance himself from. Though it's possible that he receives income from the surfing camp he started and his sons still operate. But the ideal family he worked so hard to create is scattered and fractured. There aren't scores of grandchildren running up to give him a hug. I got the impression that the spouses of the nine kids barely know him.

In the end you come away feeling that there is no Utopia. The choices he made had advantages and dissadvantages. Dorian admits that he made mistakes and I give him credit for that. He also has some good ideas about diet, exercise and the need for rest and recreation. I'm on that bandwagon myself.

The DVD has a few extras: some out takes and a short film about Israel Paskowitz's surfing charity for autistic children. Add this one to your Que. It will make you think.

Update: Shortly after the original post I read another review that mentioned an audio commentary. I didn't see anything about an audio commentary in the special features section of the disc, where you would normally expect to see it. So I put the disc back in and sure enough there is an audio commentary in the set up section. I seldom listen to the entire audio commentary for the full length of the movie, but I did in this case. The commentary is by the director, one of the producers and Salvadoe Paskowitz. The insight they bring adds to the film. Take the time to listen to the audio commentary. You won't be dissapointed.

Review of Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse

Review of Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse written and directed by Fax Bahr and George Hickenlooper
Rating *** 1/2

This is a making of documentary of the film Apocalypse Now by Francis Ford Coppola with most of the footage being shot by his wife Eleanor.

The film was shot over several months in 1976, a time before making of documentaries were common place. The footage shot by Eleanor was never released before because Francis wasn't happy with the way he was portrayed. He changed his mind when he was approached by the filmmakers.

The filmmakers use a combination of Eleanor's footage along with interviews of many of the people behind the film. Eleanor serves as a narrator. It makes for an interesting documentary.

The film Apocalypse Now was a spectacle film on par with Jaws and Star Wars. It was one of the few films where I had to stand in line to get in. I remember the film as being cinematically great. The story and characters were only so so. The weakest link in the film was Marlon Brando.

The access that Eleanor had to Francis gives this film an edge over similar making of films. You get to see and hear Francis as he struggles with the many obstacles facing him: finances, politics, logistics, etc. I didn't know, for example, that Francis had his own assets at risk should the film flop.

Any fan of the film or even of the film making process would appreciate this documentary. In fact, I plan to watch the movie again soon.

The DVD had an audio commentary by Francis and Eleanor. But it is a completely blown opportunity. I honestly think Francis was either asleep or he left after the first hour, because his comments are few and far between. The only insight he gave was that he was in over his head. He also had a few things to say in defense of his handling of Martin Sheen's heart attack. He says nothing about having to replace Harvey Keitel. He doesn't have anything to say about working with Dennis Hopper and Marlon Brando, though Eleanor points out how difficult Brando was to work with on the film. And he says nothing about the two and half years from the end of shooting to the film's release. Are you telling me that he couldn't sit down for an hour and a half and find something interesting to say about a film which was such a big part of his life? I'm still ticked off about the audio commentary, but I'll recommend the documentary.

Update: Okay I just finished watching the film. Blockbuster had Apocalypse Now Redux which is a re-edited, extended version of the film. It's been nearly thirty years since I first saw the film and I don't know how this compares to the theatrical release, but it was fantastic. I was totally wrong about the story and characters being only so so. For this film to hold up so well after thirty year is a testament to the quality of this movie. Watching the film after watching the documentary only added to my enjoyment. This is definitely a classic.

Review of Darfur Now

Review of Darfur Now written and directed by Theodore Braun and Ted Braun
Rating ***

This film looks at the problems in Darfur from six different perspectives: a celebrity activist (Don Cheadle),a female rebel fighter, an international criminal prosecutor, a civilian activist, a relief worker, and a local sheik.

The media (and this film) has compared what's happening in Darfur to the genocide that took place in Rwanda. And if the killings of several hundred thousand people is genocide, then they are correct. The big distinction in this case is that the genocide is being carried out by the Sudan government. In Rwanda, as in most all genocide cases, ethnicity is the primary source of conflict. In Darfur it seems to be a battle for resources. Oil is a factor with Exon Mobile emerging as the biggest player. One way to combat the problem is by divesting in U.S. companies that do business with the Sudan government.

Looking at the problem and possible solutions from different angles gives you a very good overview of the situation in Darfur. Having only 90 plus minutes to tell the story, however, isn't enough time to form an emotional attachment to any one of the six stories. The female rebel fighter for example. She lost her child after her and her child were beaten by a government sponsored killing squad. That tragedy led her to want to fight back. But her story gets little screen time compared to that of Don Cheadle.

The story of the prosecutor who eventually names two people in the Sudan government as conspirators and instigators of the genocide is left unresolved. It is unresolved because the government refuses to hand over the individuals. Not only haven't they been handed over for trial, they were put in charge of relief efforts. Talk about the fox guarding the hen house. The real problem is that the entire Sudan government is guilty.

