Homeschool Mom Movie Mavin – Type "AUDIO" into the search box for AUDIO version. And remember…EDUCATION DOESN'T HAVE TO ALWAYS COME FROM A BOOK

WEIGHING IN ON THE PETER RABBIT “CONTROVERSY”

On the Peter Rabbit bullying controversy. This is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard of or read. It only goes to prove that some people have way too much time on their hands. Perhaps in responding to this it indicates that I do too. However, I review movies. What's their excuse?!

If you have not heard of this dumb thing: Peter "bullies" the younger McGregor by capitalizing on his allergies and slingshotting a Blackberry into his mouth. They call it "allergy bullying". Of course, McGregor was, at the time, trying – with cause – to kill Peter and his siblings. At first I thought the protestors were kidding but then I realized that people who gin up this kind of complaint generally do not have a sense of humor.

I got news!! Peter and Thomas McGregor are in MORTAL COMBAT. We're talking Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd, Sylvester and Tweety, Tom and Jerry, Daffy Duck and Yosemite Sam. Peter is a 5 pound rabbit. Thomas McGregor is a 170 lb 6 foot one inch grown man. They are trying to EXTERMINATE each other!!! And to see this rabbit get the best of McGregor and watch as McGregor attempts to retaliate is very very funny.

To paraphrase John Cleese from Monty Python's the "Dead Parrot Sketch" Peter and Thomas are trying to enroll each other in the Choir Celestial. They're engaged in attempting to make each other push up daisies. They are trying to introduce each other to our Creator. They are, with great earnestness, endeavoring to KILL EACH OTHER.

Thomas McGregor tries to chop the bunnies in half with with a hoe! He sets up fatal animal traps in hopes of breaking their necks. His Uncle ATE Peter's father! Peter on the other hand tries to electrocute, trap, and beat Thomas McGregor to death. At one time he and his friends successfully manage to get the young McGregor to fall off the roof of a two-story house. Had he fallen onto something harder than the turned earth below him it would have been a lethal fall. As it is he is rendered unconscious and the animals all comment about how it will be lovely when the ice cream truck comes to pick him up – referring to the ambulance that came and took away the late Elder McGregor.

This is Shakespearean level tragic stuff. Two males vying, with different but equally compelling motives, for the same woman's affections, try to murder each other in a variety of ways and in the attempt almost succeed! AND, as a side effect, almost kill the young lady as well. Had this not been a child's movie it is likely all three would have ended up dead.

To then be concerned about a relatively minor, but honestly clever, attack with a blackberry is ludicrous – which is really an insult to genuinely ludicrous things. It reminds me of the Monty Python sketch "Self Defense Against Fresh Fruit" where an incompetent self defense instructor explains the fine points of defending oneself against a banana! SEE SKIT HERE

Peter Rabbit is SLAPSTICK. Do these people have no sense of humor!? (Rhetorical question.) Have the "protestors" never seen what the Three Stooges do to each other?! I have family members with serious food allergies too and I took ZERO offense. To paraphrase John Adams from the musical 1776 – It's a comedy – you have to offend SOMEBODY!

What I am sorry for is that Sony actually apologized for this scene and did not have the steel in their collective important body parts to tell the boycotters to GET A LIFE! I am all out of patience with oversensitive snowflakes who run around looking for some reason to be put out. And frankly I'M OFFENDED BY THEIR BEING OFFENDED!!! How about THEY apologize to Sony and the other members of the audience for being so boorish?

I'm not condoning the behavior of EITHER characters in the movie but neither do I suggest children or other adults should: set animal traps in beds, electrify door knobs, use slingshots in an effort to emasculate someone with vegetables or blow each other up with dynamite – ALL of which happen in this movie! If you don't want your children seeing this then use a bit of parental discretion and do not go! But don't make the world more peevish and unpleasant for the rest of us.

I can only hope that in the future the people who spent effort stirring up this silly controversy manage to find better things to do with their time….then I can too.

PETER RABBIT – CHARMINGLY PRESENTED RABBIT … TAIL

SHORT TAKE:

Lovely and fun family friendly homage to the classic story of the mischievous rabbit, using all the talents of the modern animation techniques as well as some very skillful voice and pantomiming actors.

WHO SHOULD GO: Very family friendly for all ages (despite the stupid controversy about the "allergy bullying" – see my other blog on this: WEIGHING IN ON THE PETER RABBIT “CONTROVERSY”). Take everyone from the youngest who will sit through a feature length film to the Grandparents. Everyone will find something to enjoy.

CHECK OUT DETAILED AND SPECIFIC CONTENT STATISTICS AT SCREENIT.COM.

LONG TAKE:

Domhnall Gleeson is a good sport. Son of the immensely talented Brendan Gleeson who has appeared in everything from Tom Cruise's sci fi Live, Die, Repeat to Mad Eyed Moody in the Harry Potter franchise, Domhnall does not fall far from that gifted tree.

Domhnall Gleeson has appeared in Star Wars as the new and somewhat comedically incompetent baddie, General Hux, occasionally thrown unceremoniously around by a miffed Kylo Ren. He has appeared often with his brothers and father in genres from dark comedy (Calvary) to rom-com fantasy (About Time) to an American western (True Grit). He's been shot, tossed, wolf bitten, has murdered his own real life brother as a modern day Cain in Mother! and fallen in love with an android (Ex Machina).

Irish born and naturally heavily accented, he nonetheless has solid command of a variety of accents. He's been an iconic upper class British writer (A. A. Milne in Goodbye, Christopher Robin) and an over the top American CIA agent (American Made). There's a boyish charm he exudes, even in his darkest roles, which makes his characters inherently likeable, especially as he endures whatever indignities required of his roles with an amused sangfroid even when it's against a green screen necessitating pantomime.

But no where is he required to endure more humiliations with a smile against an imaginary antagonist than in Peter Rabbit.

The premise is that Old Man MacGregor, portrayed briefly in broad good natured ranting and raving by

Sam (Jurassic Park) Neill, bequeathes his farm to his great nephew, Thomas. My daughter, Elizabeth, pointed out that once again, in Peter Rabbit, Sam Neil tackles intelligent animals out to get him. LOL

Domhnall's Thomas is as precise in his habits as Phileas Phogg and as cantankerous and anti-wildlife as his rabbit pie eating Uncle. He moves into the MacGreor house with the intention of selling it but the anthropomorphized animals will have none of it. Peter's coat wearing, wise cracking, English speaking rabbit family are as anxious to be rid of this new human interloper as he is of them.

The adorable complicating factor in all of this is Bea (presumably a version of "BEA"atrix Potter, the author of the original Peter Rabbit stories, who mothers the rabbits and lovingly paints them, with whom Peter has attached and in whom Thomas falls immediately in love. This sets off a series of comical incidents where each side tries to do away with the other all while pretending to be pals for the sake of Bea.

While the stuff of Shakespearean tragedy, this is a kids' film and, as such, you can be sure that subsequent to a series of outrageous hijinx all will be well that will end well.

