The Cove

This is a difficult movie if you care about animals at all. The Japanese are one of the only groups of people left that actively hunt and slaughter whales and dolphins. After 1986 it was pretty much agreed upon that no one would hunt and kill these animals anymore. They have found a few loop holes like killing them in the antarctic, about 1000 a year and claiming its for science. The other is much more brutal and that's what this documentary is about.

In the small fishing town of Taijii in Japan there is a disgusting and dark secret. On average they kill 23,000 dolphins and porpoises every year, but only after they sell off the best of them to be trick animals in captivity like at Sea World.

What the Japanese of this town noticed is that every year there were pods of dolphins swimming by on their normal migratory patterns, combine that with the knowledge that dolphins are very sensitive to sound and you have the set up. They use a line of boats that have metal tubs going into the water, they hit the tubes with hammers, scaring the dolphins towards a cove they use, and then put in nets. People come from all over to pick out the dolphins they want to buy, each going for about 150,000, all the rest are corralled into another smaller cove where they disappear.

The fishermen are very careful about who can see the smaller cove and have done a good job about keeping it under wraps so then no one has any proof of what they are doing. By the way a dead dolphins meat goes for about 600 US dollars, not a huge cash cow. The documentary follows a group of activists as they discuss what they know about dolphins, the history of whaling and the trade of meat.

They come up with a plan to record the slaughters with hidden cameras, and spend most of the film setting that up. When you do see the slaughters it will make you sick, my breath was wavering and I was trying very hard not to cry. Its hard enough watching them stab the dolphins with spears, but seeing them try to escape, or seeing the babies being killed is to much.

The film also touches on over fishing the oceans, degradation of the ecosystems and mercury content and poisoning, all real and serious problems. The main activist of this mission is the man who created the show "Flipper" and trained the dolphins to do tricks, now he works to set them free. He feels responsible for their current incarceration and destruction.

The waters literally run red with the blood of the dolphins, and the fishermen seem to have no shame over what they do. Like I said earlier this is a hard thing to watch and harder to swallow. If this appeals to you to learn about then also see the documentary "Sharkwater" which focuses on the destruction of the shark populations of the world, a very big problem if we kill to many of them. The dolphins are cute and have the smile, but the sharks are just as much at risk if not more so since they aren't protected like the dolphins and whales are, as well as being demonized as man killers (which they aren't)

8/10 stars.

Director: Louie Psihoyos

Shadow Company

This is the first documentary that I've watched that was completely and 100% dedicated to discussing mercenaries. They were pretty even handed and fair to all sides, but there were still things I noticed that they dropped the ball on.

They initially go through a history of how these groups came to exist all the way to its current incarnation specifically with how the government is allowing "private military companies" to come into Iraq. They give an interesting look at the history and smartly don't dawdle on it to long because frankly as interesting as that is, I'd rather know more about whats happening today.

The psychology of the people who do this is interesting, they are willing to put their lives on the line for causes they don't necessarily care about for the sake of money. To me it seems they are destined to fail because an Iraqi will fight so much harder than they will since they have an actual stake in the outcome. The men though are trained and well manicured. They really know what they are doing, just like the military, some of them are actually ex-military. But, and they discuss this in the doc. there is a big disconnect between the two, in the military if your told to do something you do it because you have to, as a private contractor you don't have to do a mission if you don't want to.

They show some rather disturbing footage in this, specifically charred and mutilated bodies of mercenaries in Fallujah, Iraq. They are very grisly, so if you watch this be warned. Now the problem I have with there being mercenaries in Iraq is accountability. The mercenaries can't be charged with any laws they break in Iraq, and the military has no power over them. I'm set to believe that a lot of these men are good people, for the most part, but there are certainly people over there right now who are committing legal murder. Shooting women and children, and civilians as a whole.

The company spokesmen that they have interviewed in this as well as the Lobbyists were just making me laugh, they are trying to justify a business based solely on killing and blunt violent force. These men, and women are really snakes in the grass. As much as they say that they only hire the best and they are very careful just further emphasises my point. They hire the best to kill efficiently and they are careful because they want to stay in business. Iraq is the first American war that has used mercenaries like this and it really makes me sick. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the whole lot of them are responsible for this, of course they would find a way to make this war as profitable for private interests as they could.