Review of The 11th Hour

Review of The 11th Hour written and directed by Nadia Conners and Leila Conners.
Rating *****

Al Gore won an Oscar for his documentary on this subject in what was mostly a glorified slide show. I'm not knocking that film. I liked it. But this film is a much more thorough examination of the problems and possible solutions to global warming.

One of the key points in this film is that the only way we're going to correct the problem is by creating a higher level of awareness. You would think that by now everyone would know that we can't continue on the course that we have been on, but apparently that isn't so because we continue to elect officials who don't have a grasp of what has to be done.

We all have heard about the problems associated with the loss of tropical rain forests, but there is also a problem associated with the loss of our own forests in the U.S. due to urban development. I was surprised to learn that nearly 90% of our forests have been chopped down to make room for houses and highways. This not only affects the atmosphere but the soil and biodiversity.

After watching films like Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth and Who Killed The Electric Car and reading books like The Omnivore's Dilemma, I have come to the conclusion that we are seeing the beginnings of the next revolution. I grew up during the beginnings of the computer and information age. I saw it and experienced it but wasn't smart enough to take advantage of it. Now I am no stock picking guru. In fact, so far my stock picks have been abysmal. But I have a strong feeling that the next big opportunity is going to be the green revolution and companies that deal with renewable energy. That's where I'm moving my money: solar, wind, geothermal, electric and fuel cell vehicles, etc...

The film is narrated by Leonardo DiCaprio who does a very good job of letting the images and experts tell the story. He keeps a low profile throughout and acts more of a guide. There were no bonus features on the DVD which was my only disappointment. 

 

Review of Jimmy Carter Man From Plains

Review of Jimmy Carter Man From Plains directed by Jonathan Demme
rating *** 1/2

I was interested in seeing this documentary for a number of reasons. For one I'm a fan of Jonathan Demme. One of my favorite films is Something Wild. I also admire Jimmy Carter. I think he got a bum deal. He was one of our better presidents. Another reason I wanted to see this film is because it follows Jimmy Carter on his book tour for his book Palestine: Peace not Apartheid. Since I'm doing my own book tour now, I wanted to see what it was like to go to a book signing where you sell 1600 books as opposed to mine where I'm lucky to sell six books.

The book tour is the force that drives the film, allowing the filmmakers to travel across the country with Jimmy Carter, but the theme of the movie is the controversy behind the book, especially the title. I have not read the book. I plan to now after seeing this film. But from the film I now know that the book basically accuses Israel of persecuting the Palestine people in much the same way as white South Africans persecuted blacks during Apartheid. And after listening to Jimmy Carter explain the realities of what's going on, I have to agree with him. Who would want to live their lives behind a forty foot wall.

The title of the book alone is enough to stir up controversy. Most of his critics, however, haven't read the book. They get hung up on the title and become so inflamed that they can't contain themselves. But if they would step back and listen (and read) they would see that the book gives both sides of the issue. He condemns the violence from Palestine. And the word in the title that angers so many people fits what's happening. Apartheid is defined as when one group of people forces their influence over another group of people.

Jonathan Demme also gives the issue fair balance. In one of Jimmy Carter's speeches he shows a student pointing out the drastic decrease in the number of suicide bombings since the wall was erected. I don't remember his response. I do remember it wasn't one of his better responses. He said something to the effect that he was okay with the wall as long as it was on the border and not inside Palestine. I don't agree with that at all. There should be no wall. Period. If you imprisoned every Palestinian, there would be a drastic decrease in violence as well. But is that a solution?

As far as selling books, it helps to be a former president. You name the media outlet and Jimmy Carter gets full exposure: PBS, CNN, Charlie Rose, the New York Times. The only thing missing was Oprah.

The DVD had an interesting commentary track with Jonathan Demme and one of the film's producers.

Review of Deliver Us From Evil

Review of Deliver Us From Evil written and directed by Amy Berg
Rating ****

This is a film about sexual abuse by priests and the cover-up of the problem by the church. The focus of the film is on one priest, Father Oliver O'Grady, and a number of his victims and their families. It is sometimes difficult to watch, but at the same time enlightening.

Anyone who is even tangentially aware of this problem knows that it is a situation that has been perpetuated by the church through its indifference and its attempts to solve the issues by transferring the offending priests to other parishes. The lack of accountability is still going on and goes all the way to the Pope, who I didn't know has been charged with covering up sexual abuse cases.

The filmmakers do an excellent job of presenting the issue in a fair and balanced way. Watching the interviews with Father O'Grady you can see how he was able to conceal his crimes from the victims parents. He comes across as a very likable man who admits his faults.

On the other hand you get to hear from the victims and their families and see the devastation that has been caused by O'Grady's acts. They continue to deal with what happened to this day.

Interwoven between the offender and his victims is the story of the church and individual Bishops who turned a blind eye. They are shown in depositions where their ignorance is astounding. You can see the deception and concealment in their responses to questions.