Domhnall, during the course of the film is beaten, tripped, electrically shocked, subjected to animal traps, used as a bulleye's in uncomfortable places with well aimed vegetables, kicked, bitten and wrestled with by —- nothing. He didn't even have the benefit of the voice actors nearby.

James Cordan (who appears in two Dr. Who's as a love lorn fellow tenant of a town house then again as the same character, now as a well meaning but overwhelmed father) does the voice of Peter. By his own description, Cordan was working in his pajamas in England, while the intrepid Mr. Gleeson was sweating it out in 100 degree Australian heat pretending to be in the far cooler northern rural U.K.

In interviews, Gleeson good naturedly describes how he hurt himself early and often during the course of the filming – wrenching and bruising ankles, back, ribs – as he leaps, falls,

slams into furniture and generally gets banged around.

All for a good cause as my two grandsons loved the movie. The littlest laughed hardest whenever Pigling Bland appeared to aristocratically gorge himself on whatever happened to be within reach.

The movie is good natured and silly, Peter on steroids, as the slightly mischievous bunny of the books becomes a ninja-like, almost superhuman terror, turning the young MacGregor's modern gizmos back onto his unwary human antagonist.

Both Thomas and Peter must ultimately come to terms on behalf of the sweet Bea but it's their rivalry that provides the most entertainment as Peter is more Bugs Bunny than Potter and Thomas would definitely be able to empathize with Elmer Fudd.

The voice acting is enthusiastic and bright.

Margo Robbie of Suicide Squad narrates and speaks for Flopsy.

Elizabeth Debicki from both Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and Valerian is Mopsy. And in a creative, if not physical, reunion

Daisy Ridley rejoins her Star Wars alumni, Domhnall, in the cast as Cotton-Tail. Each actress provides a cute and distinctive personality to the triplet sisters.

Take your little ones to go see this adorable homage to the classic rabbit tail — I mean tale. Although, honestly, some of the sight gags are repeated a bit too much as though they are dragging out their run time, at the end the audience I attended with applauded. My grandsons enjoyed it and that is endorsement enough. And rest assured, this Peter Rabbit will find something for every age in your family at which to chuckle.

SECRET GARDEN AT MCNEESE UNIVERSITY ONLY THROUGH FEBRUARY 11, 2018

The Secret Garden – a musical – is playing through February 11, 2018 at the McNeese University "Tritico" Theater here in Lake Charles.

This is an ambitious project taken on by Jessa Lormand inspired by a childhood attachment to the story.

SOME SPOILERS

The premise of the story is about a young British girl, Mary Lennox, living in India, whose military based parents die during a cholera epidemic. The sole survivor of the village she is brought to live with one of her only two remaining relatives – Archibald Craven, a reclusive hunchback still grieving ten years after the death of his beloved wife, Lily, a death brought on during the birth of his only child, Colin. Everyone is so anxious about Colin's frail health that they have, foolishly, but with good intentions, hidden him away until he develops rickets. It is only when Mary comes to the manor and befriends the boy, stealthily bringing him out into the fresh air and the secret garden which Mary has rediscovered, that Colin begins to recover.

The book presented the garden with its fresh air and breezes as an analogy for the Holy Spirit. However, later versions of the story, including the movies released in 1987 and 1993, and this musical, point out the spiritual vacuum in which these children were raised. Both neglected by their parents – Mary's out of selfishness and Colin's out of fear – they seek to fill that vacuum with the misplaced and misinterpreted mythology and childish mimickery of the Indian dances which Mary remembered seeing performed when she was in India. Without appropriate loving adult guidance the children revert to made up pagan rituials, instead of the Christian faith to which they were born, for solace.

It is not until the proper child-parent relationship is healed that the garden's newly refurbished beauty is or can be celebrated.

Both the story and the music are challenging and often dissonant. But our community players and McNeese students meet up to this demanding production. Archibald is performed by Tyler Brumback who we saw recently in McNeese's Kiss me Kate as Fred/Petruchio. Archibald's brother, Neville, is well done by Timothy Smith. Lily, the deceased mother of Colin is played by Amy Phillips. Martha, the maid, who is the only optimist in the crowd, is sung by Lara Connally, also recently from Kiss me Kate as Lois/Bianca. Dickon, Martha's brother and Mary's first friend at the manor house is Timothy Cural. Clay Corley dances as the robin who leads Mary to the garden. Heather Partin, veteran of many productions at both McNeese and Lake Charles Little Theatre, as well as the traditional Mistress of the Community Band concerts, plays Mrs. Medlock, the housekeeper. Seth Trahan is the comic relief groundskeeper whose Irish wisdoms brighten the stage. And the adult Kaitlyn Colby, petite and charming, is inexhaustible as the nine year old Mary Lennox. There are over a dozen other players who fill out the cast of ghosts and dancers and guests in flashback of the manor. But I have to mention that our own son, Louis, plays Lt. Wright, one of the first on the scene at the cholera stricken household.

The cast brings all the youthful enthusiasm and energy needed for this difficult musical and, as you can see, injected an infectious enthusiasm into their coming together as a tightly knit cast as well.

WARNING

Not for younger teens as it is a long musical and deals with a lot of serious content, including death, ghosts that haunt the mansion, a brother who coveted his brother's wife, pagan rituals and neglected children.

BE SURE TO GET YOUR TICKETS HERE AS THE RUN IS VERY VERY SHORT: Tickets for Secret Garden

LOVING VINCENT – AN ANIMATED BIOGRAPHY IN VAN GOGH’S PAINTINGS

SHORT TAKE: Astonishing and beautiful, one of a kind film in which a reluctant messenger plays detective in an attempt to parse out the circumstances of Van Gogh's death, animated in the style of Van Gogh's paintings!

WHO SHOULD WATCH: Anyone interested in classic art, though younger audience members might get bored. Adult themes of mental illness, prostitution, alcoholism and, of course, the death of Vincent Van Gogh – the main topic of the film – are points of discussion, though there is no graphic content of either a sexual or violent nature, and little or no prafane language.

UNFORTUNATELY, SCREENIT.COM HAS NO DETAILED CONTENT STATISTICS ON LOVING VINCENT YET.

LONG TAKE:

The word "unique" is too often blithely thrown around. If you go online you'll find "unique" hair styles and "unique" ice cream stores. "Unique," in fact means "being the only one of its kind; unlike anything else". And there are really only so many ways you can manipulate your hair before redundancy becomes an issue and I'm afraid a truly "unique" ice cream might not be edible. Even so, there are still a few things that genuinely qualify as "unique": Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, each and every individual human soul, Shakespeare's Hamlet, the Mona Lisa and….Loving Vincent.

Loving Vincent is a movie of which there is only one of its kind. Not just different or unusual, though it is that, but actually unique. Loving Vincent was animated by over 100 professional artists using 853 backdrops and over 66,000 paintings which, if laid out like a carpet would cover both the entire United Kingdom and the Island of Manhattan. 80 of the artists were chosen for their professional technique, facility with computers and ability to accurately recreate Van Gogh's style.

