REAGAN: THE DEFEAT OF SCREWTAPE

 

SHORT TAKE: Historically accurate bio-drama about the life of President Ronald Reagan, his enduring love affair with his wife, Nancy, and his heroic decades long fight to root out Communism in our country and around the world.

LONG TAKE: Loving but honest, Reagan, based on Paul Kengor’s novel: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism, is a tribute to Ronald Reagan, the man Rush Limbaugh referred to as Ronaldus Magnus, the man tied with Donald Trump for the best president we’ve have since our founding fathers. And it is a gem. It begins March 30, 1981, the infamous day outside of the Washington Hilton, when he and some of his retinue were shot by an attempted assassin, much like Donald Trump was so targeted July 13, 2024. That is only the beginning of the parallels between Trump and the story told in Reagan.

Dennis Quaid does a delightful turn as the eponymous Leader of the Free World, gently and respectfully portraying Reagan, the man as well as the statesman. Quaid naturally conveys Reagan’s personality, from his sense of humor under pressure to his contagious and confident air of authority in negotiation, as well as his Christian strength in recognizing and accepting the Hand of God in both his own victories and defeats. (One minor piccadillo – I thought the too-heavy makeup, prosthetics and CGI was a little distracting at first. But Quaid’s performance is excellent and effortlessly created the magic of suspension of disbelief with his acting alone.)

Reagan’s courage and wit are on clear display after his attempted assassination, as he tries to comfort his wife, Nancy (played with gentle and loving enthusiasm by Penelope Ann Miller) and crack jokes with his surgical team. It is also demonstrated how more civilized our country was at the time, as the worldwide sentiment was towards Reagan and his recovery, instead of today’s vicious media which made no effort to hide their childish animosity towards Trump despite his injury and the death of one of Trump’s supporters.

Assuming it is true, I was surprised to learn that even one of Reagan’s staunchest political enemies “Tip” O’Neill, Jr., Democrat Speaker of the House, prayed the rosary at Reagan’s bedside.

Reagan spent the majority of his adult life going head to head against the corruption of Communism infiltrating Washington and Hollywood, which then as now, sought to destroy the foundations of America. Similarly, today, Donald Trump has faced, during his political tenure, a resurgence of this corruption. (Though Trump’s job is harder given that the cancer of Marxism has been allowed to eat far more deeply and into many more establishment institutions.)

Then the movie cleverly takes a peculiar turn, landing us in the present at the apartment of Viktor Petrovich, (Jon Voight) an elderly, weary, and worn KGB agent, who spends the rest of the movie explaining to a bemused Russian agent, Andrei Novikov (Alex Sparrow) how Reagan single-handedly managed to bring down the Soviet Union.

The rest of this solid pic follows the many highlights of Reagan’s political and personal life, as seen through the eyes of this KGB agent, previously assigned to watch and outmaneuver Reagan, a task which constantly was always just out of Petrovich’s grasp.

And in the midst of his battles Reagan meets and marries the love of his life, his devoted consort battleship (as Henry Higgins might have put it), Nancy Davis Reagan. They become inseparable as Reagan becomes the governor of California then President of the United States.

Petrovich regales to Novikov how the Soviets harried and spied on Reagan. How, despite constant attempts to aid his Soviet superiors in stopping Reagan from stopping them, nothing worked – not threats, not unrest fomented on Reagan’s political doorsteps, not the assail of Democrats and the convenient idiots for the Communists who surrounded Reagan. Not well meaning but lesser committed allies who unintentionally gave Reagan bad advice. Not sabotage nor betrayal by the Communist sympathetic media who caricatured him, deliberately misrepresented his economic proposals, and warped the image of his negotiations. Not the Berlin Wall nor assassination attempts. Reagan out plans, out negotiates, out spends, outmaneuvers, out charms and in the end…simply wears the Soviets out until they have no choice but to capitulate to this “American Cowboy,” who forced them to “tear down that wall”. (Referring to the Berlin Wall which separated with mortal violence the prosperous West Berlin, the latter of which was oft called the “Island of Freedom,” from the Soviet oppressed East Berlin for 28 years. Many unarmed men and women, merely seeking to be free in their own country, were shot trying to cross over the massive concrete barbed barrier. The tearing down of this bloodied Wall signaled the beginning of the end to Soviet supremacy in Russia.)

You almost feel sorry for Petrovich – this beaten and bemused failed information gatherer. Although he accurately lays out all the information to this junior leaguer, he never quite seems to comprehend just what it was that enabled Ronald Reagan, against odds, threats to his life, the might of the Soviet Union, and opposition from his own countrymen (then and now the Democrats and RINOs), to defeat one of the most powerful Marxist countries in the world.

So we become privy, at the most pivotal times of Reagan’s life, to the Angel at his side, as well as the Devil at his back.

The Screwtape Letters, by the brilliant CS Lewis, is a creepily whimsical tale of an elder statesman demon, Screwtape, tutoring his nephew and apprentice demon, Wormwood, on the fine art of corrupting a soul. Wormwood has a “patient” who eventually, to Screwtape’s frustration and Wormwood’s destruction, converts to Christianity, is supported in his faith by the love of a good woman, and defeats both Screwtape and Wormwood by never succumbing to the multitude of temptations and terrors laid before him. And it occurred to me that Reagan, in concept, is a modern day successor to The Screwtape Letters, if it were set after Screwtape’s defeat, as we listen to the old demon Petrovich commiserate with the younger replacement apprentice demon, Novikov, as they vainly try to comprehend how they lost to Reagan. Wormwood was absorbed by Screwtape as the penalty for failing to corrupt their “patient”. Correspondingly, who knows HOW many Wormwoods were “disappeared” by the Soviet apparatchiks for failing to stop Reagan.