A voice of reason emerges in the film through interviews with a former priest and now lawyer, Tom Doyle, as well as others such as John Manly. They don't hesitate to put blame where it rightfully belongs. This includes not only the individual priests but the church hierarchy.

The last ten to fifteen minutes of the film are dedicated to trying to explain how this could happen. It starts with the requirement of celibacy. They point out that this requirement has more to do with political and financial reasons rather than anything in scripture. When a priest dies his assets are transferred to the church. If the priest had a family then his assets would go to the family and not the church. Yet these same priests are required to counsel parishioners on family and relationships when they are obviously ill-equipped to do so for lack of experience.

This requirement for celibacy begins for many priests at a time when they are first experiencing sexual urges. My own theory is that when a male first becomes sexually aware the trigger for that awareness forms an imprint on the brain. In Oliver's case, he was sexually abused as a young boy by an older brother and by a visiting priest. It doesn't excuse his actions, but it does offer an explanation.

The disc contains several extra features including audio commentary by the director and editor. Highly recommended.

Review of My Kid Could Paint That

Review of My Kid Could Paint That by Amir Bar-Lev
Rating *****

I loved this documentary. It has already garnered a spot in my best of for this year. This is a story about little Marla Olmstead, a four-year-old (now older) whose paintings have made her rich. It is also a story about fame, media, marketing, child prodigies, and abstract art.

When Marla was just three years old her father sat her down in front of a canvas and gave her some paint and a brush and let her do her thing. She continued to dabble with painting and at the age of four her father showed one of her paintings to a friend. That friend showed the painting to Anthony Brunelli, an artist and gallery owner. Anthony wasn't told that a four-year-old had done the painting. When he learned the truth, he knew he had a story on his hands. Thus began the saga of Marla Olmstead.

After a front page treatment in the local Binghampton newspaper, the story took off nationally both in print and on TV. Marla became a celebrity and her paintings began selling for thousands of dollars. The media whirlwind came to a grinding halt, however, when a story about Marla on 60 Minutes questioned the authenticity of the art.

The controversy at the center of this film is whether or not Marla's father Mark helped Marla with the paintings either through coaching or by doing some of the paintings himself. The ride that Marla nd her parents go through is a prime example of how our society and the media in general is quick to put people on a pedestal only to take delight in knocking that person back down. But this is not Brittney Spears we're talking about here, this is a four year old girl.

To help prove that Marla did in fact do the paintings herself, the parents make a video of her doing a painting from start to finish. The painting is called Ocean. It should have put an end to the controversy, and it has in my mind. But for some reason the director still has doubts.

Some of the doubts are because when Marla is filmed by people other than her parents, the results are not so convincing. But they are overlooking a few important facts. First, Marla is smart enough to know that she is being asked to perform on demand. How many of us can do that? She paints in layers and the early layers are not representative of the whole. And not every attempt at creating something is successful. How many writers publish their first draft?

As for whether or not Marla is a child prodigy, I can't say. The paintings are beautiful. Click here to see for yourself. My gut feeling is that Marla does have a special talent. One of the videos taken of her painting catches her totally focused on the painting. She is not just splashing paint on a canvas like Jackson Pollock; she is composing. Speaking of Jackson Pollock. There is another documentary about Pollock called Who the &%$#! is Jackson Pollock. I reviewed it here on this site. Click here to read that review. I recommend that you watch both of these as companion pieces.

I had two minor complaints about the film. First, I don't understand why the filmmakers didn't have other four years olds try to duplicate what Martha has done. They show a short segment where John Stossel from 20/20 tries this, so why couldn't they do the same? Why didn't they try to create a similar painting themselves? After all the movie is titled My Kid Could Paint That. Okay, so let me see for myself. I'm fairly confident that if I was given the same setup of canvas, paints, and brushes that I could slap together something presentable. Abstract art is in the eye of the beholder. My second complaint is along the same lines. At one point Marla is at a showing and she's trying to get her father's attention to tell him that her little brother Zane was responsible for doing one of the paintings. I'm not sure if it was one of the paintings in the show or not, but they never followed up on it. You never see the painting.

The interviews throughout the film are excellent, especially the ones with Michael Kimmelman, an art critic for the New York Times, and Anthony Brunelli. There are some interesting bonus features on the DVD, but director Amir decided against doing the audio commentary. I'm guessing that he had become too close to the family and didn't feel comfortable talking about them for the commentary. The editor and Anthony Brunelli fill in for him and do a fine job. Definitely see this movie. And if you haven't seen the Jackson Pollock film mentioned earlier, see that one as well.

Lastly, for Marla and her parents. I believe you. My next stop is your web site. I might even purchase a print. Best of luck to you all.

Review of No End in Sight

Review of No End in Sight directed and written by Charles Ferguson
Rating *****

This film covers the same ground as Bush's War. It differs in two significant ways from the Frontline film. One, it does not go into the mishandling of prisoners. And two, it goes into much greater detail the mistakes that Paul Bremmer made.