This technique has never before been used. The effect is mesmerizing, like watching one of Van Gogh's paintings come to life before your eyes.

The plot follows Armand Roulin, the son of Joseph Roulin, a postmaster who had been a friend of Vincent's. Armand is portrayed and captured as a facile youth who matures during the course of the movie by Douglas Booth who was Romeo in the 2013 Shakespeare film, Shem in Noah and Titus in Jupiter Rising. Booth carries the water of the narrative beautifully as we see the story unfold through his eyes like the petals of the irises featured in one of Van Gogh's paintings.

Joseph is captured using Chris O'Dowd, a charming and gentle British comedian who has appeared in roles as varied as Thor: Dark World, the dark and theologically intriguing murder mystery Calvary, the most recent space oriented sci fi installment of the Cloverfield franchise called Cloverfield Paradox, and was in a quirky British comedy about time travel called FAQ About Time Travel.

Joseph tasks his drunken aimless son with transporting the last letter Vincent wrote to his brother Theo. This begins a journey for Armand which will change his perception of the world and himself for the better. Vincent has been dead for two years by the time Armand starts out and during the course of his travels Armand's adventures transform from a simple delivery to an inquiry into the master painter's life and mysterious circumstances surrounding his death. Armand finds out as much about himself as about those who knew Vincent well as he tries to uncover what truths he can concerning the premature demise of this, at that time, unappreciated genius.

This film would have been an achievement in storytelling had it been done live action and would have rivaled Immortal Beloved whose main protagonist sought the identity of the Immortal Beloved to whom he wished to deliver Beethoven's remaining post mortem letter. Or even the curiosity piquing Citizen Kane as one journalist interviews everyone who knew Kane to try to determine the identity of Rosebud. The script is written with sensitivity and three dimensional prose to tweak out the tangles of conflicting evidence amidst the testimonies of those whose only connection was their acquaintance with or love for Vincent. This, as a tale, would have been a great story by itself. But to use the UNIQUE and brilliantly appropriate, though massively ambitious, technique of animating it with Van Gogh style paintings was itself, if you will excuse the intentional pun, a masterstroke by the writers/directors Dorota Kobiela, Hugh Welchman and Jacek Dehnel. This is as different in its own way as the one take-one unbroken shot that Russian Ark was (see a previuos blog).

Armand seeks out and questions a number of others. Pere Tanguy (John Sessions) was a friend of Vincent's. Dr. Gachet (played by Jerome Flynn), who appears in Portrait of Dr. Gachet, had cared for Vincent in his last few months and during the gunshot and subsequent infection that killed Vincent. Louise Chevalier, housekeeper to Dr. Gachet (Helen "Narcissa Malfoy" McCrory), who had no use for Vincent and his odd ways. Adeline Ravoux (played by Eleanor Tomlinson) was an innkeeper's daughter who ran the hotel Vincent last stayed in. Adeline was featured in Van Gogh's Portrait of Adeline Ravoux. Saoirse Ronan (Ladybird) portrays Marguerite. Marguerite Gachet was the daughter of Dr. Gachet, and is the girl in Van Gogh's painting Margueite Gachet at Piano. And Robert Gulaczyk, a Polish theater actor, plays Vincent himself and bears a more than passing resemblance to the shy, kind, sensitive and tormented painter. All the actors were chosen, not just for their acting (for the capture) and voice talents but for their resemblance to characters in the actual paintings by Van Gogh.

Even the title is creative, evocative and chosen with care. Your "Loving Vincent" is the way Vincent would sign his letters to his brother, Theo. Loving Vincent could refer to the way the painters are expressing their respect and affection for this great artist, as in – this is how we are "loving Vincent", by creating this beautiful movie about him. Or it could be a command to the audience as a demonstration of the way we could appreciate the man and his work – as in, if you watch this movie with the appreciation it deserves you will be "loving Vincent". Or it could simply be a description of the man himself. Loving – as an adjective to describe the great, generous and open heartedness of the man who was the genius master craftsman of the easel – as in – he was a great, a creative, a brilliant but also a loving Vincent.

It is unfortunate and shortsighted by the Oscar committee that Loving Vincent has been selected to compete in the Oscars as "only" in the animated feature film category. There is precedent to allow animated features to compete in the "Best Picture" category – Beauty and the Beast, Up and Toy Story 3 all were accorded that respect. Loving Vincent MORE than deserves the acknowledgement to be included in the Best Picture category. This is a serious film about the creative life and mysterious death of one of the world's most beloved master painters. It also only HAPPENS to also be an animated movie. We learn not just about the circumstances of his death but of the complex man whose life was cut far too short from those who knew him best and in conversations that appear deceptive or misleading at first, as in the style of an Agatha Christie novel, and all come together like some lovingly sculpted three dimensional puzzle.

Not only is this movie made WITH beautiful paintings, it IS one big gorgeous animated painting. This is a remarkable work of startlingly pure love – a love letter from these hundreds of artists and actors and seamstresses and animators, caterers and drivers, electricians and sound technicians, not to mention the writers and directors …… to Vincent Van Gogh

Watching this movie gave me a new appreciation for Van Gogh's paintings and has inspired me to seek out and learn more about this great man's work.

It also couldn't help but remind me of two other lovingly created items which focused on Vincent Van Gogh. The first is one of the most moving three and a half minutes of cinema I have ever seen.

It is near the end of the Dr. Who episode – Vincent. Dr Who and his companion Amy have traveled back in time to meet Vincent Van Gogh. They befriend him and come face to face with the mental and personal struggles of this gentle soul and decide to bring him forward in time to show him the Van Gogh exhibit at the Musee d'Orsay. Tony Curran, as Vincent, does a magnificent job as Van Gogh and the scene is touching, funny and deeply moving. . Dr Who excerpt – Vincent at the Musee d'Orsay.

The other bit of Van Gogh fandom which occurred to me was Don McLean's song Vincent. McLean is probably best known for American Pie. The song Vincent came out in the same year, 1971, when I was twelve: "Starry Starry Night, paint your palette blue and gray…how you suffered for your sanity…flaming flowers that brightly blaze, swirling clouds in violet haze…and when no hope was left in sight on that starry starry night you took your life as lovers often do…." The melancholic and beautiful tune sums up the feel of this visually, emotionally, narratively and lyrically moving film. LISTEN TO VINCENT HERE: VINCENT by Don McLean

WARNING: I really have none except that the topic of suicide may upset the very young.

This film is a gorgeous masterpiece which I like to think that Van Gogh, himself, would have appreciated.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THIS AMAZING MOVIE AND ITS CREATION HERE: LOVING VINCENT WEBSITE

SEE IT ON AMAZON HERE: LOVING VINCENT

WINCHESTER – VERY SCARY MOVIE WITH A SURPRISINGLY THOUGHTFUL THEME

SHORT TAKE:

Extremely effective ghost story about the real life Winchester House, well told with a class cast and a pleasantly unexpected underlying thesis.