Ironically, Petrovich misses the obvious. While Petrovich amasses voluminous amounts of information and knowledge about Reagan, he seems to have acquired very little wisdom. Reagan won and protected America’s greatness because he was a man of faith, fortitude and commitment, who loved his wife, his fellow man, and his country more than himself and would…not…quit.

But as you can read in Eccleiastes 1:9 – “There is no new thing under the sun.” It is easy to see the parallels to today’s headlines as President Trump faces similar demonic opposition in the Woke, pro-Communist, pro-death, anti-Western culture so prevalent in our media, entertainment and elite entrenched political swamp. Trump, as did Reagan, is combating similar forces of evil who seek to destroy our country and erase our Judeo-Christian heritage.

And just as it is beyond the comprehension of Petrovich, the modern day Screwtape, to understand how one man’s faith and love can overcome impossible odds, the Swamp we face today will not likely understand why this movie will resonant with the vast majority of Americans who, like the East Berliners, seek only to be free in their own country, or how and why Reagan’s successor in valor, Trump, will not stop until our beloved country’s citizens are free to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

.

NAPOLEON – BRILLIANTLY PORTRAYED HISTORIC FICTION FOR MATURE AUDIENCES

SHORT TAKE: Realistically portrayed battle scenes and masterful acting highlight this bio-pic about Napoleon’s rise to and fall from power from the French Revolution to his death on St Helena, but for mature adults only because of gratuitous sex and authentic but extreme battlefield violence.

LONG TAKE: Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Alien, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down) is no stranger to depictions of realistic gore and violence. And his direction of Napoleon is no exception. From the guillotine to cannonballs, Scott unflinchingly demonstrates the brutal and de-romanticized effects of war and revolution.

Napoleon follows the adult life progress of the master tactician, obsessed lover, and fatally ambitious Bonaparte from the French Revolution through his many incredibly brilliant victories, his catastrophically foolish debacle in Russia, his resurgence back into France and his final ignominious defeat at Waterloo and exile to St Helena. He led over 60 campaigns with or against pretty much every European country in existence at the time, from Russia to Egypt to Austria and France during the years 1801 -1815.

Michael Broers, Oxford historian, consulted with Ridley Scott in both script and production of this epic saga. In interviews, Broers revealed a few incidents which were the creative fantasies of the director and not biographically accurate. Notably, Napoleon’s slap of Josephine during the formalities of their annulment, while dramatic, did not happen and was inconsistent with Bonaparte’s character. Another fabrication had Napoleon shooting at the tops of the pyramids during the Egyptian campaign. In justifying these colorful but inaccurate events, Ridley Scott reminded the bemused academic that Napoleon was a work of historic FICTION, not a documentary, and so liberties can be expected.

But what IS literally correct, is at the heart of Napoleon. Chunks of 200 intensely passionate letters are featured in the script – mostly from the eponymous character to Josephine, Napoleon’s adored: mistress, wife, empress and ultimately dismissed queen, most written during Napoleon’s extended absences. While leading his men into battle was what he lived for, the soul of what propelled him was his lifetime devotion to his morally flawed, emotionally equivocating and ultimately barren wife, Josephine, even after their annulment. Though, as the movie portrays and apparently as their letters reveal, Bonaparte absolutely adored her, her feelings toward him were far less straightforward.

The acting is excellent. Joaquin Phoenix (Signs, Gladiator, I Walk the Line, Her, Joker, You Were Never Really Here) is one of the finest American actors to date, exhibiting a virtuosity and chameleon ability to sink into a role challenged only by Dustin Hoffman and a bare few others. In Napoleon, Phoenix conducts a master class in performance. From subtle to gross movements, from outbursts to quiet moments, every expression and mannerism is a brushstroke in the portrait of the brilliant military strategist, the obsessed lover, the committed leader, the terrified but courageous soldier, and the hubristic and recklessly ambitious emperor. This is a three-dimensional and complex personality and Phoenix brings Napoleon to life on film. I even suspect there were moments which were improvised or bloopers, but so expertly kept in character by Phoenix that Scott retained them.

Vanessa Kirby (Mission Impossible – Fallout and Dead Reckoning), brilliantly catches Josephine’s ambiguous relationship and constantly contradictory and changing feelings towards Napoleon, from opportunistic social climbing former aristocrat to callous adulteress through to genuine affection for her husband. Her faithfulness to Napoleon was a checkerboard at best. And Kirby captures well Josephine’s complex attachment to this important historic figure.

The biggest difficulty I found with the film was the lack of adequate explanation of the intricacies of the political issues which fueled these decades of continental chaos. The how, who, and where were fairly clear, and the battles were compelling, but I was left puzzled through most of the movie as to the why of the constant, costly clashes among people who were often related to each other by blood and/or marriage. For anyone who already knows a good deal about the history of that time, it comes down to petty arrogance, pride and avarice. A bit more tweaking of the script might have made that clearer to the general audience member. But ultimately that flaw takes little away from the overall bird’s eye view of the events because the focus is on the eye of the storm, Napoleon.

The violence alone makes Napoleon inappropriate for even mid-teens. And a few scenes of gratuitously explicit sex, which sink almost to the point of raunchy vaudevillian comedy, advises against the film for anyone not an older adult. Nevertheless, this is a not-to-miss film for those sufficiently mature and interested in this tumultuous period in history and its driving force – Napoleon.

JOURNEY TO BETHLEHEM – FAMILY-FRIENDLY BUT FLAWED

SHORT TAKE:

Charming and interesting but missing significant parts of the story. Recommended for only those well versed in the complete Biblical account.