The fact that Bremmer had no experience in handling a reconstruction, did not speak Arabic, and went into Iraq knowing very little about the culture, apparently didn't matter to Rumsfeld. In hind sight, the three blunders that Bremmer made and that are highlighted in the film have much to do with why we are still in Iraq. In short, Bremmer created the insurgency problem by putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work. Many of whom were armed.

Like watching a movie for the hundredth time, the same people make the same mistakes and the end result remains the same. We should not have gone to war in the first place. Once we did go to war, we mishandled every aspect of the reconstruction. And we are still dealing with those mistakes today at an enormous cost to everyday citizens both here and in Iraq.

Review of The Trials of Darryl Hunt

Review of The Trials of Darryl Hunt Directed by Annie Sundberg and Ricki Stern
Rating **** 1/2

I have always been  drawn to stories of wrongful convictions. I can think of no greater injustice. This film is nearly on par with my favorite documentary on the subject Murder On A Sunday Morning.

Every wrongful conviction story has most if not all of the following elements: poor investigative work by the police, dubious eye witness testimony,  unethical or incompetent prosecuting attorneys, inexperienced or incompetent defense attorneys, and indifferent or hostile juries. This story is one that has all of those elements.

It all begins with the rape and murder of Deborah Sykes. An eye witness reports the crime as it is occurring. The witness, however, has a troubled past and decides to use a fictitious name. He uses the name Samuel Mitchel when he makes the call. The incompetent police decide that this Samuel Mitchel must be involved in the crime. Turns out the police know a Samuel Mitchel. When they finally track him down they discover that he did not make the call. The real caller was Johnny Gray. The police then surmise that they both must be involved, despite the fact that the two men have never met. But there are problems with their case. Neither man matches the description of other eye witnesses. No problem. Samuel Mitchel has a good friend. He must be the guy. And thus begins the sad tale of Darryl Hunt.

That Darryl Hunt has an alibi is of no importance to the police. That there is no physical evidence linking him to the crime is of no concern to the prosecuting attorney. Add in inexperienced defense attorneys and a mostly white jury and you have the necessary ingredients for a wrongful conviction.

Where this story really becomes almost unbelievable is when DNA testing excludes all three of the primary suspects, including Darryl Hunt, yet the judge not only does not overturn the conviction he denies a new trial, stating that the DNA testing only proves that he didn't rape the victim. It didn't exclude him from killing her. Even though he was convicted and sentenced for rape and murder.

Denzel Washington portrayed a character who was wrongfully convicted in the film The Hurricane. There is a scene in this documentary that reminded me of Denzel's performance. Darryl's attorneys call him in jail to inform him that his request for a new trial has been denied. You don't have to see Darryl to know the anguish this news brings him.

Darryl is finally cleared of all charges when a DNA match identifies the real murderer. Even then his freedom was not a certainty. the state still tried to claim that he must still have been involved in some way. Certainly the state was not guilty of confining a man wrongfully convicted for nearly twenty years.

The sad part of this story is that many of the people whose incompetence, arrogance, and unethical behavior led to this miscarriage of justice are still working in the system.

The one person who remains strong throughout the ordeal is Darryl Hunt. He refuses plea deals. He survives prison life. And he never talks bitterly against any of the people who denied him due process. He is a better man than any of his accusers.

Review of Frontline's Bush's War

Review of Frontline's Bush's War Producer Michael Kirk
Rating *****

I was against the war from day one. I never for a minute bought the justification that was put forth by the administration. I never could understand how Congress, Britain, and the Press never questioned the veracity of the many falsehoods that were presented by our President. Before seeing this excellent documentary, I held Bush primarily responsible for the war. I now know that he was but a secondary player.

The war in Iraq can be traced back to three main players: Dick Cheny, Don Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. The secondary players were George Bush, Condoleeza Rice, George Tenet, and Colin Powel. This documentary painstakingly goes through each player's contribution in a linear fashion. Watching this film is very much like talking with every author who's ever written on the subject and having them explain in detail the salient points from each of their books. What easily must have taken years to piece together is presented here in an easily digested five hours.

The first part of the two part series explains how we got into the war. The second part explains the many mistakes that have been made since. The fact that Dick Cheny still won't admit how wrong he was just demonstrates his arrogance. And Rumsfeld's complete lack of respect for the Geneva Conventions shows his lack of a moral compass. Many of the people that he claimed were the worse of the worse and were subsequently tortured, were unjustly imprisoned. History will not be kind to any of these people.

If you don't have the ability to record upcoming showings, click here to view the entire two part series on line. The site also has a wealth of ancillary content.

Review of The King of Kong

Review of King of Kong by Seth Gordon
Rating ***

I am a fan of old arcade video games. My favorite was Asteroids. Donkey Kong was a fun game, but I never mastered it like I did Asteroids. This film is about the two top Donkey Kong players in the world. That description, however, doesn't accurately portray what this film is really about. What it's really about are two men vying to be number one, with one willing to take whatever steps necessary to validate his claim, and the other unwilling to face his competition one on one for fear of defeat.