LONG TAKE:

SOME SPOILERS!

I truly believe that God puts people in your life that you need when you need them. It can be as small as a smile from a stranger when you are feeling blue or directions from a police officer when you are lost in a bad neighborhood or as significant as a chance encounter with someone who will become your lifelong friend.

In my case it was two obnoxious fellow moviegoers during Winchester. You see, it so happened that the night that worked best for my schedule for one of the scariest movies I have seen in a while, was the one night when NO one, because of either opportunity or preference, could go with me.

Winchester’s story is based upon the real house in San Jose which was built and rebuilt during a 38 year construction marathon by the heiress to 50% of the Winchester Repeating Arms Company fortune. Sarah Winchester inherited the today equivalent of a half billion dollars with a continuous income of $25,000 per day. She put this vast wealth to use in moving from New Haven, Connecticut to San Jose, California where she purchased and remodeled an unfinished farm house into a seven story mansion with 161 rooms, 2 ballrooms, 47 fireplaces, three cutting edge elevators and rare indoor conveniences for the era like forced air heating and indoor plumbing. An innovative floating foundation preserved the house from collapse after the devastating 1906 earthquake. In addition to these far thinking aspects to the house, and working without an architect, Sarah Winchester designed the home to very peculiar specifications, sporting staircases which go nowhere , rooms with windows which open into other rooms or into the floor, labrynthian hallways which double back on themselves, a door which open to the outside from the third floor (think Roger Rabbit), spiderweb motiffs, groups of 13 items wherever possible and other bizarre features which seem to make no sense. Discount Hogwarts without benefit of movement in the staircases or animated portraits.

However, there are house ghosts.

The premise strives to explain the reason for the unique construction – that Sarah Winchester (Helen Mirren) built rooms to replicate those in which the "victims" of the Winchester rifle died, attract them to their room, then help them move on. She acts as sort of an afterlife psychotherapist – thnk the little lady in Poltergeist. After which, Sarah tears down the room and builds anew with a new tenant in mind. In this way she hopes to appease the angry dead and protect her niece and great-nephew Henry from their wrath. Into this odd scenario comes Eric Price, a traumatized and opium addicted LIVING human psychotherapist (Jason "War for the Planet of the Apes" Clarke), a doctor who is unable to heal himself, hired by the Board of the Winchester Company to prove Sarah Winchester unfit to control her half of the Winchester stock. Although a wackier plot would be hard to find, the inimitable Dame Helen Mirren sells it with gusto and the director/scriptwriters, twin brothers Michael and Peter Spierig, do a good job of creating convincing back stories and atmosphere which make this all fit.

At this point I'm going to make a shameless fangirl plug for Dame Helen.

I have been following her career since I first saw her as Morgana in Excalibur and have loved everything I have seen her in since. (Please note the knight Mirren is holding hands with is an equally young Liam Neeson.) Some beautiful young women, if they are lucky, become handsome older women. Dame Helen stayed, simply, beautiful. I have seen her in really great movies and some truly tatty ones, but she always brings style, grace and skill to every transfigurative role she chooses. (2010) (Fate of the Furious)(Gosford Park) (Hitchcock) (The Madness of King George) (National Treasure 2) (The Queen) (Raising Helen) (Red) (as Prospera, in a female version of The Tempest)

She is even teaching a Master Class in acting which is publically available online. AND a friend of mine once sought her out early in her career for an interview for the paper at which he was working. While refused, the refusal was in person…so he did get to meet her….. so that gives me only two degrees of separation, RIGHT????

One of the things I especially liked about the movie, Winchester, was the way the writers-Spierig kept us up in the air as to what is really going on. Is Eric having opium and withdrawal induce hallucinations or is he really in commune with the dead? Is Sarah just a batty old lady or is she really constructing half-way homes for the unquiet deceased? Is the boy truly possessed by an angry ghost or is he traumatized from having seen his abusive alcoholic father die? Was the mansion damaged by the fury of a thwarted poltergeist or did the 1906 earthquake wreck the havoc?

The Winchester Mansion does exist and it really was severely damaged in 1906 – rending it from its pinnacle of seven stories down to its current four. Construction stopped the day Sarah Winchester died in 1922, afterwhich it was leased in 1923 and eventually purchased from her niece and heir by John and Mayme Brown, who opened it to public display. Dubbed the Winchester Mystery House by Harry Houdini during a tour in 1924, it is still an attraction to this day.

With set designs featuring beautifully period detail, effectively claustrophobic sets, and enough jump scares to unnerve even Beetlejuice, this movie is quite effective for the task to which it applied itself – namely scaring the living snot out of anyone who sees it.

But at the heart of the movie I found another far gentler theme. That God will send you those you need at just the right time. Without giving away too much, Eric, despite his addiction, self doubt and brokenness, heros up for Sarah’s family. And Sarah, despite her looniness, extreme eccentricities and decidedly peculiar guests, is just the friend Eric needs at this bottomed out moment of his life. In many ways, both save each other from fates arguably worse than death.

And this is when I realized….

You see, when I say I went to the movie by myself, I mean not only did I go with no one, but that the theater I was in was completely empty but for me. Row upon row of vacant seats greeted me and sat staring at my back while I endured half a dozen previews fitting for the main attraction, about demonic possession and murderous games. I was tempted to watch the intro credits with laced fingers. So when two people who failed to understand they were not watching the movie in their living room sat nearby, proceeded to make occasionally loud comments to each other, and texted throughout the movie, neglecting to even turn off the slight pinging sound announcing an incoming response, I was actually quite grateful. Every now and again one NEEDS to have their suspension of disbelief interrupted.

And if the oblivious persons in question just happen to read this blog – thank you – BUT – while your intrusiveness was quite helpful in this one instance……..for the next movie – keep it down and at least turn off the danged chime!!!

WARNINGS:

There is a lot of violence and, as I have mentioned, jump scares. Though no bad language, there is use of opiates and the presence of prostitutes though no nakedness or activities. So, obviously, I do not recommend this for young teens.

I also recommend AGAINST the movie for anyone theologically unformed or immature. On the one hand, there are no seances and an atheist does come to understand there is an afterlife. On the other, there is no mention of or appeal to God. But there is a lot of vague talk about spirituality and the ability, without reference to Divine assistance, to command and control unclean spirits, which could be very misleading, disquieting, and even dangerously influential to the vulnerable in mind or soul.

DEN OF THIEVES – KINETIC, EXPLOSIVE (LITERALLY), RED-BLOODED COPS AND ROBBERS

SHORT TAKE:

Octane fueled version of a good old fashioned cops and robbers movie structured like a football film.