LONG STORY:

I do not mind creative retelling of Biblical stories as long as they are faithful (literally) to the source material, in spirit, if not in fact. Liturgical dramas have been documented all the way back to the 10th century. Many were performed in the church, although not part of the liturgy. And some wonderfully portrayed Biblical stories emerge from the most unlikely of places. In the 1990’s,  Ted Turner, who at the time was openly and aggressively agnostic, and who referred to Christians as “losers”, produced some truly magnificent, accurate and respectful TV movies portraying the Patriarchs, featuring a cavalcade of (at the time) “A” listers: Richard Harris and Barbara Hershey as Abraham and Sarah, Ben Kingsley doing double duty as Moses and Potiphar, Leonard Nimoy as Samuel and Jonathan Price as Saul, to name only a few. These Turner productions took a few liberties, which did nothing to disrespect or undermine the historicity or religious narrative.  The point being that there is a millenia-long, distinguished tradition of respectful, imaginative, interpretations of Biblical events.

So, I had high hopes for a musical version of the Nativity story in Journey to Bethlehem, especially having seen the talented Antonio Banderas in the trailers belting it out as King Herod.

There is much to recommend the movie, which is quite charming. The songs are catchy and lyrically emote the internal turmoil of the characters, as all good musical songs should. The performers had strong and energetic voices, the comic reliefs were cute, and the actors playing Mary and Joseph (Fiona Palomo and Milo Manheim) sparked chemistry, convincingly portraying innocence without being saccharin.

There were even some inspired creative aspects. Antonio Banderas’s gleefully evil King Herod gives Shatner’s Kirk a run for his money in scene chewing. Herod’s conflicted first born was an interesting plot twist. And something that might be misinterpreted as inaccurate was appealingly depicted. The Archangel Gabriel paces nervously as he is about to greet Mary, practicing different ways he might introduce his mission to her. This is actually not as far out as one might think. In his Biblical greeting Gabriel says “Hail Mary FULL of Grace!” This has been interpreted by religious scholars to mean that Gabriel was, indeed, marveled by Mary, the human of perfect soul and the first person since Adam and Eve to be born without sin. So for Gabriel to be shown as just a bit nervous was not out of line and was kind of adorable.

There were aspects that did not fit the time period. The choreography, for example, was more Ballywood than Biblical, and the “romance” between Mary and Joseph reminded me more of La La Land than Luke’s Book. But anachronisms do not necessarily diminish the legitimacy of the presentation. Much Renaissance religious art showed Biblical figures in European garb, such as: the Donne Triptych, Madonna of the Meadow by Raphael and The Virgin Mary by Van Eyck. Even the controversially born Jesus Christ Superstar was endorsed by the Vatican on December 13, 1999, during the papacy of Saint Pope John Paul II, despite its anachronistic trappings.

I did think the writers pushed it to the edge of the envelope in the contrived dialogues between Mary and her parents, wherein Mary expressed her dismay both in being betrothed to a man she had never met (which was pretty much de rigeur then and would not have been a surprise) and that she would have preferred to become a teacher rather than “forced” into the more mundane obligations of wife and mother. This chronologically challenged, modernistic, angsty teenage attitude is simply out of character for Mary, who was without sin and would not have been confrontational with her obviously caring and attentive father. But as she ultimately agreed, I chalked it up to the writers showing how she was obedient despite her trepidations.

And, Joseph’s moaning about how his dream to be an “inventor” would somehow be thwarted by his nuptials was a bit ridiculous. Joseph was a carpenter and his modern age kvetching about unfulfilled daydreams was a bit silly.

Now, (SPOILER) I really do have an issue with a kiss between Mary and Joseph at the end of the movie, which implied there would be more than a chaste relationship between them in the future. While this kiss and its “promise” keeps to the rom com formula of the disparate couple finally falling in love, it is COMPLETELY inappropriate for the relationship between Joseph and Mary. Mary was God’s spouse, the Mother of His Son and Joseph was Jesus’ foster father and Mary’s protector, nothing else, (quite enough for one lifetime).

However, what troubled me most was not what was IN the movie but several things that had been left out. When Gabriel announces to Mary that God had chosen her to be the Mother of His Son, the writers left out Mary’s consent! Her last word as Gabriel departs is: “But I have so many questions.” That is a serious breach of Biblical narrative and context. Theologically, neglecting, “I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to Your Word,” is not a minor quibble. Leaving out Mary’s express and freely given consent is not only inaccurate but a dangerous misunderstanding of Scripture. This guts the infinitely important point of contrast between Mary’s obedience and Eve’s disobedience. It’s not as though these lines are under copyright protection AND,  these expressions of faith are in most Protestant as well as Catholic Bibles, so I do not understand why the writers failed to include them here.

Similarly, when Mary reaches her Cousin Elizabeth they embrace silently. No where are the lines: “Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus,” wherein Elizabeth acknowledges Mary’s position as Queen Mother of the Lord, and mentions John (the future Baptizer) leaping within her – a clear affirmation of the unborn disciple’s recognition of Our Lord and Savior even in the womb. Also neglected was Mary’s Magnificat: “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior,” additional acknowledgement of her understanding of her place in what Bishop Robert Barron consistently refers to as Mary’s place in God’s Theo-drama, to which Mary FREELY CONSENTED.

Sadly, these significant blemishes could have been so easily repaired by the insertion of just a few sentences lifted out of the Bible. The 2017 animated feature, The Star, FROM AFFIRM, THE SAME PRODUCTION COMPANY, which shows the Nativity mostly through the eyes of a sentient donkey, clearly included Mary’s express consent: “Yes. Let it be done just as you say.”