The filmmakers began the project following several different story lines. They didn't know where the story was going to take them until well into filming. It only became apparent to them when they realized that the reigning high scorer, Billy Mitchell, had no intention of defending his score in a public venue. He instead tries to usurp his competition, Steve Wiebe, by sending in a tape of himself achieving a supposedly higher score than what Wiebe achieved in an official competition. What makes the story compelling is the fact that Wiebe had also sent in a tape, which later came under scrutiny and was ultimately discarded.

One of the strongest segments in the film are of Billy Mitchell explaining how no high score is valid unless it occurs under the spotlight of head to head competition. In the very next scene his wife is asked if Billy had ever participated in a head to head competition, and her answer was no. Not only does he avoid any kind of direct competition, but when he finally does find himself in the same room as Steve Wiebe, he acts disinterested and disrespectful.

There's no question that Billy Mitchell is a world class video arcade gamer, but he completely lost all credibility by refusing to face any competition. He spends a lot of time making sports analogies, but would Tiger Woods get any satisfaction by turning in a video of his low round, where he was the only competitor? I don't think so.

The DVD has a few extras including a very good audio commentary.

Review of Crazy Love

Review of Crazy Love directed by Dan Klores
Rating ***

This is another review where you can't say too much without revealing what makes the story interesting. The film revolves around two people: Burt Pugach and Linda Riss. The story begins in 1957 when Burt happens to spot Linda sitting on a bench as he is driving by. It was purely a physical attraction. He knew nothing about her yet became so fixated on the idea of having sex with her that his life from that point on was directed toward obtaining that goal. Linda, on the other hand, was not attracted to Burt. Thus set up the conflict that would intertwine the two even to this day.

Despite the lack of a physical attraction with Burt, Linda agreed to go out with him because of his obvious wealth. He showered her with gifts. Burt was a successful lawyer. He was an ambulance chaser with  dubious ethics. Linda made the mistake of falling for the money and prestige of having a lawyer for a suitor and overlooking Burt's many faults. Besides the lack of attraction on Linda's part, there was another problem; Burt was married. Once Linda discovered this fact, she refused to even see Burt unless he got a divorce.

This is where the story turns and Burt's true character comes to the forefront. He does some things in is quest to get Linda that are so morally wrong that there is no acceptable excuse. He pays dearly for what he does, but his acts are so reprehensible that he can never make amends.

Linda, on the other hand, is guilty of only trying to better herself through marriage rather than making it on her own. She was beautiful. But she was naive and lacked a stable upbringing. Despite her looks, she was still a virgin. Burt found this to be so unbelievable that she eventually had to go to a doctor to prove it.

My personal opinion is that people who make the wrong choices in life end up paying for their indiscretions one way or the other. This is certainly true of Burt and to a much lessor extent of Linda. There is no such thing as love at first sight. There may be lust at first sight, but love is something that takes time to grow.

The twists and turns in this story make it a worthwhile choice. The DVD has limited extras.

Review of Deep Water

Review of Deep Water directed by Louise Osmond and Jerry Rothwell
rating *** 1/2

This is a story about a race to be the first and fastest to sail around the world solo and non-stop. The event took place in 1968 through 1969. At first the story plays out as you would expect. There are nine competitors. You know that all of them are not going to complete the journey. The film makers focus on one particular competitor -- Donald Crowhurst. He is not particularly skilled at sailing, but he is a risk taker and the prospect of a cash payout to the man who completes the journey in the fastest time draws him in.

What Crowhurst lacks in sailing experience he makes up in design skills. He succeeds in finding a financial backer to pay for the construction of a radical new boat, a three haul catamaran like boat designed for speed. There is one caveat. Should he not complete the trip, he is required to pay back the investor in full.

As the deadline for beginning the race approaches, it becomes apparent that the boat will not be fully completed in time. But with the contract commitment hanging over his head, Crowhurst decides to leave anyway on the very last day allowed.

One look at the boat and you can tell that his chances are not good. His innovative design has a sleek low haul that would be ideal for racing on an inland lake, but it's low haul is a distinct disadvantage in the open ocean where waves can easily wash over the boat. He starts taking on water soon after he sets sail.

A few weeks into the race he realizes that continuing on through the southern oceans would be suicide. But if he were to return home, he would face financial ruin. This is where the story turns on its head and becomes much more fascinating that a simple man against the sea story. Crowhurst comes up with a third option. To tell you what that third option is and how it plays out would spoil the surprise. So I am not going to reveal what happens here. You'll have to rent the DVD to find out.

The filmmakers do an excellent job of telling the story with limited archive film and audio. What they lack in material from the actual event, they more than make up for with insightful and poignant interviews from friends, family, and reporters. The interviews with his wife and son as well as the interview with his best friend are very compelling.

Only one man completed the journey, and he is one of those interviewed. He is a noble man and should be applauded for what he did at the end of this story.