LONG TAKE:

I love a good cops and robbers movie where you have the force of law in opposition to the practitioners of chaos. And there are about as many ways to tell a "cops and robbers" movie as there are imaginations to tell it: comedies like the Italian Job, The Great Train Robbery and even Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World; buddy movies like The Hitman’s Bodyguard; movies seen from the perps point of view like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and The Sting; mysteries like The Usual Suspect; histories like The Pursuit of DB Cooper and Serpico; private eye flicks like The Maltese Falcon; parable-like such as 3 Godfathers or Fargo; ensemble style such as The New Centurions; pursuit movies like The Fugitive and The French Connection; even sci-fi like Blade Runner. Then you have combos. There’s comedy suspense like all the Die Hards; buddy dark comedy like Midnight Run; mystery private eye like Chinatown; sci fi mystery cautionary tale like Minority Report; dark dark comedy seen from the perp point of view like Dog Day Afternoon; and sci fi comedy mystery like Demolition Man.

It is hard to find a variation that has not been done to death but Den of Thieves artfully manages to pull off a slightly different take. Seen evenly from both the robbers and the police point of view the movie spools out like a Mission: Impossible caper only planned by the bad guys.

The premise is that a group of professional and experienced criminals led by Merrimen (Pablo Schrieber who happens to be the half – brother of Liev "Wolverine’s brother" Schrieber) are planning to pull off the "perfect" heist – snatching the used and soon-to-be shredded hundred dollar bills from the Federal Reserve before they are missed. Schrieber manages this three dimensional anti-hero with the same confident skill with which he played a pure American hero in 13 Hours (about the Benghazi embassy terrorist attack).

I have no intention of giving any spoilers, but will assure you that despite what appear to be holes in the plot or preposterous amounts of informational prep in the possession of the crooks, it is a cleanly written and well thought out script.

On the side of the angels-with-dirty-faces is Gerard Butler’s "Big Nick" who heads up an elite team of police with virtually free rein to keep check on the mayhem in this "Bank Robbery Capital of the World". Captions right after the credits point out that L.A. has a bank robbery every 48 minutes. (Remind me not to deposit money if I go visit my brother.) Butler’s Nick informs a would be snitch that they are far less likely to go to the paperwork trouble of arresting you than shooting you. I do not believe this is idle banter. More hound dog and hung over than Bogie, scruffier than Serpico and more heavily weaponized than Rick Deckard from Blade Runner, I suspect Nick would inspire Dirty Harry to run for cover.

Butler dives into his character with tremendous gusto. It’s a bit of a shock to remember that 14 years ago he had the singing lead in filmed version of Phantom of the Opera. And only Shakespeare afficianados will recall he and Fiennes co-starred in the cinematic Coriolanus. A very talented guy, he is as at home in the sappy romantic PS I Love You as he is the unstoppable secret service agent in the

Olympus/London Has Fallen movies. It’s obvious why he has done this over the top popcorn movie – he just enjoys the heck out of chewing up scenery, dialogue, and bad guys as the over the top, over the edge centurion – holding the barbarians at bay.

Rounding out the core of the cast is Donnie played by O’Shea Jackson, Jr. Jackson is the son of rapper Ice Cube, and had the rare opportunity to play his own father in Straight Outta Compton. Jackson does a marvelous job of portraying Donnie in Den, the sympathetic young driver of the gang of thieves.

A couple of things made this a stand out movie for me. The acting was quite good for this genre, the action scenes were exciting and well edited, all the characters were interesting – showing them personally and professionally in detail, and the caper was both intricate and believable. But one of the innovative items was the approach. The writer-director, Christian Gudegast, who also wrote and directed London Has Fallen, showed both the cops and the robbers often side by side. While showing the bad guys prepping for a heist, the cops are shown prepping for their interception. Merrimen and Nick are both well aware of each other and they not only play cop and robber but cat and mouse, laying tricks and traps along the way. While perhaps not a unique plan of attack, Gudegast carries the theme off in creative and surprising ways which were cinematically well executed.

I also appreciated the fact that while making the bad guys sympathetic in some ways by showing them protective of their children and not out to create unnecessary mayhem, there is no doubt Merrimen's group are the bad guys. And though the cops committed more than their share of vice, there is no question Nick's men are the ones who protect the innocent and even attempt to treat their dangerous quarry with dignity. So while endeavoring to show all parties as three dimensional, Gudegast does not try to lead us down a garden path of murky gray area as some films do, such as Dog Day Afternoon or Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Despite the questionable behavior in many of the cops' personal lives, and the sometimes morally and legally questionable activities of our intrepid heroes of the Los Angeles Sheriffs Department, the first scene of rampant bloody destruction by the bad guys leaves us without doubt for whom we should be rooting.

I also enjoyed the parallels of professionalism – the simultaneous prep, the frequent meetings in "random" places – all had the feel of two teams gearing up to meet at the ultimate winner take all championship game. To emphasize this, Gudegast makes a number of references to the fact that several characters on both sides previously had experiences in both the military and on football teams.

So, unless the NFL players start to stand for the Star Spangled Banner, skip the Superbowl and go see Den of Thieves, where there is no doubt as to where your allegiances should lie.

NOT FOR CHILDREN, there is a good deal of profanity, naked women, morally wrong behavior by both "sides" and bloody violence.

ON GOLDEN POND – SEE THIS WEEKEND OR MISS A GREAT PERFORMANCE

On Golden Pond, playing only this weekend at Central School, is a heart breaking examination of the art of dying. This is a must see performance which, unfortunately, only goes through this weekend. Get tickets at K.C. Productions

WARNING: Some spoilers.

On Golden Pond tells the story of an elderly couple, Ethel and Norman Thayer, performed with chemistry and credibility by Paula McCain and Randy Partin. The Thayers, given Norman’s deteriorating health, are spending what is likely the last of many summers together at their cabin on Golden Pond, a lake replete with loons and bordered by wild strawberries. Sarah Broussard tackles the challenging role of Chelsea, the Thayer’s unhappy daughter, with skill. Matt Dye is charming and funny as Bill, Chelsea’s boyfriend, bringing a sensible lightheartedness to a somber reality. Brahnsen Lopez is Charlie the quirky and adorable childhood friend of Chelsea. And Zachary Benoit, as Bill’s son Billy, who stays with the Thayers for a month, creates a natural bond with Partin’s Norman as his pseudo-grandson.

The stage is an idealized image of the perfect cabin. Homey, lived in, perhaps even a bit cluttered but warm and friendly with every amenity one could want for a lazy summer fishing camp. And Keith Chamberlain directs this production with style and an eye to keeping this inherently slow paced tale moving in a fascinating interpersonal dance.

Ernest Thompson, the author of On Golden Pond, has been "eating out" on this play for almost 40 years, earning money from it as a stage play, then a movie, followed by revivals, even one in 2001 whimsically re-pairing The Sound of Music duo Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer. Thompson even now lives by the lake where the movie was filmed and gives boat tours. With just a little evaluation it quickly becomes pretty obvious this story is biographical.