Another thing they didn't hit on enough, or at all was that these mercenaries are also hired not only for these body guard missions but also for interrogation. Again though, they exist outside the law and the military. The military doesn't "torture" under their definition of it, but these private companies can do whatever they want. So they interrogate some of these detainees to the point that they kill them with their interrogation "tactics" Its sickening.

It was a very well done documentary, I only wish they had not sugar coated some of it as much as they did, or not bury some of the more upsetting facts of the situation over there. They don't idolize these men, but they also don't ask them the hard questions. 7/10 stars.

Directors: Nick Bicanic, Jason Bourque

The House of Sand

Ten minutes into the movie there is spoken maybe six words. Ten whole minutes go by and almost no one speaks. It reminded me of "There Will Be Blood" and if you are a fan of that movie I think you would really like this.

The story is simple, it's 1910 and an older man (Vasco) has moved his young wife (Aurea) and her mother (Dona Maria) out into the middle of the Brazilian desert to start anew. With him he has brought a group of other settlers. No one is really happy there, they are basically living on the only spot that has water and is akin to a marsh in the middle of the desert. The other settlers get scared and leave and Vasco gets angry and makes a mistake while building their "house" and kills himself. Now Aurea and Dona Maria are all alone, and Aurea is pregnant.

The meet up with runaway slaves who have been living in the desert for generations. The one that helps them the most in named Massu. He is quiet and pretty mysterious. In fact all the characters are pretty quiet. Aurea gives birth to Maria and after ten years alone out there is getting very desperate to escape. They can't do it on their own, they tried and the desert would kill them.

The film ends up covering fifty years of time. When they jump forward in time they use the actresses who are the mothers to play their daughters so then they all will look like they are actually family, and as I read online they actually are family. The film is just drenched in desolation, there is nothing out there but each other, their money is worthless, they need water and food. The dunes eventually over take their home, nothing is permanent in this landscape. The desert it self is its own character that they are constantly battling. The story is actually an incredibly simple one, it is just about survival on the surface with all of this pent up desire underneath. A desire for Aurea and eventually Maria to escape that place. As well as both of them have the longing of a man even though they are capable of surviving on their own, the need for human touch and interaction.

There is a scene where Aurea comes across some scientists and the army in the desert doing an experiment, when she meets one of the officers he touches her hair and the look on her face says it all, she hasn't been touched like that in 10 years. When she hears one of the soldiers play the violin she breaks into tears, she hadn't heard music in years. The things we take for granted and don't even think about is what they yearn for so much.

The image is so clean in this, the white of the sand in contrast to the black they wear was so visually stimulating it was driving me crazy. The blacks are rich and velvety, it was just blowing me away. The cinematography in this was stellar, I cant say that enough, I loved this movie for so many reasons not the least of which being the amazing shots, I'm talking about every single shot is brilliantly and beautifully composed. Really something to see.

The acting was along the same lines, stark like the images, contrasted and strong, with a deep well of emotion and reflection. The woman who plays Aurea and then eventually the daughter Maris is beautiful, but not in the American way. If this was made here they would have been wafer "girls" where these were strong and passionate women.

I recommend this film to anyone who might read this, it was that good to me. Shot after shot blew me away, scene after scene I got more involved. It is something that I would hope to make one day. 9/10 stars easy.

Director: Andrucha Waddington

Starring: Fernanda Torres, Fernanda Montenegro, Seu Jorge, Ruy Guerra, Enrique Diaz, Stenio Garcia

Body of War

I have of course seen many documentaries that take a stand against the war, and with me they are preaching to the choir. I love learning something new about the war that I didn't know. The back channels that were going on as the country geared up for war, the weak in numbers opposition that fought like dogs in the Senate and Congress to stop the march. This film is different from those, it gives a face, voice and sadly broken body to the vets of the Iraq war.

Tomas Young was shot in Iraq five days into his tour. He was shot below his left collar bone, and as it went through his body it severed his spine. He dropped his M16, and as he reached for it his body went numb, he realized his fingers wouldn't work to pick up his weapon. When he regained consciousness a week later he was in the hospital, and without use of his body below his chest.