Over all I’d give Journey to Bethlehem a qualified approval. But, I regret it is not for the demographic for which I think the producers were aiming. This is an awful shame, as with but a couple of small additions it could have been SO much better and spiritually fulfilling for all audiences. Those of immature or incomplete religious teaching may find some of the issues I have mentioned, and for the reasons I have given, confusing and damaging to their spiritual formation. But for those who are well informed and reasonably mature, who can afford to turn their brain off a bit and overlook the deficiencies in the script, Journey to Bethlehem can prove a relaxing, if fluffy, dose of Advent entertainment.

For the more impressionable or less well-formed, despite the animated silliness, I would rather recommend The Star.

SOUND OF FREEDOM – YOU MUST SEE THIS FILM – BE A WITNESS

 

Most of the time we go to the movies to be amused, terrified, enchanted, cheered, or made to laugh. Some we even see more than once as tradition or a family favorite.

But there exist rare films which, despite artistic cinematography, intriguing plot, skillful acting, beautiful music or clever dialogue, are difficult to watch … even once. These are the movies during which one does not crave popcorn, munch candy or chat about afterwards with casual banter, but leave from quietly and thoughtfully, with respect for the dignity the story deserves. These are the movies we may not WANT to watch but we must. The Passion of the Christ, Schindler’s List, the first 15 minutes of Saving Private Ryan, and Unplanned all come immediately to mind.

Sound of Freedom is one of these determinative films which, like all powerful literature, will change your life and impact your soul. Sound of Freedom documents the abomination of child sex trafficking, as seen through the eyes of a courageous FBI agent, Tim Ballard, willing to sacrifice everything – his career, his safety, his own freedom, and his life – in the search for a single child.

There is nothing graphic shown, but imagination has its own tortures as we, familiar with the depredations of this generation, know what it means to see the desperate resigned fear of the victim children, the expressions of soul crushing horror on the faces of veteran FBI agents forced to review evidence that haunts their nightmares, and understand the evil behind the curtains drawn by the degraded perverts who buy these innocents.

One might consider – if there are millions of children sunk into this deepest pit of Hell, why would Ballard risk everything to seek this one child? I am brought to mind of the parable of the starfish. After a great storm thousands of starfish were washed up on the beach, dying. A child went out to throw them back into the ocean one by one. When asked what possible difference his efforts could make by saving only a few out of these countless numbers, the child replied as he threw one more into the water, “I made a difference to this one.”

We are called to witness and be aware. Much like efforts at abortion clinics, where millions prayed for 50 years to overturn the horrendous miscarriage of justice that was Roe v Wade before the back of that beast was broken, we first must recognize the existence of the evil.

It is interesting that media moguls and entertainment behemoths have tried to diminish and trivialize this movie: Disney tried to shelve it, Washington Post, CNN and Rolling Stone, among others have attempted to deny the credibility of the issue by accusing the creators of being conspiracy theorists using “bogus statistics” and “moral panic” (whatever THAT is).

First, there is no way to over alert the public about even ONE child being kidnapped and sold for sexual torture, much less millions. Second, I wonder why the wealthy and powerful leftist elitists are pushing an agenda to give aid and comfort to pedophiles. A sexual attack on a child leaves scars as permanent as a severed limb. And there is no punishment severe enough to mitigate the damage these degenerates wreak upon innocent lives and their families.

But before we can even begin to combat evil we must recognize it is there. Be a witness. Go see Sound of Freedom.
(Note: Please do not bring children or sensitive older teens, and hesitate before bringing new mothers.)

“THE DODO” WEBSITE-CRITTER AND FAMILY FRIENDLY BUT MISSING SOMETHING IMPORTANT

I love videos on The Dodo. It’s a family friendly website featuring critter-human interaction. You can find it here: https://www.thedodo.com/

I have been especially warmed by the rescue mini-documentaries where attentive humans come to the aid of, of course, cats and dogs, but also everything from jumping spiders and turtles with birth defects to abandoned donkeys, one-winged birds and newborn squirrels.

Comments are always positive and my contributions generally point out the rescuers’ love and kindness, as well as their graced performance of stewardship to the critters to whom God has entrusted us, as well as pointing out that even wild animals’ true natural habitat is under the stewardship of people.

BUT – and I know you felt a “but” was coming on – I have also noticed a disturbing trend of late. With a few delightful exceptions, the vast majority of these rescuers, most of whom are couples, do not seem to have children. Their instinctive maternal and paternal love, affection and attention is poured out on these, admittedly, wonderful animals INSTEAD of on, or better, WITH children.

I fear that the fundamental problem is rescuers, many of whom are Millennial age, have bought into the ubiquitously spread lie of overpopulation. In fact, our world is facing a population crash which is likely to occur in their lifetimes. It’s not an if, but a when.

I only bring up this fact to assure these generous-hearted, gentle and kind people that adding children to their “menagerie” would be a GOOD thing. God gave us the stewardship of animals, yes; but He also blessed us with the ability to create and Will for us to “go forth and multiply”. God granted us these gifts, not to horde for even a lifetime but to pass on for generations to come – generations which will not happen if these lovely people confine themselves to the care of other species.

Think of how much more love and affection, attention and protection can be taught and passed on through your children as you create and raise them to participate in the next generation of critter stewards.

And in the process you’ll learn the joys, challenges and satisfaction in stewardship of your own children.