According to Kelli Allred, PhD, writing for the Southern Utah University Shakespeare Festival, "A self-proclaimed nonbeliever, [Ernest] Thompson writes about lost souls who do not have ‘the luxury of turning to diety,’ so his characters must rely upon one another." In other words, as Thompson does not believe in God, he creates characters who muddle through by depending exclusively on each other. But those characters are ultimately doomed in On Golden Pond to betray that trust, by active neglect of each other, flippant remarks of hurtful rejection, or abandonment by death itself.

During the play, I was often reminded of Satre’s vision of Hell in No Exit, wherein characters are forced to stay in a room and torment each other with reminiscences of regrets, petty harpings and constant obsession with trivialities. Similarly, the characters in On Golden Pond treat each other to their own versions of Hell. Although free to leave the actual cabin, the characters find the idyllic appearing cabin is a snare net in which the Thayers are trapped either mentally or, in the case of Norman, too frightened by his own deteriorating mental faculties to wander far.

Examples of their self-imposed Hell are rife: Norman repeatedly references death despite the growing distress of his wife, Ethel. Ethel obsesses over loons and strawberries, glossing over their dismal parenting of Chelsea and deliberately ignoring the encroaching dementia and frailty of Norman. As for Chelsea, there is a theater expression immortalized as the title of a play by Elaine Mae: Enter Laughing. With Chelsea it is "enter crying". She drops the temperature every time she responds or is even in proximity to her father. Frowning, hunchbacked, self-admittedly childish, crying and bitter she does not see or communicate with her parents for months on end, and then only to rehash 30 year old hurts.

The author, Ernest Thompson, seems to indicate it is a biography of his own, apparently, dysfunctional relationship with his parents, whose names, Theron and Ester Thompson, echo those of his surrogate family, Norman and Ethel Thayer. Thompson’s father, like Norman, was a school teacher, and Thompson even today, lives quite near the lake where On Golden Pond was filmed. His voice is given to the self-absorbed and depressed Chelsea, the Thayers’ daughter, permanently locked into her own self view as a neglected, underappreciated, fat disappointment. Despite her own adult accomplishments, she acts out her chronic dismay with her father in a string of shallow and unhappy relationships and a dismissal of child bearing.

The spectre of finality sits heavily upon them as 80 year old Norman teases his wife in a constant patter of comments about his own coming demise: comparing himself to her 60 year old doll who might some day either fall or decide to dive into the fireplace, glibly quip how he might not make it all the way down to the end of the driveway, and suggest how his ashes could be sprinkled over her flower garden. Most of the time these observations seem only to torment his wife or perhaps help her face the eventuality she seems determined to avoid thinking about – his departure. But other times his distress is genuine, as in when he gets lost on a familiar path and scurries back to be in the one place he feels safe – by his beloved Ethel.

It is not until the entry of Bill and his son Billy – representatives of the family, wherein the play takes a lighter and more fulfilling turn. Thompson places great emphasis on the point that Chelsea is an only child – grown distant to her parents, an emptiness that is reflected in the preternaturally quiet cabin. Bill and Billy bring a semblance of family which temporarily reignites and renews a certain underlying attentiveness and life in Norman as he takes the boy daily fishing.

Meanwhile, while rejecting a belief in God, Thompson hampers his characters with a formless deistic philosophy. Ethel goes on often about the loons and flowers, as though trying to create a veneer over the fractures in her family. She and Chelsea reminisce about a woodsy campfire group from Chelsea’s youth, associated with an annoying childish song, which repetition stresses the patience of even the easy going Charlie. This emphasis on an idealized artificial relationship with nature suggests that Thompson has a certain deistic belief system – not in God but a ubiquitous "god-ness" in everything – which he substitutes for any truly analytical spiritual life. This semi-spirituality ultimate both proves unsatisfying to the characters and provides no comfort in the moments of crisis which happen during the course of the play. There is no appeal to God and the only references to Him are made as angry interjections but never in prayer.

And although Thompson makes it clear that he does not have any faith in God, neither does he have anything to fill the void which that a-theism creates.

Norman and Ethel demonstrate a philosophy of situational ethics as they shrug their shoulders in a laissez faire attitude when asked by Bill if he and Chelsea, while still unmarried, could sleep together in the cabin. Norman responds with a crude banter which makes it difficult to tell whether he genuinely disapproves or just enjoys shocking his guest, but makes no real effort to establish or enforce any respectful guidelines.

Thompson draws a brilliant portrait of what it is like for someone to face the eventuality of one’s earthly death without the spiritual awareness of a Divine Creator, an immortal soul or a concept of eternity. What is it like for people who think this is all there is? The result for the elderly Thayer couple is one unending day of board (bored) games, Chelsea’s purposeless and childless drifting through relationships, and constant acrimony.

Only when the prospect of acting for the sake of another – for the nurturing of Bill’s son Billy – do they all come together briefly, like cold travelers around a warm fireplace. And for a while they engage with constructive purpose in the world and with each other, healing emotional riffs and coming to an understanding.

It is said: If you can’t be a good example, provide a horrible warning. Norman and Ethel while away their last few days in endless games of Parchessi, listening to Norman’s acerbic "witticisms" and deflecting Chelsea’s angry reproachfulness. Chelsea only finds peace in separation from the shallow and unfulfilling summer cabin life to create a family with Bill and Billy. Near the end, when finally at peace in a real home, Chelsea elicits from her parents a promise we know they will not keep to join her family. Instead, the Thayers literally walk off into the sunset, alone, fully aware they will never come back – death throwing them out of the self-defined Paradise to which they have limited themselves, without hope or prospect of immortality. Neither seeking nor finding any concept of eternity or genuine spirituality, the best Norman can offer Ethel is a passive and bland acceptance of the inevitability of separation, death and oblivion.

The K.C. Productions performance of On Golden Pond deftly and dramatically demonstrates the desperate resignation and shallow accomplishments of facing one’s death without spiritual discernment or faith. Like Satre’s characters they have created their own Hell to which, in the end, they willingly exit.

LADY BIRD – TO ANYONE WHO KNOWS A TEENAGED GIRL – A VERY FAMILIAR AND FUNNY CHARACTER

AUDIO PODCAST OPTION OF LADYBIRD REVIEW

SHORT TAKE:

A very familiar and funny story abut the growing pains of a teenaged girl having to face the prospect of adulthood and her family which must endure the process with her.

LONG TAKE:

My oldest son pointed out to me that the Chinese symbol for war is two women under a single roof. He would know that because he has four sisters and a mother. And one might keep that in mind when watching Lady Bird.

Lady Bird tells the story of a girl (Saoirse Ronan) in her last year of high school who doesn’t know what she wants. All she knows is that she does not want to be associated with her modest middle-class family or life in her hometown of Sacramento. She even rejects her providentially chosen given name Christine, inexplicably preferring the appellation of Lady Bird. Her father, Larry, (playwright Tracy Letts) is kind and sensitive and tries to help her but is older and kind of beaten down by life. Her mother, Marion, (Laurie Metcalf from The Big Bang Theory as Sheldon’ mother and the voice of the Mom in the Toy Story franchise), and she are too much alike to be close. They try but it always ends up in acrimony. They cry at the same things and they spend time with each other, but their relationship is like a mosquito bite, they can’t seem to keep from scratching at it until it bleeds.