The film follows him through his day to day life, his wedding, and the anti-war rallies that he attends. He is visibly bitter, and with good reason, he is injured very badly, is that why he is against the war though? In an interview on 60 minutes with Mike Wallace he's asked that, a fair question although maybe in poor taste. Tomas responds with "Yes, I would still be against the war even if this didn't happen to me, I had friends die over there, my brother is over there now"

When he is at the anti-war rallies there are people yelling that all the protesters are anti-American, there is a shot where he is yelling back, and the other person doesn't seem to care or notice that Tomas has been injured in the line of duty, and that yelling at him for being against the war is a truly shitty thing to do.

He shows all the medication he has to take everyday just to keep him going, just because he is in a wheelchair doesn't mean that that's where it ends. He has pain meds, blood thinners, antidepressants and so on. He was lucky enough to regain use of his hands, but and this is something that is important to most people, he cant easily have sex anymore. That lost intimacy coupled with the fact that he needs to be taken care of to an extent that borders on mother/son dependency at times puts an incredible strain on his marriage. There were a few times in the documentary I felt like I was seeing to much, and it was all the stuff having to do with him and his wife and their marital problems.

Seeing the real life effects of what war means is difficult to watch. A number of dead or wounded, or seeing a picture is easy to ignore, but when you have someone in living color in front of you its a different thing. He is an extremely tough individual, but then at the same time has his break downs. He is embarrassed and apologetic about the fact that he can no longer maintain his body temperature automatically. Whenever he has to put his head down from being dizzy from getting to warm he apologizes profusely.

The ones who should be apologizing are those at the top. Those who gave Bush carte blanche to do whatever he felt like with the war, and that's what happened. The Legislative branch gave Bush the use of the armed forces for as long as he deemed necessary and where ever he deemed necessary. That reminds me of something similar, Ceasar, who refused to give up power. And the other is Hitler becoming chancellor after they burned down the Reichstag. Hitler wouldn't ever give up the power they gave him. Now don't get me wrong, Bush was not Hitler, but when you give someone unlimited power over that kind of force you have given away far to much.

More and more people like Tomas are being injured and killed everyday to bring democracy to a country that never attacked us, and didn't want us there, and still don't. I'm not for people anywhere to suffer, but war was not the answer to bring peace there. Our governments contempt for the U.N. is so angering, the U.N. exists for a reason.

The doc. was very good, but difficult to swallow at times. Tomas uses his injury to push his causes along and I say that's his right to do, so much was taken from him. He came home to be lambasted for being against the war. 8/10stars.

Director: Phil Donahue, Ellen Spiro

Vanaja

Netflix really has got to find someone else to write the little descriptions and blurbs for their movies. This is yet another one that did sort of tell me what the film was about, but really sugar coated a major element of it by calling rape, "shame."

The story is an old classic, the young and beautiful girl falls for the older rich young man, but it cant be, or at least for a while. Our main character is Vanaja, and she seems to have gotten a few problems that are setting her back, her Mom's dead, he father is a drunk, and loses the boat he needs for fishing, and she is really smart. Now it might not seem that being smart is a bad thing, but in this case it is, she is smart enough to know she can do a lot better, and deserves it.

She wants to be a dancer, and it just so happens that the woman who basically acts as slum lord over their little area used to be a great dancer. So when her father forces her out of school, she want to go there to work. The landlady (slum lord) Mrs. Devi takes a liking to her and hires her. Vanaja is able to get Devi to agree to teach her music and how to dance. So for a while things are going well, that is until Devi's son returns. After a little flirting and eyes made between them, innocent enough even though Vanaja is only 15, and he is well into his 20's, he rapes her.

The other maid of the house finds out and keeps it hush-hush. That is until Vanaja turns out to be pregnant, and decides to not get an abortion. Devi and her son will take the baby in exchange for 600,000 rupees and the promise no one will ever know that he's a rapist. Ill leave off the story there to not give much more away.

Needless to say there is no happy ending, in fact its down right tragic, but for that it is probably the most realistic Indian movie Ive ever seen, which is saying a lot. I love watching Indian women in movies, they are so beautiful, I cant take my eyes off of them when I see a really beautiful one.

