DVD Review - I Killed My Mother

Director: Xavier Dolan
Starring: Xavier Dolan, Anne Dorval, Francois Arnaud
Year: 2009

I don't see a lot of films coming out of Canada.  Or maybe I just don't know that I do.  The few that I'm sure I've seen have either been very American or very French, seeming more a part of those countries then having their own national feel.  The Lesser Blessed was decidedly American, a story about high school angst that could have been set in any northern town.  I'm sure it didn't help that the film was in English and that my own ethnocentric tendencies made it all about me.  On the flip side, I Killed My Mother was decidedly French, having almost an Amelie undertone.  It is set in Montreal, Quebec where the director Xavier Dolan is from, and I'm sure there are subtle differences between that region's films and those from France, but to me they seemed very similar.  Anyway, the story isn't about the area, it's about the boy, as Dolan wrote, directed, and starred in this semi-autobiographical film set in his home town and giving audiences an uncomfortably candid look into his past.

The Movie

In the film, Dolan basically plays a version of himself, a 16-year-old named Hubert.  Talented in painting, writing, film-making, Hubert is an artistic bohemian trapped in the suburbs of Montreal.  His grades are not the best, though his intelligence is unquestioned, and he wants desperately to move into an apartment of his own.  The reason behind this is his strained relationship with him mother.  They used to be close, could talk about anything, but recently they have become constantly at odds, screaming at each other, always criticizing, enemies who deep down love one another.  Hubert feels like his mother doesn't understand him, and he's right.  She doesn't because he hasn't been honest with her, hasn't revealed to her that he is gay and in a relationship.

When she finds out about his secret life, Hubert's mother attempts to understand her son and accept the fact that he has changed beyond her understanding.  But old habits and old hatreds don't just disappear after a revelation, no matter how important.  Arguments erupt, Hubert runs away, and his mother feels compelled to place him in a boarding school; not only to fix his grades but to give him what she feels is much needed direction.  This is the final straw for Hubert, and he believes that he will never love his mother again. The pair must try to understand each other if they are to have any hope of mending their relationship; a difficult task given Hubert's distance, his new lifestyle, his experimentation with drugs, and his deep seeded resentment.

The summary of the film doesn't do it justice.  It all sounds a little trite; a young man's struggle to overcome his mommy issues and grow up to become who he wants to be, a mother trying to love her son despite his resistance and her own shortcomings.  It sounds silly, but it isn't.  The film does enough right to overcome the trappings of what could have been a very dumb plot.  But it wasn't.  Instead it came off as honest and relatable, a story that we all can connect to on some level.  Hubert's being gay didn't really matter, nor did the fact that it was his mother who he was fighting with, nor was his age important.  There was something in the story that we have all felt; anger, resentment, boredom, the feeling of being trapped.  And it was those emotions that became the focal point of the film, not the details of the plot.

The film needed very strong actors in order to pull off such a complex drama, and fortunately they delivered.  Anne Dorval was excellent as Chantale, Hubert's mother.  Not only was she a very deep character, but she was funny as well.  The sort of funny that hurts a little, but funny nonetheless.  She was able to be extremely believable while still being very dramatic, which a ton of Hollywood actors can't pull off.  And Dolan himself was very strong as well.  I guess it's not surprising that he played himself well; who better to show how he felt at this time in his life?  But it couldn't have been easy, to write the script that bares your emotions to the world, act it out on camera, and direct the film that puts it all together.  That aspect alone is pretty impressive.  It doesn't make the movie a success that he worked so hard, but the effort is obvious and helps to make the film feel that much more realistic.

It wasn't all perfect though.  The film was a little slow at times and perhaps too reliant on dramatic screaming matches.  Raising your voice can hide some imperfections in your acting and can heighten the intensity of a scene.  But I don't think they were yelling just for the sake of it.  The arguments were necessary to the story, but they did get a little too numerous.  Also, the hand-held camera scenes were a little forced, and the dream sequences were a little silly.  I didn't feel like they were needed; the "real life" mood of the film was good enough and didn't need gimmicks to help it.  That said, I guess 16-year-olds are dramatic, so perhaps the over-the-top moments can be forgiven because that's how the director saw the world at that time in his life.  Regardless, the imperfections were minimal and didn't hurt the quality of the film.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 1.85:1, the video was just fine.  The film was shot using a Red One camera, and the picture quality was nice but not amazing.  There were some very beautiful shots though; Dolan has a good eye for a dramatic visual.