One example: they are shopping for a prom dress for Lady Bird at a discount store. Lady Bird finds what she thinks is the perfect dress. Marion can’t help herself but says: “Don’t you think it’s too pink?” setting Lady Bird off. Additionally, Marion is constantly plagued by money worries and she sometimes takes it out in acrimonious comments to her immature daughter. Example: Lady Bird can’t wait to come home and tell her parents about her first kiss but when she arrives all bubbly enthusiasm, Marion, while not quite going full boar Joan Crawford/Mommy Dearest on her, mercilessly rags on her for not putting her clothes away “properly”.

Conversely, Lady Bird, herself, is a big bag of dissatisfaction and teenage angst who longs for the material world, to the point where she thoughtlessly hurts others by what she says. For example: Lady Bird tells her new wealthy boyfriend that she comes from “the wrong side of the tracks,” which the beau artlessly elaborates on when he first meets Lady Bird’s parents, noting with some enthusiasm that he really DID have to cross railroad tracks to get to their house!

The father, Larry, an understanding soul, tries to explain to Lady Bird that she and her mother have very strong personalities. Being a sister, a daughter, and the mother of four daughters, I can tell you the interactions and dialogue are spot-on.

The parents, while not Catholic, fear for her safety and have sacrificed significantly to send Lady Bird to a Catholic School. The school is populated by beautifully and humanely portrayed nuns and priests who are at turns wise and endearingly funny.

The staff of the school meets occasionally with Lady Bird to give her advice and in a charming scene which reminds me of the old Hayley Mills-Rosalind Russell movie The Trouble with Angels, the Mother Superior (Lois Smith) even “confesses” her amusement at some of Lady Bird’s antics.

Another time when an older priest (lovingly portrayed by Stephen Henderson) has to take medical leave from his position as head of the Theatre Department, another priest, (played by Bob Stephenson), the school football coach, takes over. The resulting pep talk with the kids as he explains his plan of organization for directing The Tempest is priceless.

Unlike Juno, which involved an illegitimate mother, or Pretty in Pink, which culminated at a long anticipated school dance or Rebel Without a Cause, which finds its watershed moment of truth in tragedy and death, there is no real catastrophic or milepost moment in Lady Bird. Instead, we watch as Lady Bird slowly matures through her senior year from self-absorbed, conflicted angsty brat into an uneasy but promising adulthood. Not to give any spoilers, but rest assured there is closure to the story and a complete arc. But the significance is not so much in the finish line as the observation of her journey and the companions with whom the trip is taken which is most interesting.

The Catholic Church and the religious who occupy it are refreshingly shown in a very positive, supportive, kind and wise light. Lady Bird is even at times gently framed in shots by crosses and pictures of Our Lady of Guadalupe – not overtly but in fortuitous natural background.

Bishop Barron in his Word on Fire podcasts often reviews movies. I find him extremely insightful. One of the comments he makes about Lady Bird is that he suspects even the Saints might have had troubled or stressful youth and teenage years. And that it is necessary, especially for a strong-willed character, to go through these difficult antagonistic stages before they can become the people that we know. In other words, even Saint Peter, Saint Augustine, Mother Teresa and even St. Pope John-Paul II may have been pains in the butt as teenagers as most people are. But that God worked with and through those weaknesses and foibles to mold them into the brilliantly spiritual people they would become. And He will do the same with us if we give Him a chance. And that the writer/director, Greta Gerwig may have been showing us what she perceives as the undeveloped beginnings of such an embryo saint, even if she herself was not aware of it.

Lady Bird has garnered a number of awards, including best comedy for writer-director Greta Gerwig and best actress in a comedy for Saoirse Ronan. Every allocade it gets it will have earned.

Cautionary note: there are a few harsh profanities, though not the avalanche that can sometimes accompany films aimed at this demographic. In addition, there are subjects and at least two scenes I would not have wanted to explain to my 15 year old daughter. As a date movie I wouldn’t recommend it for your first.

There is great charm and insight into these obviously well loved characters created by Ms. Gerwig. And much to be learned and appreciated in this textbook example of the Chinese symbol for war, ironically made into a love letter for the turbulent teen everyone must pass through to adulthood.

12 STRONG – THOR ON HORSEBACK AGAINST TANKS!? WHAT’S NOT TO LIKE!!

SHORT TAKE:

Inspiring re-enactment of Task Force Dagger, the mission of an elite group of American Soldiers with their Northern Alliance allies who fought the Taliban against overwhelming odds in Afghanistan weeks after the 9/11 atrocity.

LONG TAKE:

I once had a coffee cup with the inscription: "Do not annoy the writer or she might put you in a book and kill you." Similarly, I might advise: "If you are the commanding officer of an aspiring actor, be nice or he might end up portraying you in a movie." Such is just one piece of serendipitous trivia in 12 Strong, a movie which cinematically tells how an elite group of our soldiers volunteered to go to Afghanistan for a trip which, but for the grace of God, should have been a suicide mission, entering a country and city they knew little about to work with a local insurgent who might have sold them out for their $100,000 a piece bounty, to fight 5,000 to 1 odds on foot and horseback to guide air drops against an entrenched vicious Taliban using tanks and armored artillary.

The script is based upon the experiences of a group of American elite military forces led by Mark Nutsch, who is renamed Mitch Nelson in the movie and played by Thor – I mean Chris Hemsworth. And let us not forget that Hemsworth also was George Kirk during the best 15 minutes of cinematic science fiction at the beginning of the 2009 Star Trek reboot. I only mention these movies to remind you that Hemsworth is fantastic at playing noble, courageous heroes. And he once again is awesome in 12 Strong. (As a side note, Captain Nutsch has mentioned that being played by "Thor" has gotten him some serious brownie points with his kids.)

The story is of the special forces sent weeks after the 9/11 World Trade Center/Pentagon attack and is based upon the book Horse Soldiers by Doug Stanton. Rounding out the cast with Hemsworth is Michael Shannon (Zod from Man of Steel and lead baddie in The Shape of Water), Michael Pena (Collaterol Beauty, Ant Man and The Martian), Navid Negahban who plays General Dostum – leader of the Northern Alliance fighters and later Vice President of freed Afghanistan, who teamed with Nutsch's group for real and who is, to this day, friends with Nutsch. William Fichtner (Armaggedeon, Batman: The Dark Knight) as Col. John Mulholland and Rob Riggle a comedian and United States Marine Corps Reserve Lieutenant Colonel who, in a quirk of fate, plays his former commanding officer, Lt Col. Max Bowers. Fichtner and Riggle are the only ones who play officers going by their real names. There really was a Col Bowers and Col Mulholland participating in this extraordinary military operation. And as a side note, to lend further points of solid credibility to the chemistry of the cast, Elsa Pataky, Hemsworth's real life wife plays his REEL "life" wife, Jean Nelson.