As for the other competitors, their stories take a back seat to the Crowhurst story, but there is one compelling side story. One of the competitors decided that he liked the solemness of the open sea so much that he instead of heading home he turned and sailed off for another trip around the world, finally ending his journey several months later in Tahiti.

This is one of those truth is stranger than fiction stories. You couldn't have dreamed up this scenario. Rent this DVD; you won't be disappointed.

The DVD has some additional background interviews that are also insightful and help paint a fuller picture of how the pieces of the story fell together.

Review of "Sicko" by Michael Moore

Review of "Sicko" by Michael Moore
rating **** 1/2

I have to admit that I had some preconceived notions before I watched this film. I like the documentaries that Michael Moore has done in the past, but they all have been very one sided and very opinionated. I was expecting the same with this one. I was wrong. He does a very good job of telling both sides of the story (mostly).

I have to preface this review by stating up front that while I agree with a lot of what Michael Moore has to say about the poor quality of health insurance in the U.S., my wife and I have experienced first hand some of the positive aspects of having good health insurance. Our baby, Allison, was born with complications that forced her to remain hospitalized after birth. Allison did not survive her six and a half weeks of life in the hospital. But in that same time period her medical costs exceeded $250,000. My wife and I paid a little over $3,000 of that amount in out of pocket expenses. None of the expensive medical treatments that the doctors requested were denied. We didn't have to fight anyone. Had we not had a health insurer who delivered as promised, we would still be paying on this bill.

Now back to the review. I had read or heard from various sources how the film touts the health care system in Canada. I must have heard this before the film was completed, because I also heard a lot about how health care might be free in Canada, but you'll die before you get that care because of the long lines. Well, the film shows these same naysayers. Michael Moore then goes to Canada and visits hospitals, pharmacies, and doctor's offices. No one there seems to be complaining about long lines.

He visits Brittan and France, both of which offer free health care to everyone. France is unbelievable in what they offer their citizens. I do recall, however, there being a lot of upheaval in France among the youth, who are finding it more difficult to find jobs. The people have become so accustomed to five or more weeks of paid vacation and other amenities like free day care, that employers can't afford to add new employees. There was nothing about that upheaval in the film. Nor was there anything about possible abuses of free health care. I would have liked to have seen how these countries deal with hypochondriacs and drug addicts and the people who take advantage of the system.

Like other films by Michael Moore, this film has a political motive. But in this case it is one we should all get behind. Universal health care is possible and he shows how other countries are doing it. The stories of individuals who were denied health care due to the greed of the insurance companies and their overpaid CEOs is enough to make anyone demand change.

I'd much rather have my health insurance premiums go into a national fund than into the pockets of insurance company doctors and executives who go out of their way to deny payment.  This is a film that could actually have an impact on people getting behind a cause. I hope it does just that. I plan to vote for the bill for universal health care the first opportunity I get, and so should you.

Review of "The Bridge" directed by Eric Steel

Review of "the Bridge" directed by Eric Steel
rating *** 1/2

In 2004 twenty-four people committed suicide by jumping off the San Francisco Golden Gate Bridge. In this unusual documentary, filmmaker Eric Steel captured a number of these suicides by using a team of cameramen to film the bridge over the course of a year. The end result is an illuminating look at the causes of suicide and the effects suicides have on those left behind.

While this film does capture people as they leap to their deaths, it is not done for sensationalistic purposes. The filmmaker interviews family members and friends of the jumpers to try to determine what  led to such drastic measures. Several common traits seem to emerge. Most of the jumpers suffer from mental illnesses: schizophrenia, bipolar disease, or simply depression. Most of them are lonely. Many of them are on some kind of medication. Some have turned to illegal drugs or alcohol.

The first jumper is an elderly man who wastes no time as he climbs the rail and lunges forward. Most, however, spend time on the bridge gazing down as they contemplate jumping. One man in particular, Gene, is shown throughout the film as he paces back and forth across the bridge. His is the last suicide shown, and when you see it you'll understand why.

All of the suicides are disturbing to watch. Yet each is different. Some sit on the rail as if they're waiting for someone to intervene. Other's give no inclination that they are planning to jump. One man in particular is seen making several calls on his cell phone just prior to jumping.

The film includes several suicide attempts that were prevented by police or passersby. There is also an interview with a young man who survived the plunge into San Francisco Bay.

As you watch the film you never know who or when someone is going to jump, just as those filming never knew. In the making of documentary included on the DVD, you learn that everyone filming was given the responsibility of phoning bridge authorities if they suspected someone was about to jump. The Golden Gate Bridge is seen from every conceivable angle in all kinds of weather conditions. But even these scenic scenes are sometimes abruptly altered by the sight of a person unexpectedly falling from the bridge. Sometimes you only catch the splash, never having seen the actual jump.