THE COURIER: THE ANSWER TO STING’S QUESTION

SHORT TAKE:

Breathtaking look at the true story of two ordinary men on opposite sides of the Iron Curtain who risked everything to save our world from mutual nuclear annihilation in the 1960’s.

WHO SHOULD GO:

Not appropriate for younger children because of the brutal look at Communist treatment of political prisoners, but should be an eye-opening experience, and educationally required, from high school age up.

LONG TAKE:

1985, before the Berlin Wall came down, before Reagan finally broke the will of the Communist Politburo, and when the possibility of nuclear war was still a reality, Sting released a song called “Russians”. It’s Slavic melody and haunting lyrics evoked the almost-prayerful lament:

Mister Khushchev said, “We will bury you.
I don’t subscribe to this point of view.
It’d be such an ignorant thing to do —
If the Russians love their children too.”

The music video is here: Russians.

The height of the Cold War was the terrifying and infamous Cuban Missile Crisis of October, 1962. Russia’s imperialistic, trigger-happy, Communist leader Khrushchev placed nuclear missiles on our doorstep, in their political satellite and lackey, Castro’s Cuba. This event precipitated our then President, JFK, to threaten the necessary military response. The Cold War did NOT get hot and The Courier, directed by Dominic Cooke (The Hollow Crown series), recounts how that came about and about to whom we should be thankful.

In the 1980’s, even into my 20’s, I remember having nightmares wherein I would hear bombs whistling towards me KNOWING I was about to die and praying the most intense Hail Marys of my life only to wake, thankful that “IT” had not happened — yet.

The Cold War was eventually won, the Berlin Wall came down and the idea of an imminent nuclear exchange with Russia became a historical footnote and warning. The defeat of Communist Russia came about due to a felicitous combination of events, especially: President Reagan’s hard line stance against the Communists and outspending the Russians in the war effort, (see the “Strategic Defense Initiative” also known as the “Star Wars Program”, a plan Reagan initiated to prevent what he saw as an insane “suicide pact” between America and Russia), and Reagan’s cultivating good relations with Russia’s Gorbachev.

BUT that happy outcome might never have had an opportunity to come to fruition, may have been lost in the radioactive ashes of our lost civilizations, had it not been for the efforts of two men, one on either side of the Iron Curtain, Greville Wynne and Oleg Penkovsky, who formed an unlikely friendship and laid the groundwork for that eventual permanent detente.

In 1960, Greville, an ordinary businessman who frequently traveled and made deals in the Slavic areas, was recruited by MI6 to pose as Penkovsky’s Western business connection and retrieve information from him.

The film, in a script written by Tom O’Connor, whose most notable writing effort to date was the very watchable comedy The Hitman’s Bodyguard, (my review here) evokes, accurately, the grim spectre of nuclear war which hung over everyone for decades.

The Courier features: Benedict Cumberbatch (Dr. Strange, Smaug in The Hobbit, Khan in Star Trek into Darkness, Sherlock, Hamlet) as Wynne; Irish-born Jessie Buckley as Wynne’s wife, Sheila; Merab Ninidze (Bridge of Spies and Homeland) as Penkovsky; Rachel Brosnahan (Blacklist) as the CIA operative, whose Emily Donovan is a composite of people, including the wife of a British Visa officer; and Angus Wright (Father Brown series, Iron Lady, The Crown series), who plays Sir Dickie Franks, Donovan’s British MI6 counterpart and the man who, in the movie, recruits Greville, (but who, in fact, claims not to have had anything to do with Greville’s recruitment).

The acting is excellent. Often, as appropriate in a spy thriller, what is NOT said can speak more volumes than what IS said. Both Ninidze and Cumberbatch do this masterfully, wherein: a facial twitch, a break in eye contact, body language, all inform their characters’ personalities as well as express both what they are saying and what they are trying NOT to say.

The soundtrack by Abel Korzeniowski is symphonic, masterfully reflecting the characters’ interactions. The string section functions like a musical telepathic connection, placing you in the center of the characters’ emotions: deep bass cellos underline the depression engendered by grim Russia, light violin phrases dance staccato in imitation of frantic typewriters or quickly ticking clocks to heighten stress. Another passage is reminiscent of waves on an ocean as dangerous options are tossed back and forth between the players. An almost whimsical and comical circus tune is background for the scene in which Greville is informed by his friend that, not only is he a spy, but wishes to recruit Greville, underlining the gob-smacked way Greville must have felt.

The cinematography by Sean Bobbitt is excellent – dark and foreboding throughout but never obscuring even the smallest visual detail of the story. Bobbit successfully accomplishes what the cinematographer Chung-Hoon Chung failed to accomplish in, coincidentally, another Cumberbatch movie – Current Wars (my review here). Wherein, Chung’s lighting techniques attempted to be period but effectively were simply so DARK they prevented the audience from seeing what was happening, Bobbitt’s style, in The Courier, manages brilliantly to both paint in dark political pallet colors of the 1960’s and, simultaneously, makes every scene crystal clear.

As the story is written, the catalyst for Penkovsky’s decision to release massive amounts of information  to the United States was a desire, yes, for his children to live in freedom and not under the crushing thumb of Communism, but more immediately, for his children to simply SURVIVE, to NOT have to face the prospect of death by radioactive fallout or nuclear incineration.

While it’s, obviously, no spoiler to tell you their efforts were successful in preventing the Cuban Missile Crisis from precipitating a nuclear holocaust, how they did it is a fascinating journey. We should know our history or be doomed to repeat it. And tribute should be made to the men who offered everything they had and were to pave the way for this instead of this — for the love of their children.

May God bless and rest their souls.