I had difficulty trying to find the actual names of the other soldiers who were part of the team. As it turns out they prefer, in classic hero fashion, to retain the anonymity which was at first required on this top secret mission. Mark Nutsch, the inspiration for Michael Nelson only came forward when the movie was green lighted in order to help with the authenticity. These men were not given any recognition at the time for the miraculous feat they performed.

I have a Jewish friend who likes to playfully sum up the history of the Israelites in the Old Testament as: "They tried to kill us, we fought, we won, let’s eat!"

This sentiment pretty well sums up the forthright, pragmatic and confident attitude of the military with which America is blessed. Not looking for praise or parades they simply go in, perform their duty and come home. Not withstanding they "go in" after leaving their stalwart sacrificing wives and children, that they "perform their duty" against sometimes overwhelming odds, or that they might "come home" permanently maimed, severely injured….or in a coffin.

It’s about time these men, who struck the first blow for America subsequent to the cowardly and evil act of terrorism wrought upon our country on September 11, 2001, received some acknowledgment.

I had a friend ask if I was looking forward to this movie. I emphatically exclaimed: "Thor on horseback riding against tanks! What’s NOT to like!!!" And like it I did. Hemsworth and the rest of the cast perform with infectious camaraderie, conveying the depth of trust each of those real soldiers they portrayed had for each other. Filmed in New Mexico the rugged Afghan terrain is convincingly pictured. The battle scenes are breathtaking. And it is not spoiler, because it is in the trailer, that, indeed, these men wound their way through merciless fire against ridiculous odds side by side with their Afghanistan Northern Alliance allies, like the Light Brigade, on horseback, into ferocious tank and artillary fire. These men boldly and selflessly offered their lives to stop the brutal stranglehold of torture and repression the Taliban and Al Qaeda had against the locals and prevent further attacks on our country. Their push into the merciless enemy's stronghold broke the back of Al Qaeda and had them fleeing to Pakistan.

There have been some criticism against the details of the mission – for example: did they really ride the horses into battle against tanks? Frankly I don’t care. We get far too few movies with the guts and gusto to demonstrate the every day bravery and selfless dedication of our American soldiers to our protection and freedom. It’s about time we returned to the likes of Patton, Green Beret, The Longest Day and The Great Escape – where the matter-of-fact patriotic heroics of our American military is a given and we should be rightly very proud and joyously celebrate their accomplishments.

I am unconcern with any modest cinematic license which might have been taken to enhance the telling of this amazing story.

The core of the history is dead on: They tried to kill us, we fought, we won, let’s eat!!

PS – Assuming the web page is accurate, if you want to find out more about the accuracy of the movie 12 Strong to the actual events they portray check out: How Accurate is 12 Strong? SHORT TAKE: Almost every bit is detail-accurate.

PADDINGTON 2 – ADORABLE STAND ALONE BEAR OF A STORY

SHORT TAKE:

Family friendly stand alone continuing adventure of an anthropomorphized bear living in London who lives by the motto: "If we're kind and polite the world will be right".

LONG TAKE:

I knew nothing about the Paddington stories going in to see this sequel with my son-in-law and grandsons. I have not even seen the first Paddington movie. I was immediately charmed by the gentle, naive kindness of the titled bear and his adoptive human family, including Julie Waters (Mrs. Weasley from Harry Potter), Sally Hawkins (The Shape of Water), and Hugh Bonneville (from Downton Abbey).

Paddington is voiced by Ben Whishaw (Q from the rebooted James Bond) who brings a lovely ingenuous confidence to the little talking ursine creature. Paddington is now a beloved integral part of his community who performs small kindnesses as a matter of course throughout the movie: cleaning a grouchy neighbor's windows gratis which affords the neighbor the notice of a lovely woman; reminding an absentminded neighbor to remember his keys before his door shuts on him; making lunch for a friend. Through these seemingly insignificant acts of random kindness Paddington manages to help knit these otherwise at-odds neighbors into a community of friends. And this, I think, is the point of the movie. The rest is just McGuffins and window dressing to demonstrate the importance of the small actions which can mean so much to those around you.

I am reminded of St. Theresa of Liseux' book on the philosophy of The Little Way. That one does not need to be a celebrity or build a cathedral or die in a gladiatorial ring in order to become a saint. That for most of us, who are blessed with never being called to such sacrifices, it is our calling to offer all the little opportunities that come our way as the path to sainthood: opening a door for a stranger, smiling to the curmudgeon even when it seems they do not appreciate your offer of friendship, enduring with patience the unexpected suffering that does come your way…like being sentenced to prison for 10 years for a theft you tried to stop, not commit.

Such is the set up for this Paddington story. Paddington wishes to give his beloved Aunt Lucy a special birthday gift. So he goes to the eccentric and slightly dotty but goodhearted Mr. Gruber (Jim Broadbent of Moulin Rouge and Slughorn of the Harry Potter franchise). He decides on a rare but expensive book which he strives to earn through odd jobs but which is soon stolen by the unctous and self-absorbed Phoenix Buchanan (Hugh Grant, who creates the most amusingly horrible egotist since Kenneth Branagh's Lockhart in Harry Potter.) Paddington is accused of the crime and sentenced to prison where he befriends, again through small kindnesses, some of the inmates. (Don't try this at home kids – cute in a story but…..) His fellow prisoners include: Brendan Gleeson (Mad Eye Moody AGAIN from Harry Potter), and Noah Taylor (the Dad from Charlie and the Chocolate factory). Rounding out the cast is Tom Conti (veteran comedian of a number of quirky British comedies including Reuben, Reuben and Saving Grace) as a grouchy judge with a grudge against the occasionally hapless bear, Michael Gambon as the narrator (the replacement Professor Dumbledore from…you guessed it, Harry Potter), and Peter Capaldi (the last male Dr. Who before Jody Whittaker) who has the unenviable task of being the only member of the community to take an instant dislike to our little furry friend.

Paddington's human family continues to believe in Paddington's innocence and the balance of the movie spends its time digging up evidence to free him. It's funny, charming, innocent fun and shows the benefits of striving to be….polite and kind – along with courageous, loyal, honest, steadfast, optimistic, hard working, and just plain nice.

I, my son-in-law, both of my grandsons, and the many other children in the theater and their parents, enjoyed the movie thoroughly. Don't feel like you need to even see the first one. Paddington the second is well worth your time and, I am even inspired to paraphrase a quote from my all time favorite movie – It's a Wonderful Life: "Each bear's life touches so many other lives," and when he isn't around the community of friends he has created will rally to help him, which, in itself, is a brilliant virtue to watch enacted with humor and affection for their source material.

It's quite nice to see a movie which everyone in the family can enjoy.