Life is a roller coaster. Everyone experiences ups and downs. Some people, for whatever reason, can't see far enough ahead to see that the ride is about to go up. Gene, for example, is despondent over a number of things including his inability to find a job. What he apparently didn't know was that he had received an e-mail offering him a job on the day he committed suicide. One man leaves a suicide note that reads: I'm fifty years old and I have no money; I have no job; I have no career; I have no partner; I have no home. We all get depressed now and then. Hopefully, this film will help someone in the same state find a better solution.

Another positive to come out of the film is the construction of a suicide barrier on the bridge that is to be completed next year. Unfortunately, as delays in construction continue, the number of suicides from the bridge have increased.

Two reviews that put life in perspective

Review of "My Flesh and Blood" directed by Jonathan Karsh *** 1/2
Review of "Bus 174" directed by Jose Padiha **** 1/2

I decided to combine these two reviews because both films portray the lives of people who for different reasons have been dealt an unfair hand. Trust me, after watching these two films your problems will seem insignificant.

The first film by Jonathan Karsh revolves around a former nurse and divorced mother who has taken it upon herself to adopt and care for 11 disabled kids. This is a hard film to watch because the disabilities are so severe. But it doesn't take long to get to know and care for each of them. Despite their physical and emotional problems, they each make the best of a difficult situation, thanks in large part to the efforts of their caretaker Susan Tom. The sacrifice she and her two daughters make in caring for these children is commendable. She is their mother, nurse, psychiatrist, and social worker.

The filmmakers delve into the backgrounds of Susan and several of the kids. Susan's only source of income is what she receives from the state for caring for the children. What ever she gets, it isn't enough. Few people could take on the challenges that she has taken on. As for the children, the one child who on the outside seems to be the most normal, turns out to be the most troubled. He is also one of three children with life a threatening disease.

I was touched by all of the kids, but the one child who will remain in my thoughts is Faith. Faith, I hope you read this and know that I'm rooting for you.

The second film by Jose Padiha tells the story of a bus hijacking that took place in Rio de Janeiro in June 2000. The actual hijacking is perhaps the most photographed and filmed hijacking in history. But unlike the major media that covered the incident, Jose's interest goes beyond the actual hijacking. He is also interested in showing the psychological makeup of the hijacker and what led to such a dangerous act.

Sandro do Nascimento is a troubled youth in his early twenties whose dream was to find a job and one day be famous. But Sandro's mother was murdered in front of him and he was forced to live in the streets. This led to petty crimes and drugs. He was arrested and sent to jail. That experience more than any other is at the heart of this story. As you learn how poorly he was treated by the Brazilian police and the harsh, inhumane living conditions in prison, you begin to understand his motives. Going back to jail was not an option.

The director expertly weaves background material in with the drama of the hijacking. This is one of those stories that pulls you in to the point that you can't look away from the screen for a minute for fear you might miss something.

One of the most telling background stories involves the massacre of seven street children by police. Sandro was among the children that were attacked. Later in a call in radio show the general consensus by those calling in is that the killings were a good thing. The street kids were becoming a problem and killing them was a justifiable way of dealing with the problem.

The film is in Portuguese with subtitles.

I recommend both films.

Review of Ghosts of Abu Ghraib directed by Rory Kennedy

Review of Ghosts of Abu Ghraib directed by Rory Kennedy
rating *****

Watch this film! When you're done watching it, watch it again with the audio commentary. This is as good as it gets in documentary films.

Anyone with even a cursory understanding of what took place at Abu Ghraib realizes that the soldiers who were directly involved and later convicted were all scapegoats. The fact that the investigations into what took place have not uncovered the truth is unbelievable. The fact that the real perpetrators have gone unpunished is unbelievable.

This was an original HBO film. In the audio commentary director Kennedy states that her original intent was to learn about the physiological makeup up the MPs that were involved in the abuse. Only after she started interviewing them did she realize that the real story was how this whole thing got started, with the finger pointed directly at the White House.

Since none of the people who were really responsible for the abuse agreed to be interviewed, she uses archival footage where government officials like Donald Rumsfeld trip all over themselves trying to lay the blame elsewhere. Not only was torture and mistreatment of prisoners sanctioned by our government, but Bush is still trying to pass laws to allow even greater injustices.

One defense for the mistreatment of prisoners at both Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo has been the claim that these people are the worst of the worst. They are responsible for killing Americans and they don't deserve any better. While in some cases this may be true, the fact is that fewer than a half dozen people have ever been brought to trial. All of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib who were photographed and were the recipients of the abuse were eventually released without charge. For a more in-depth look at the U.S. military's record of false imprisonment since the war began read the book Enemy Combatant by Moxamm Begg.

Some ninety deaths have occurred directly by the hands of interrogators both military and by civilian. The longest sentence anyone has received for these deaths has been five months. I hope this film becomes a call to action for congress to do a proper investigation. All they really have to do is watch this film. It's all laid out for them.

The commentary found on the disc is the best example I've seen yet of how audio commentary can enhance the value of a film. Rather than mute the sound or drastically reduce the volume during periods of silence, she lets the film play at the regular volume, only commenting when she wants to make an important point. The end result is a narration that gives valuable insight and adds a whole new dimension to the film.