HONEST THIEF – FORMULAIC BUT ENTERTAINING ACTION ADVENTURE

SHORT TAKE:
Keeping in mind that I LOVE cookies, Honest Thief is a cookie cutter Liam Neeson action adventure. So, while it’s not Shakespeare, a fun time was still had by all.

WHO SHOULD GO:
Mid teens and up for language and some TV cop show level violence. But no sex or outright blasphemy, (though God’s name is used in vain twice it is not as a profanity), which, in today’s culture puts this film above a lot of other offerings.

LONG TAKE:

Before we get started – is it me or do the Neeson action adventure posters have a theme going – streaking lights at odd angles with Neeson torso and a gun? No? OK.

SPOILERS

On Calvary there were two thieves – one on either side of the crucified Christ. One was repentant, received forgiveness from Jesus and the promise that he would be with Our Lord that very day in Paradise. I’ve always been especially touched by this moving scene and wondered if the repentant thief, of all people, was the first soul to enter Heaven after Jesus opened the Gates for the first time since Adam and Eve’s Fall from Grace. The Bible does say that there is more rejoicing in Heaven over a single soul who has mended his ways than over 100 who were not in need of such contrition.

One of the aspects of this story that warms my heart is the fact the good thief did not ask for any such promises. He simply admitted his guilt, accepted his punishment and merely asked to be remembered. In return he received far more than he had expected.

Such is the case for Liam Neeson’s Tom, a bank thief so successful and clever, he has achieved a certain begrudging respect and legend amongst the police who seek him. He is properly, a thief, not a robber, for he enters and departs the bank, seemingly like magic, in secret, and has never physically harmed anyone.

Tom, by chance, meets and falls in love with Annie (Kate Walsh) who is led to believe he is a bank security analyst – which is “kind of” true? LOL Wanting to spend his life with her with a clean slate, he plans to admit his guilt to the proper authorities and to Kate, return all the money, accept his punishment and hope for the best from his lady love, expecting nothing more than to be able to tell her he has repented. Given his non-violent criminal record and the fact he is able to return all of the money, he reasonably plans to be able to cut a deal with the police. Problem is he can’t get anyone to believe he is the semi-legendary mystery pilferer of millions. A second string team with few scruples and even fewer brain cells Agents Nivens and Hall (Jai Courtney and Anthony Ramos) are sent out and Tom’s plans become…complicated.

In other hands this could have turned into a comedy (on purpose or by accident) and there were moments when I thought it might stand on that knife edge. But this is a straight up action adventure thriller and works on all points as such, though it does retain a certain wry Neeson humor, lightening moments as a bit of creamer does strong coffee.

Liam Neeson, OBE (Order of the British Empire) used to be best known for classy bio pics of real and fictitious characters such as Les Miserables (the prose version), Schindler’s List, Rob Roy, Michael Collins and The Mission. The last couple of decades he has made a name for himself as an action hero in edge-of-your-seat adrenaline rushes like The Grey, the Taken series, Non-Stop and Run All Night.

Director and co-writer, Mark Williams, makes sure Honest Thief continues in that latter vein. Fast spaced, with Neeson comfortable in his likeable laid back but quietly strong character, he has nice chemistry with Walsh.

Courtney and Ramos are suitably menacing bad cops, though I wondered at their stupidity given they thought they could get away with this kind of blatant embezzlement and a murder of one of their own, when they work for the very people who ferret such out. Jeffrey Donovan is the clean cop trying to get at the truth with his partner Sam Baker, played by Robert Patrick.

As a piece of irrelevant trivia, both Jai Courtney and Patrick were in the Terminator series, albeit with their roles reversed – Patrick was our first glimpse at the terrifying shape shifting Terminator in Terminator 2: Judgment Day and Courtney rebooted Kyle Reese in the much maligned Terminator: Genisys.

Mark Isham’s soundtrack favors sequences featuring a long suspenseful note, usually strings, overlayed with a melancholy tune, breaking forth with startling and focused aggression during action scenes, reflecting Tom’s naturally calm and thoughtful personality, which you would be well advised not to test. Isham has worked on an impressively ecclectic list of movies – from the whimsical Nell (in which Neeson also starred), to the sci fi Next, the Stephen King horror The Mist, the reboot musical Fame, the Jackie Robinson bio pic 42 with the late Chad Boseman, the action adventure about an autistic hitman in The Accountant, the charming family film A Dog’s Journey and the ridiculous Bill & Ted Face the Music.

The cinematography isn’t especially inventive but more than adequate for the needs of this fast paced action thriller.

Though Neeson claimed 2019’s Cold Pursuit was his last action adventure, he has not only successfully continued his smart tough guy roles with Honest Thief but has signed on to film yet another action flick – about a man stuck, with his two children, in a car wired with an explosive which will detonate if he does not obey his “captor”.

Neeson is a fine classic actor, who seems to have created a successful  niche for himself in the popcorn genre where the good guy can drive fast backwards in traffic, while successfully shooting at the bad guys and avoid harming any bystanders. Good for him. Personally there is a place for good old reliable formula movies. Sometimes it’s nice to just sit back with a bag of M&Ms and enjoy a movie where the righteous (or at least repentant)  man is going to win.

ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING – CUTE BUT FORGETTABLE SIMON PEGG COMEDY

SHORT TAKE:
Broadly comic, but largely forgettable morality tale of what happens when a well meaning schlub gets a shot at ultimate power.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:
Mostly more MATURE audiences for: language, some nudity, and high school level sexual humor, though no sexual activity is ever seen.