The film is very colorful, and had some really well composed and interesting shots, as well as lighting. Although there were scenes that were lit so artificially it just made me cringe. The camera moved well, and was very fluid, they even used some hand held which I hadn't really seen in an Indian movie before. Like all Indian movies there are several scenes of just singing and dancing, and they are just gorgeous, so graceful, yet forceful, like ballet mixed with fighting. Even though the story was one that I had seen before I wasn't really bothered or bored with it, the rape certainly took me off guard (not graphic, I just didn't know it was going to happen) A fairly strong film overall, but an young directors attempt. 7/10 stars.

Director: Rajnesh Domalpalli

Starring: Mamatha Bhukya, Urmila Dammannagari, Ramachandriah Marikanti, Krishnamma Gundimalla, Karan Singh, Bhavani Renukunta

Trouble the Water

Katrina was a wake up call to all of us here in the U.S. just how poorly our government is run for the most part. It took over 100 hours after the storm had ended before people started to get food, or even clean water. Thousands died in the hurricane, then even more after because of poor planning.

This documentary covers the lives of a married couple as the storm hits through a year later. Before it begins, just hours before we see some home footage that they shot as the storm approaches, and the cockiness is off the charts. They admit that they don't have enough money to get up and leave, I understand that, but here they are along with others saying "Its just a little water, let it come" This disrespect of the raw power of nature is idiotic, if there was one word I would use to describe all the people in this film (including the government) would be Ignorance...at least before the storm hit.

Now I'm not blaming them, they actually at times turn out to be real heroes of the story, while other times I just wanted to reach through the TV and slap them. As the storm rages on they are forced into their attic, but have not put an ax up there. Most people in the areas that are hit by hurricanes like this keep an ax in the attic so if they are trapped and the waters are rising then they can escape onto the roof. We hear a few 911 calls, one of which the woman on the other end says I cant get out, the 911 operator says, sorry no rescues are being done right now, the desperate woman states, then I'm going to die up here, the operator is silent on the other end.

One of the members of their little group actually stands out in the storm to grab anyone who goes drifting by, and then carries every person from their attic into the one that's across the street since its higher. That's true heroism. They admit that they have at times wasted their lives, and I pity that they feel they have to say that, even if they have that's no reason to be left alone to die by your government.

They view this as a new start, and actually do succeed as the movie goes by, but there was little things that reinforced my anger at them, such as having a gold grill in their mouths, or brand new, and nice clothes when they are making 25 dollars a day, please go to the salvation army and pay a buck for a shirt, two for a pair of pants, and return the FUBU and Ekho clothes.

But like I said they are truly strong people, and its hard to put your self in their position, a good example is the documentarians are talking to some national guard who are sitting around, one says to the camera, civilians don't know how to survive, they trashed this school when they came in here for shelter. Talk about an asshole. Easy for him to say, he has the training and he was sitting safely in Oregon when the storm hit. Even if they did trash the building, lets do the math: No food, No water, No Electricity, No Plumbing, The water is 15 feet high and people are dying everywhere....would you care about keeping an abandoned school clean. Here, let me just sweep up the mess I made here when I was just trying not to die of dehydration.

We also see a Naval base that people were sent to when their homes became to underwater to remain in, they were turned away, and at gun point no less. The Navy officials deny that they had guns, I don't buy it, why would the people who came there make that up?

I'm glad they focused on the micro by following these two people, but I also wanted to see more about the big picture, the blame that went around, why something like this could happen. Ive seen a few docs. already about the effects on the individual with Katrina, I haven't seen an all encompassing one yet.

By the end we see how they are really rebuilding their lives from the dust up, and I have to admire that, they even have jobs that command my respect, they were drug dealers before the storm, now he works in construction. Everyone deserves a second chance, I just wish it didn't have to come in the form of a storm. 7/10 stars.

Directors: Carl Deal, Tia Lessin

Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills

They don't hesitate in getting to work in this documentary. Right off the bat they show the drowned and sexually mutilated bodies of three, eight year old boys. At first I wasn't sure if what I was seeing was a recreation or the real thing since its cheap looking footage of a few sheriffs deputies pulling the children out of a shallow and muddy creek bed.

The documentary doesn't so much follow the story of the little boys, although it should. No instead it focuses on the media frenzy and trial of three older teens who are accused of committing the crime. The film highlights the vast differences that occur when going from a major metropolitan area such as Chicago to West Memphis TN, a backwards little hick town. Two of the teens who are accused like to wear black and listen to Metallica, so in effect in this town it means they must be Satan worshippers. The Children's murder was motivated by that and that of course they did it, just look how weird they are. In a city, or anywhere that isn't filled with bigots and hillbillies for that matter, wouldn't think twice about the way these kids are dressed.

