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