Audio - The sound was done in Dolby Digital, with your choice between Dolby Digital 5.1 or Dolby Digital 2.0.  The sound quality of the film was fine, with nice background music.  There were a couple spots where the the voices were soft and the music was overpowering, but some of that could have been done for effect.

Extras - There are a couple extras on the disc.  About Kino Lorber tells a little about the distributor.  There is also a theatrical trailer and a stills gallery.

Final Thoughts

Recommended.  I Killed My Mother is a strong film, especially for a first time director who also wrote the script and starred in the movie.  He was twenty at the time and made a great debut.  The film was well acted and well made, with a simple story that was easy to relate to.  The video, audio, and extras were just fine, but not very exciting.  All in all, a very nice movie that was easy to appreciate.

✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ ✰ ✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Rushlights

Director: Antoni Stutz
Starring: Josh Henderson, Haley Webb, Aidan Quinn, Beau Bridges
Year: 2013

Some movies you can tell just aren't going to be any good.  They may end up with some redeeming qualities, but there are certain signs that point towards crap.  Two young, attractive, unknown lead actors?  Yes.  Two mediocre veterans meant to lend some credit to the film?  Yes.  A story set in a small town in Texas where everyone knows everyone?  Yes.  These all seemed like red flags to me, and when I watched the trailer I was even more confident that this movie wouldn't be anything wonderful.  But I also thought that it ought to be entertaining, fast-paced, sexy; a fun way to spend an hour and a half.  Well, I was wrong on one of my assumptions.  Guess which.

The Movie

It's young love at its finest when the handsome Billy falls for the beautiful Sarah.  She's a waitress, he's a who-knows-what, but a passionate night brings them together and they seem to have fallen hard for each other.  But their idyllic situation is rocked when Sarah's friend ODs, dies, and leaves her in a tight spot.  Call the police?  Run?  Or maybe open her mail, find a letter of inheritance, and hatch a deceitful plan that could make the young couple very rich.  You see, Sarah looks remarkably like her friend and could pose for her easily.  So Sarah & Billy head to Texas to claim the inheritance as their own.  Sounds too good to be true, and of course it is.

Things are not so cut-and-dry in Tremo, where this long-lost relative has died.  He left behind a lot of money, but also many secrets and a lot of people who want a piece of the pie.  Sarah & Billy soon meet the brothers who run the town: Cameron Brogden the lawyer and Robert Brogden the sheriff.  While friendly at first, it soon becomes apparent that they have agendas of their own and that the young lovers will not be getting their hands on the cash as quickly as they had imagined.  Lies abound and cover stories unravel, as everyone's true motives are slowly revealed and the twisted plot races toward a resolution that will definitely not be amicable.

Where to start, where to start.  The production of the film, I guess, since that was as bad as everything else.  First off, director Antoni Stutz has only directed one other film, 2001's You're Killing Me... starring former porn star Traci Lords.  You gotta start some time I guess, but the film made it obvious that he was an amateur.  It was more like a copy of a movie than an actual movie.  I take that back; more like a copy of a made-for-TV movie than an actual movie.  It felt stolen instead of created, with no hint of originality.  The whole small-Texas-town thing is so cliche, it's got to be impossible to do it well.  And adding a yellow filter over your camera lens didn't make the boring, typical scenes that you're shooting seem any cooler.  From start to finish the film was a rip-off of so many that have come before; just one more "thriller" with no substance and no saving grace.

I guess I'd have to blame the acting for taking the movie from bad to awful.  I mean, it obviously wasn't going to be great, but it could have helped itself out a little by having actors who were the least bit likeable, believable, or talented.  Josh Henderson was especially poor as the seemingly simple-minded Billy.  It was like he was reading lines in acting class, not performing in an actual movie.  His counterpart, Haley Webb, was actually OK.  She was pretty at least, and not horrible anyway, but the two of them had such bad chemistry that it felt a little weird every time they touched each other.  Quinn & Bridges, the veterans, were exactly what you'd expect; about as exciting as mannequins taught to speak.  Neither one of them brought anything to the film except a recognizable name.