Before I delve more into the trail I'd like to focus on the parents of the murdered children. They keep saying they are good and caring Christian people, but as soon as they finish saying that they talk about how they are glad these other children are going to get raped in prison, and how they are going to shoot them. There is even a part where a few of the fathers show off the guns they are going to do it with. Now don't get me wrong, I feel for them, they lost their children in a horrible kind of way, but what they are talking about is simple revenge. They admit several times that no matter what happens it wont bring their children back, and then back peddle and wish the worst things on these other children.

Now the case against the teens is weak, in fact its just not strong enough for a trial. They have some fibers found near the boys that match fibers from clothes in the defendants home, not things they were wearing on the day, or even clothes they own. I'm a firm believer in science and this forensics wasn't bad, but they even admit there is a chance that the fibers weren't even from those clothes.

The best evidence they have is the confession of one of the three teens who was there. He has an IQ of 72, and barely understood most of what was asked of him. They interrogated him for 2 hours alone, with no recording, or note taking, and only when they were going to get the confession out of him did they turn on the tape recorder. They could have said so many things to him off the record to coerce a confession from him. Now that's not to say that the confession isn't real and true, but there are many inconsistencies. He claims the murders happened at noon, the children wouldn't even be out of school till 3. When in fact the murders were at night. He claims that they murdered the children at the creek in the woods. There wasn't a drop of blood anywhere, and the children were bled out.

Most of the confession the cops are leading him, and he is simply agreeing with them and repeating what they say. Next is the bull shit motive, and they simply chalk it up to witchcraft. The teens worship Satan and needed to sacrifice the children, makes sense right?

They bring in many experts in the trial to say it was because of Satan that they did this, and the "experts" have less educational background on the subject than I do. The problem comes down to simple physics and forensics. The children were killed somewhere else and brought there and the evidence seems to point more to one of the fathers than a couple of local goths.

Its a terrible miscarriage of justice, and the boys don't even really get to defend themselves all that much, on cross examination they are lambasted for owning a book with a Pinnacle star on the front, and for writing their names in dead alphabets. Now I cant say for sure that they didn't do it, they certainly could have, but they were not the most likely killers in this story. I don't think they did it, not based on that evidence.

It was a strong and gut wrenching documentary, be warned that for a few minutes you do see the children's bodies and its graphic and heart breaking. There is a sequel that I now have to watch to find out what happens after this one ends. Overall 7/10 stars.

Directors: Joe Berlinger, Bruce Sinofsky

Elegy

The description of this movie claims that its about an older professor who falls in love with an ex student of his, and while that might be true, and a decent short hand explanation of the story it is by no means what the film is actually about.

Ben Kingsley plays David Kepesh a critic of all things culture oriented and artistic. He seems to have the coolest job in the world, read books, go to plays and then go on TV and the radio and talk about if its good or bad. He also teaches a class at some unnamed NYC University, and on the surface seems like a very nice and interesting guy, while in fact his character is genuinely unlikable, not to say you will not like him, I liked him, but he is just such a perfect example of hypocritical behavior.

He falls in love with Consuela played by Penelope Cruz, and would really like to have sex with her. He takes the time to woo her and plays his cards pretty close to the chest. For having 30+ years between them they actually make a nice little couple, not perfect, but I wouldn't bat an eye seeing them out in public. Of course he becomes jealous, and thinks she will leave him. It all plays out in that way like you know it will. The thing that made the film the most interesting is the conversations they have in it about life and ownership that directly corresponds to his love affair with Consuela.

The film opens talking about the "other" colony in the New World, that was sexually free and Paganistic, and how the Puritans wiped them out, and thus Americas fascination with the destruction of sexual freedom began and was set in stone. Another example of the things they discuss in the film is how no one owns art, or I suppose anything of that caliber for that matter, they in fact own us. So if you buy some famous painting, you will eventually die and it will go to a new owner and so on and so forth. We merely get to be there while it owns us, an interesting notion.