LONG TAKE:
If you take Bruce Almighty, (albeit without the brilliant theological underpinnings), add a page or two from Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, add a touch of The Twilight Zone’s amusing “Mr. Dingle, the Strong”, a smidgeon  of Bedazzled and package it all in Simon Pegg’s unique brand of wry humor, you get Absolutely Anything…. I don’t mean you can get “absolutely anything” as a description of the literal resulting outcome of this combination, but refer to the title of the movie: Absolutely Anything.

Despite disagreeing with much of Mr. Pegg’s philosophical opinions, I am a fan of his witty banter in his often clever film ideas (except for the occasional temper tantrum religion bashing, like Paul). Most of his repertoire, such as Shaun of the Dead, Run Fat Boy Run, his tech expert Benji in the Mission Impossible films, his Scotty in the reboot “Kelvin” version of Star Trek movies, his alcoholic desperate-to-relive-his-youth Gary King in the bizarre sci fi The World’s End, his adorable voicing of Reepicheep in Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and even his stint as The Editor in the Eccleston incarnation of Dr Who in “The Long Game” as well as many others, all benefited from Pegg’s gentle, self-deprecating, comic-timing master persona.

Pegg excels best when he portrays a nobody who rises to the challenge of a truly bizarre situation to overcome seemingly insurmountable odds: a fat layabout in Run Fat Boy Run, who trains for a marathon to convince the mother of his child to stay in country.A burnt out idle human parasite who pulls himself together to defend his friends from invading robot aliens in The World’s End.

In Absolutely Anything, directed by Monty Python veteran Terry Jones and written by Jones and Gavin Scott (the latter of whose resume consists mostly in kids’ versions of classic stories), Pegg’s Comic Champion once again plays out as reliably as Bruce Willis’ one-note but reliably entertaining Action Hero – nothing new or particularly surprising but an expected and fun formula, as satisfying as a tub of movie theater popcorn – nothing especially substantial to digest but delightful of which to partake.

SPOILERS

Pegg’s Neil is a well meaning, average, albeit lazy teacher who longs to be a novelist and pines unrequitedly for his next door neighbor Catherine (Kate Beckinsale).

A group of bizarrely colorful aliens voiced by the surviving members of the original Monty Python’s Flying Circus:John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, and Michael Palin, decide it is Earth’s turn to be tested for existence-worthiness by choosing a random human to see what he will do with complete power for 30 days.

If he chooses wisely Earth will not be destroyed. If he does not perform the way they think he should ……

Mayhem quickly ensues when misspoken, imprecise and casual remarks suddenly become reality, such as his frustrated snarky wish for the extraterrestrial destruction of the unruly middle school children he is assigned to teach, or that his love-smitten friend, Ray, (Sanjeev Bhaskar from Paddington 2 and Drunk History) acquires the devotion of the girl of his dreams. Of course, at first, thinking he is going insane, he can’t decide whether he should give up drinking or take up a LOT more of it. But, it doesn’t take long for Neil to begin testing his new “gift”.

It’s a one trick pony joke stretched out to a feature length movie. The special effects are B grade, it’s filmed like an uninspired TV movie, and the music sounds like it was pulled off a shelf of standards for fluffy comedies: forgettable light background phrases, bassoons for the punchlines – nothing particularly memorable or identifiable.

It is Pegg’s comic timing and lovable putz persona, the delicious ad-libbed nature of the Python-ized aliens and the complete balmy silliness of the situation that make this movie watchable.

Disappointingly, Robin Williams, in his last film appearance, is truly wasted as the voice of Pegg’s dog, Dennis. Unlike William’s genius Genie, or his merry Mork, or his dubious Doubtfire, or most any one of dozens of other roles, Dennis is sweet but uninspired and could have been done just as well by any of a hundred other comics. William’s unique brand of quick witted brilliance was simply missing. Not that he was bad in the role but he just wasn’t – Robin Williams.

But what Absolutely Anything truly lacks is what made Bruce Almighty such a worthwhile piece of memorable cinema – the learning curve for the protagonist that wisdom comes from humility. The awareness that absolute power in the hands of the limited creatures that we are leaves us with – absolutely nothing.  That what will bring true happiness is genuine altruistic love for others of God’s Creatures, and submission to a power greater than ourselves, submission to God, who loves us infinitely … and who is a LOT more qualified to handle absolute power than we are.

Now while there IS a moral – as such – in Absolutely Anything, it is short-sighted and focused mostly on Neil’s recognition that HE isn’t really the person to wield this much ability. Sort of the way liberals portray Socialism to us – not that NO human being should have this much power over others but that it’s just the RIGHT people have not yet bludgeoned the rest of the world with it.

The “moral” espoused in Absolutely Anything is Neil’s recognition that HE is not suitable, implying that it just is not in the right mortal hands. Dennis, actually makes the decision which gets closer to the truth.

While Bruce Almighty is the far worthier choice in a comic examination of whether humans are fit for “God-like” power, if you’re just looking for a brainless, fairly harmless 85 minutes of forgettable adult silliness, you could do worse than Absolutely Anything ——— and I mean the movie, not as advice.

WAR OF THE WORLDS – LAKE CHARLES-STYLE

SHORT TAKE:

Wonderful radio show production of Lake Charles’ version of the Orson Welles’ radio show broadcast of H.G. Welles’ War of the Worlds, brought to us by Lake Charles Little Theatre, McNeese State University and KBYS (88.3 FM)

BUT IT WILL ONLY BE BROADCAST AGAIN ONCE MORE ON OCTOBER 31, 2020 @ 6 PM ON KBYS 88.3 FM.

WHO SHOULD LISTEN:

Anyone and EVERYONE!!!

LONG TAKE:

On October 31, 1938 Halloween night, one of the greatest and most famous hoaxes in history took place – and it wasn’t even intentional.