It all culminated in a badly acted, messy muddle.  The story was hard to follow, the characters weren't fun to watch, and the movie fell very flat.  And there's where I was wrong in my assumptions.  I thought that the film looked throw-away, but that it would have some fireworks.  Some cool violence, a sex scene, tense or scary moments.  But no, I was wrong about that.  Instead it was overly serious, strange, and at times pretty boring.  I was left not really caring whether or not any of the principles got any money, got away with murder, died, left, disappeared.  I guess I just gave up at some point.  And judging by how well the film turned out, maybe they all did too.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 2.35:1, the video was quite nice.  The film was shot on an Arriflex 35 BL4 using Cooke and Angenieux lenses, and also a Clairmont camera using a Clairmont lens.  The quality of the picture was top notch; crisp visuals, nice clarity.  The movie was a bit too yellow for my taste, but then maybe that was an artistic decision.

Audio - The film was done in Dolby Digital, with an option to choose English 5.1 or English 2.0.  There are no subtitles choices or any other audio options on the disc.  The sound quality of the film is fine, nothing to report and no problems.

Extras - There is only one extra on the disc; Behind the Scenes: "The Making of Rushlights".  It's only four minutes long and doesn't really add anything to the movie.  There are no other extras.

Final Thoughts

Skip It.  There's really no reason to watch this movie.  It looks bad from the beginning, only to get worse when you realize that there aren't any cheap redeeming qualities.  The video is nice, the audio fine, and the extras limited.  Don't rent Rushlights with the hope of having an entertaining evening.  They say it's based on actual events, but that's a pretty loose phrase, and it doesn't effect the outcome.  It's not awful enough to be funny, it doesn't deliver enough to be good, and it's not provocative enough to warrant your time.

✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Dragon Knight

Director: Helene Angel

Starring: Daniel Auteuil, Nicolas Nollet, Sergi Lopez

Year: 2003

This is a movie of many titles.  The DVD has it entitled Dragon Knight.  The original French title is Recontre avec le dragon.  And IMDB has it labeled as The Red Knight.  Whatever you choose to call it, the multiple names are a sign of the confusion to come.  There is not a single dragon in the movie, nor can we ever be sure that a dragon played any part in the story.  That's fine, there doesn't have to be an actual dragon; you could argue that the legend of the dragon is what's important to the plot.  But then there's the French vs. the English title.  Sure, it's a foreign film, why not.  But again, it's a clue as to what's to come.  And what came was some of the worst dubbing I have ever sat through.  So take the uncertainty of the title as a sign and be prepared for what turned out to be a very odd film.

The Movie

Legend has it that a man baptised by fire has become one of the greatest knights in history.  His name is Guillaume, and in his youth he saved his friend Raoul from the dragon's breath.  In the process, he was horribly burned, surviving but paying a horrible price.  The scars he will carry for a lifetime, but legend also claims that this brave warrior can never die, can never be defeated, that he is blessed by the fire.  Years after the event his exploits have not been forgotten.  Books have been written about him, and he has become a famous knight, idolized by many.  One such believer is Felix, a young boy who carries an ancient book with him as if it were the Bible, hoping to one day meet & squire for his beloved hero.

When Felix finally meets Guillaume, all is not as he imagined it would be.  The Red Dragon is no more than a bounty hunter, attempting to find the renegade Hugues, return him to the Pope, and collect a handsome reward.  Also on the trail of the runaway is Mespoulede, Guillaume's rival.  The two fight for the right to the prize, with Felix a near helpless tag-a-long.  But there is even more to the story that will make it even harder for Guillaume to complete his mission.  He is being followed by his now mad friend Raoul, who is cursed and damned and totally insane.  Something happened years ago between the two near brothers that has driven a wedge between them, something that haunts them still and will ultimately help to decide the fate of all involved.

First, the dubbing.  I'm not sure who did it, but it sounds like it was perhaps a high school class.  I've heard some bad voice-overs in some bad b-movies, but this has to be right up there with the worst ever.  Not only was it horrible acting, but the voices themselves didn't seem to fit the characters at all.  Guillaume sounded like he was seventeen.  I could have done a better job, and I really hate when that happens.  Me and my friends shouldn't be able to go in the basement, watch the movie, find a script, read along, and do ten times better than the actual dubbers.  I mean, come on, put some effort into it at least.  Try to emote a little and inflect your voice.  I don't want to sound like my old choir teacher, but a little enunciation wouldn't hurt.