The story is a very slow burner, and not really for everyone. Like I said earlier Ben Kingsley plays a characters that's pretty easy to dislike. He is so jealous that she will be with a younger man, but sees no problem with sleeping around. Everything that he worries others will do he does himself, and in that way is so self centered and so full of himself. Its obvious he thinks he's above everyone else because he's smart and cultured and rich, but he is weaker than he appears.

The acting in it was decent enough, there's plenty of mopping around and longing looks, and so the acting didn't really stand out to me. Same goes for the cinematography , it was lit well, but none of it seemed to really push the boundaries, and the shots were composed pretty straight forward.

If you enjoy heavy dramas then this might be up your alley, but its nothing to run out and see. Overall it was a strong drama, with more to it than it initially appears. 7/10 stars.

Director: Isabel Coixet

Starring: Ben Kingsley, Penelope Cruz, Dennis Hopper, Patricia Clarkson, Peter Sarsgaard

America the Beautiful

This was a documentary that came out not to long ago, and I really wanted to see it. There are few docs that I would pay money to see in the theatre, it just doesn't make much sense when I can just wait for it on Dvd. I didn't get a chance to see it in the theatre, which as it turns out was okay, it was better that I waited.

They tackle a very broad issue in this film, and its America's obsession with image and beauty. The thing is, is that it's not an American problem, its world wide. So to try and just focus on America, for the most part in it seemed a little bit to much of a tunnel vision view on the subject. Personally I think if they had looked at it as a human need or want to have a beautiful partner I think it would have been stronger.

That all said it was still a very interesting doc. Even a little unnerving. We are introduced at the beginning of the movie to a runway model named Gerren Taylor, she is tall and very pretty. We see her doing photo shoots and hanging out at parties with industry people that are drinking and mostly naked, and that's when we are told that she is only 12 years old. It stopped me dead, and made me a little sick, I certainly thought she was a pretty girl, but not really my type, even so finding out she was a baby made me feel somehow dirty.

Some of the movie focuses on her, and how she rises to be a very popular model in the community and her ultimate downfall. She is very cocky and a little bit of a bitch, but the thing is I cant and wouldn't blame her for that, she is not even a teenager yet. I blame and look down on her pariah of a mother and the industry leeches that cling onto her like she was made of gold. This poor girl is made into a woman, barley wearing anything in these fashion shows and she isn't even a teenager yet, truly disgusting.

Her story is probably the craziest one that we see within the movie. They delve into cosmetic surgery and its horrors but not nearly enough as they should have, or showing any of the ways it goes to far. People getting nose jobs and boob jobs I get, I think they are unnecessary, but I understand them. When you see a woman drop a Playboy onto a doctors desk and says "Give me her vagina" I become a little confused.

They go into the damage that can be done with magazines showing "perfection" that girls buy, and buy into. They also go into air brushing a little. It was a good documentary, but I wish they would have focused more on the biology of why we want more out of our partners, why we demand such high expectations that almost no one can recreate. This shows how as we pursue beauty we show how ugly we can be. 7/10 stars.

Director: Darryl Roberts

Inheritance

What a burden it must be to know that someone in your family is responsible for the death of thousands of innocent people. A few families not to long ago found out that they are the grand nieces and nephews of Adolf Hitler. None of them had children yet, and all agreed that they never would. To stop the blood line they were willing to sacrifice their right to have children, what guilt they must feel. This film is the same sort of thing, we follow Monika Hertwig who is the daughter of Amon Goeth the Nazi Butcher.

She was born in 1945, and he was hung by the Polish government in 1946, she never knew him. She was told as a child that her father was a war hero and died for his country, the truth was nothing of the sort. If you've ever seen "Schindler's List" then you are familiar with Amon Goeth. Ralph Fiennes plays him and is about as terrifying as anyone could. He was the Commandant of the Plaszow labor camp, he's the one who would act as a sniper from his villa and shoot people as they worked. He was a cold blooded sociopath, words cant even describe the kind of monster that he was.

In that way I feel so much sympathy for his daughter, she has to live with his deeds and even if no one else knows who she really is, it makes no difference since she will know. The documentary focuses on her and on Helen Jonas-Rosenzweig, one of the slaves that Amon kept in his house, that he beat everyday. The difficulty of facing the child of your tormentor, or on the other hand the woman whom your father terrorized for years really comes across in the film. They both spend time crying before they ever meet, and when they do Monika cant even face Helen. They meet at a memorial marker at Plaszow. After they talk for a while Helen has to walk away because she cant take it anymore, she still agrees to go with Monika to the villa where she lived as a slave.