This film has definitely made it on my best of the year list.

Review of I Know I'm Not Alone by Michael Franti

Review of I Know I'm Not Alone directed by Michael Franti
rating **1/2

This film offers a good counterpoint to what is seen on the daily news concerning Iraq and occupied Palestine. Michael Franti, a musician and singer, took a film crew along with him as he visited the streets of Iraq and Palestine. He uses music to gain the trust of the locals who open up and allow him access where few outsiders have been. The result is a clear picture of the pain, fear, and suffering caused by the current occpation of both lands.

After watching the everyday lives of these people you come away with a real sense of appreciation for all that we have here in the U.S. You also see where much of the animosity against the U.S. comes from. More importantly you see how similar the people in these lands are to us. They want peace, opprtunity, and to feel safe just like anyone would. But their lives have been turned upside down by war, violence and a lack of jobs.

Michael Franti's music and songs are used as the soundtrack throughout the film. He has a certain laid back quality in his voice that comes out best in the studio versions of his songs, which are often played against photographic montages.

This is his first film and it shows in some of the edititing. Several scenes start with silence and then the sound is introduced abruptly as if there was a miscue. Whether this was intended or not, it doesn't work. The abrupt change from Iraq to Palestine doesn't work all that well either. The film probably should have just stuck with Iraq. By the time he gets to Palestine it's pretty much more of the same.

All in all not a bad first effort. It certainly should be viewed by anyone wanting to learn more about the day to day lives of the people of Iraq and Palestine.

The disc comes with several special features including images and an audio commentary.

Review of "Who The #$&% is Jackson Pollock" by Harry Moses

Review of "Who The #%&% is Jackson Pollock"
Rating ****

When truck driver Teri Horton purchases a painting at a thrift store for $5 (she haggled it down from the original $8 asking price) she has no idea that she might have purchased an original Jackson Pollock painting worth as much as fifty million dollars.

Teri's attempt to authenticate the painting with art experts is met with skepticism and disinterest. When she finally persuades an art expert to view the painting, he quickly dismisses it as not an original. His only evidence of this is because "I'm an expert and she's not." Undaunted, Teri turns to a forensic scientist who specializes in authenticating rare art.

After finding a finger print on the back of the canvas, the forensic scientist matches the fingerprint to one found in the artisit's actual studio. Other bits of evidence such as a matching of paint samples between Teri's painting and paint found in Pollock's studio add further verification. None of this matters to the art world though.

The painting does draw enough interest that Teri recieves an offer of two million dollars, no questions asked. Teri turns the offer down. Teri, who lives in a trailor park and could obviously benefit from the money, has become obsessed with proving the snobbish art world wrong.

I'm no art expert, but I never thought there was anything special about Pollock's work to begin with. It's nothing more than paint thrown at a canvas. Despite my prejudice, the evidence of authenticity offered passes my test. The most telling moment for me is when another art expert views the painting and quickly dismisses it saying that all you have to do is compare the painting to an original Jackson Pollock painting and the differences will be plainly visible. Well, the filmaker does just that. And when you view Teri's painting next to an original, there is no way anyone can tell the difference.

The film ends with Teri turning down another offer. This one for nine million. Teri, please come to your senses. We know you have an original Jackson Pollock. The art world is wrong. Take the money and run.

Review of "Shut Up and Sing" by Barbara Kopple & Cecilia Peck

Shut Up and Sing by Barbara Kopple & Cecilia Peck

Rating *****

This is the story of how a simple quip made between songs snowballed into what became a national campaign against the Dixie Chicks. Overnight the Dixie Chicks were labeled as unpatriotic. Country radio stopped playing the group’s songs; their CDs were crushed by steam rollers. There were death threats. Fortunately, someone was smart enough to capture the whole ugly affair from the Dixie Chicks' perspective. The behind the scenes footage is candid and well shot. The viewer is a fly on the wall as the Chicks and manager Simon Renshaw plot different strategies for dealing with the growing controversy.

The Dixie Chicks answer critics by putting out a solid follow-up album full of personally penned songs.  Much of the film follows the trio as they write and record songs for the new album all while a firestorm rages around them.

As the album nears completion, the anti Chicks movement threatens to derail their careers. They are forced to cancel or move concert dates because of sluggish ticket sales. Concert venues are forced to add extra security. And they are still faced with the problem of promoting the album without getting airplay from Country radio. DJ’s and radio station managers defend their actions by claiming that they would lose listeners and advertisers if they were to play Dixie Chicks songs.

As the Iraq war drags on and the president’s approval rating plummets, the issue turns into one of free speech. Their album becomes a hit despite the lack of airplay. Veteran film makers Barbara Kopple and Cecilia Peck have crafted a great documentary. I highly recommend it.

Top 10 Documentaries

Okay, I've listed some of my favorite documentaries. Now it's your turn.