The famous auteur film writer, actor, producer and director Orson Welles, the writer and director of what some consider the most important and best movie ever made – Citizen Kane – wrote and performed a radio show broadcast of H.G. Welles’ novel War of the Worlds, updated to Welles’ contemporary time period between the two HUMAN contested world wars and geographically moved from England to the United States.

Despite it being advertised, interrupted for commercial breaks and re-identified periodically as a radio broadcast of the famous novel, people tuning in casually believed it to be a real broadcast of an invading army of extra terrestrials. Panic was let loose in pockets all across America. As funny as it seems now it wasn’t terribly amusing to those first hoaxed listeners. Though one can’t help but think that through: a deficit of listening attention and a lack of literary education, they did it to themselves.

Safe in the knowledge that the vast majority of people in this area are familiar, not only with this iconic story but with the original source material, KBYS hosted a production in collaboration with both McNeese State University and Lake Charles Little Theatre, and with the cooperation and permission of the Welles’ estate to re-create this radio show with updates to move the referenced locales to Lake Charles and surrounding areas and landmarks, both current and historic.

The voice actors were our own acting luminaries: Professor Charles McNeely Director of McNeese State University’s Theatre department, radio personalities: Heather Fazzio Partin, her husband Randy Partin, John Bridges, and Gary Shannon, Lake Charles’ mayor Nic Hunter, and Matt Young, director of cultural affairs at Historic City Hall Arts and Cultural Center.

The broadcast was a triumph and a delight. AND it will be REBROADCAST TOMORROW ON HALLOWEEN NIGHT SATURDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2020.

So tune in to this entertaining, cleverly edited, and nostalgic radio trip to our version of this famous Orson Welles’ production of WAR OF THE WORLDS – LAKE CHARLES-STYLE.

DEATH BECOMES HER – FOR THIS YEAR’S CINEMATIC HALLOWEEN TREAT

SHORT TAKE:

Great, adult humor, Halloween appropriate movie, about the mayhem which results from a magic youth potion and homicidal rivals for the same man.

WHO SHOULD WATCH:

Language, sexual conversational references, a quick shot of full back female nudity, and comically grotesque violence makes this mature fare only. However,  the excellent performances, sly jabs at the modern shallow pursuit of youth, and its strong moral life lesson makes this worth your time. Not to mention the fact it is just plain old fun to watch.

LONG TAKE:

Having been through 2 major hurricanes this year which, when added up together total a CAT 7, there’s just not a lot that would frighten me right now. So with Halloween approaching I thought I’d take a more comic shift and recommend one of my favorite, deep dark-humor comedies – 1992’s Death Becomes Her.

This movie has amazing star power. And all three leads play against type. Streep is more known for sweet vulnerable characters in serious dramas or touching musicals, such as her parts in Sophie’s Choice, The Deer Hunter and Mama Mia.

Goldie, starting with Laugh-In in her youth, is better known for breathy brainless characters in light frothy comedies like Overboard, Cactus Flower and The Out of Towners.

And, of course, Willis is usually synonymous with John McClaine’s Yippie-ky-yo-kay-yay smart aleck action heroes in heart pounders like Die Hard or Red or The Expendables or The Whole Nine Yards.

In Death Becomes Her, these performers are delightfully unrecognizable from their established trade mark personas. Bruce Willis is meek, gullible and easily manipulated plastic surgeon, Ernest Menville. Meryl Streep is Madeleine Ashton, a character which would have appalled even her steely Miranda Priestly from The Devil Wore Prada. Goldie Hawn is Madeleine’s opponent, Helen Sharp, who goes through two major transformations to appease her vengeful bitter personality.

The movie also features the stunningly beautiful Isabella Rossellini, who looks more like her mother, the cinema icon Ingrid Bergman, with each passing year.

The story revolves around the aptly nicknamed “Mad” and “Hel” as they spend 20 odd years tussling over Willis’ character the way two dogs might play tug-o-war with a toy. Not because either really wants it but because they don’t want the other dog to have it. And the result is not all that good for the tug-o-war toy. A sorceress’ magic potion, a castle full of dead celebrities (watch for cameos), and a few scenes of comically gory violence all make this appropriate for the Halloween season.

The topics, language and violence make it appropriate for a mature audience only.

The very dark humor which chides the shallow pursuit of youth at any cost, the excellent straight faced performances despite the bizarre goings on, and the surprisingly philosophical and moral message structuring the backbone of Willis’ character arc makes this a movie well worth your time.

The clever script was written by Martin Donovan, whose resume is cluttered with 1970’s TV shows, and David Koepp, whose pedigree includes both Jurassic Park and the movie version of Mission: Impossible. Directed by Robert Zemekis whose genius guided Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Back to the Future and Forrest Gump, this is one of those rare movies which will make you laugh and think at the same time, pondering the nature of what makes life worth living.

The soundtrack is by Alan Silvestri, who artfully penned the musical accompaniment of a wide variety of movies from: Infinity War, Avengers, Back to the Future, and Van Helsing to Parent Trap and Stuart Little. Silvestri’s composition here brings to mind the tension under laced with comic flair that Bernard Hermann brought to Alfred Hitchcock’s treasure trove of suspenseful movies flavored with a dash of dark whimsy.

So for this year’s All Hallows’ Eve film, instead of the mindless cotton candy of a slasher movie, I recommend Death Becomes Her for a multi-course cinematic meal, which will supply the table with: a healthy portion of thrills, a fairly large helping of gore, a generous splash of magic, some well tossed laughs, and finally a satisfying aperitif of well served justice.

Bon appetite.