This is where Helen fully breaks down, the looks on her face make it appear that she expects Amon to walk around one of the corners and come after her. Walking up the stairs that she was thrown down more times than she can count she doesn't even try and hold back the tears and panic in her voice.

The whole story of these women is about memory, and how its inescapable. We learn about their families and the damage that is encased in stone, they will never escape it except in death. Its surprising to learn about all the Holocaust survivors who later committed suicide, but when you think about what it psychologically did to them, you can understand it a little more.

It was a strong documentary, it was shot very quietly and just let the women pour their emotion out to one another, to the camera, or just to the world so then they could get some of it off their chests and breathe a little easier. 8/10 stars.

Director: James Moll

Innocence

Whew, where to start. Parts of this film, far to many parts in fact bordered on erotica for pedophiles. That's no exaggeration, it made me feel so uncomfortable and embarrassed I was watching this.

Now before I go further let me explain that other parts of it were very good, but before I get to that I need to vent on the other parts of it that bothered me. The film has a slow opening, I think only by minute seven do we actually see any people, for that I tip my hat to them, its a bold step to make the beginning of your movie so boring, and that's a compliment. The beginning was boring, it was water coming towards the camera and black screen with credits. When we actually do see some of the characters it's when it first gets awkward. There is a coffin in a room, a bunch of little girls open it and there is a 6 or 7 year old inside only wearing bottoms, this is Iris and she's the new girl at this "school." Right away upon seeing the little girl I felt uncomfortable, she was nearly naked, but I thought it was just this one scene.

I was wrong, we right away jump to a bunch of little girls getting nearly naked and swimming in a lake. I was close at this point to turning it off, and I would have, but there are very few movies that I have just straight up quit watching, it takes a lot for me to make that choice, so I wanted to give this movie a chance. After the swimming scene is when it starts to get a little more comfortable, it for about half an hour just follows the girls as they eat, play in the woods and do really nothing in particular. There are of course little things we are learning as we go, but nothing really jaw dropping. Mostly at this point I was wondering why this would be considered a school when they don't do anything and there are no adults.

This is when the first real punch in the face happens, we are meeting the teachers who work there Mademoiselle Eva and Mademoiselle Edith. We see how they teach the girls to dance and are pretty mysterious themselves along with the rest of the surroundings. One of the little girls from another group asks Iris if she wants to escape with her, Iris is to afraid so the little girl gets in a row boat on the lake and goes out on her own. The boat starts to fill with water, and she stops rowing, defeated. The camera dips under the water and when it comes up its night and raining, the boat is half submerged and the little girl is gone. What a great shot, it was so well composed and made shivers run down my spine.

The girls are learning to dance, ballet to be specific, and the only other subject I could detect was a form of Biology where they learn about animals, mostly the butterfly and its metamorphosis. Okay, I get it, they are little girls, they are becoming women, they are changing just like the butterflies and the dance is the dance they all have to do as they move into the grace of being a woman, I understand. So why then I ask was it necessary to have the kids naked or nearly naked so much of the time?

As more of the movie goes by we see another little girl named Alice who also wants to get out of the school, the headmistress is supposed to pick a little girl every year to take out with her (the school is located in the woods and the grounds are walled in) Alice tries so hard to be the best dancer of her age group, she doesn't make it, and decides to jump the wall. They just like the other little girl who was "drowned" say she wont be coming back ever.

The women of the school start to talk about the girls escaping amongst themselves and about the outside world, this is when my curiosity began to peak about the outside. What was wrong with it that they had to wall the girls into this place?

Anyway I wont go anymore into the plot (to much to try and explain) but there were a few more moments that were very voyeuristic and pedophilic, including seeing a twelve year old completely naked. It was upsetting to say the least. Whenever the women were on screen it was just so amazing to compare the two, adults to children and see how beautiful the women are, and question how someone could be sexually attracted to children.

The acting by the children and adults alike was very enjoyable, they were roles I'm sure were hard to nail down, there is seemingly so little that happens and we don't really know anything about any of them. Most of the movie is the kids playing, dancing and wondering whats outside the wall (only the French could pull that off)

The Cinematography was gorgeous and chilling, lighting some of these scenes must have been so fun, every shot was composed like a still image, there are plenty of Steadicam shots and cranes used. Its all very floaty, but when it has to be rigid and a little scary its more than a little. It was a good contrast seeing the girls play during the day and laughing and then seeing a single girl walking at night under trees each of which have a light and seeing her appear and then disappear as she heads off to do who knows what (you find out later.)

If it wasn't for the wealth of interesting shots this movie would have gotten a very low rating from me, as well as if the rest of the movie was like the first forty minutes, I don't know if I would have been able to finish it. But it got better as the movie went on, so it redeemed it self at times.

Overall 6/10, please French people, stay away from the kids.

Director: Lucile Hadzihalilovic

Starring: Zoe Auclair, Berangere Haubruge, Lea Bridarolli, Marion Cotillard, Helen de Fougerolles

Killer at Large: Why Obesity is America's Greatest Threat

Thank you God I have never been fat! This film starts out telling the story of a 12 year old girl who is getting liposuction, because they claim there is nothing left to do. Now I understand, this girl weighs nearly double what I do, but come on, get her off her ass and walk her around a little, don't let her eat the whole cake.

We learn later what happens to the girl, and by 13 she is starting to look like a cute girl of an average weight, but since she didn't earn that herself she is bound to back peddle, and she does. Don't get me wrong, Ive got compassion, and I understand its not as easy as it might seem, but the responsibility is these peoples alone.

They get scientific in the documentary instead of merely political, which is great, in that way they make themselves have a little more authenticity than someone who just wants to berate America and our eating culture, even if its deserved. They explain that as humans we have thrived based on two things, our want to have sex constantly, and our need to constantly eat. Four million years ago we hunted and gathered for our food, and most of our day was concerned with that. It takes a lot of energy to stalk an animal across the tundra or the fields for sometimes days on end to maybe not even catch it. People were always hungry. As a species we are actually very ill equipped for hunting: No claws, no sharp teeth, we're not fast, we don't blend in with our surroundings, no venom or poison....it just keeps going. So its pretty lucky that our heads contain at least a partially functioning brain.

So as it was hard for us to catch food, when we did we had to eat as much of it as possible because who knows the next time you might eat, and from that also pops up the reason why our bodies turn so much of what we eat into fat. Its stores of energy in case we don't eat for a while. So out of the industrial revolution and the corporatization of agriculture we get a society that can easily and cheaply get food. Throw in the worst foods are the cheapest, thus the poor are the fattest demographic. It is a fact that it costs more to eat healthy, how unnerving is that?

Now that defense for me will only take you so far for me. The film then dives into marketing and the misuse of corn in our diets, and all of the arguments are true and upsetting, but to me it still falls onto the fat parents to stop their fat kids and themselves from eating a whole bucket of fried chicken.

Enough of my opinion on the matter of the obese and more about the movie. It does a really great job giving all the various elements behind why we are fat, and why we continue to be fat, and its all very disgusting really. They even talk about how oil is to blame for some of the food problems, and its actually more than just an idea. Its true that the use of fossil fuels changed how we do everything, and that we are basically consuming the labor of the fossil fuels and not so much the suns energy anymore. Ill explain.

The Sunlight comes to earth = The plants grow from the sunlight = we eat the plants, or animals do and then we eat the animals.

Thank you sun.

Here's how it works now.

The Sunlight comes to earth = the plants wont grow unless they are sprayed with a particular pesticide, and fertilizer, both of which come from petrol. The seeds wont grow because we genetically engineered them not to unless given this enzyme that they put in the fertilizer and pesticide, which they also have patented, so don't even think of adding it yourself because the seed companies will sue you. = Plants grow (once we give them the fertilizer and pesticides) and we drive them on average 1500 miles to where they will be sold.

That's a lot of oil doing the work there.

The documentary does a great job of showing all sides of the subject, from vending machines in schools to running small farmers out of business. Its a strong little doc, and along the same lines as others I've seen on the subject. I think if they had made it longer and really extensive on the subject it could have been like another "The Corporation" except about food, but it was still a good movie. Overall 8/10 stars. Take a jog around the block people.

Director: Steven Greenstreet