The only thing the dubbing allowed for were some cool sound effects that seem to have been added in to the movie.  Background sounds were louder than usual, but not in a bad way.  It was almost like an old radio show where someone is producing sound effects to go along with the dialogue.  Who knows, that may have been exactly what they were doing, snapping twigs whenever a character went traipsing through the woods.  But it worked, and created a extra sense of reality, of being involved in the story.  And the story itself wasn't bad.  I was interested in the Dragon Knight legend, I was curious to see how it would all play out, and I liked Felix as the boy who is witnessing the crazy world that these messed up adults have constructed for themselves.

Putting aside the dubbing, the film was alright.  Not great, but alright.  It was very imaginative, with strange locations that the characters were always coming across, original costumes, and some nice ideas put into motion.  There was obviously a lot of time & effort put into the world in which the action was taking place.  The events of the plot were unpredictable, even a little wild at times.  But at least they kept you on your toes.  The level of violence and stark action was nice; there was a very raw sense to the film, a semi-realistic take on medieval warfare, politics, and brutality.  I guess if I had just turned the volume off it would have made for a better movie.  But then I wouldn't have known what the hell was going on, so never mind.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 2.35:1, the picture quality is nice.  Maybe not quite as perfect as you'd hope for, but nice.  The scenery was what impressed me.  The filmmakers had a good eye for the set, and gave us some really great shots.

Audio - You have two sound options here: 2.0 Dolby Stereo or 5.1 Surround Sound.  The film is in French with English dubbing.  There are no subtitles options, but if you had subtitles you'd miss some of the worse voice-overs you're ever likely to hear.

Extras - There are zero extras on this disc.

Final Thoughts

Skip It.  I wish I had watched this film in its original language.  I don't think it would have made it amazing, but it definitely would have helped.  The visuals of the movie were nice, the story was cool, but the dubbing was just so bad it made it almost unwatchable.  The video was good, the audio was fine, and there were no extras at all.  Find a French version; otherwise don't bother.

✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ - Extras
✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Gallowwalkers

Director: Andrew Goth

Starring: Wesley Snipes, Kevin Howarth, Riley Smith

Year: 2012

I can't remember the last time I watched a Wesley Snipes movie, and I'm pretty sure that's a good thing.  I don't think it was as far back as White Men Can't Jump, which may have been the only role that he was ever believable in, but that might not be far off.  He's just an awful actor who chooses horrible projects to attach his name to.  I tell you my feelings now so you'll know I watched Gallowwalkers from a biased perspective.  But honestly, I'm not sure it would have mattered.  Wesley Snipes or Daniel Day-Lewis, I doubt anyone could have turned this movie into something worthwhile.  I'm sure putting someone as bad as Snipes into your lead role didn't help, but it probably didn't hurt much either.

The Movie

The story follows Aman, a western warrior who cannot outrun the curse that chases him.  This gunslinger was once the son of a wild woman, but she was forced to give him up when she joined a secret society of nuns living in the dessert.  Growing up in a slaughterhouse, Aman fell in love with his caregiver's daughter and they planned the wonderful life they would lead together.  However, all of that was taken away when a group of bandits attacked the farm while Aman was away, stealing the young couple's dreams and shattering their peaceful lives.  Driven by vengeance, our hero tracked down the villains, attacked the prison in which they were captured, and killed them all one by one.  His revenge was complete, but the story was not yet ended.

In once saving Aman's life, his mother has caused a curse to be visited upon him.  Those who he killed with his gun were able to return to life, becoming undead beings with vengeance on their minds.  Now the group of outlaws have returned, and Aman must kill them again, once and for all.  But it won't be so easy a second time.  They are led by the powerful Kansa, who seeks a method of returning his dead son to life as well, allowing father & son to be reunited.  Aman must find help if he is to survive the retaliation of the undead and destroy them once more, and that helps comes in the form of a young cowboy named Fabulos.  The pair must hone their skills and outsmart their enemies in order to defeat death and put the evil curse to rest.

It's exactly as bad as it sounds. The story barely made any sense at all, was set in some strange pseudo-West, and relied heavily on the belief that if killing someone once didn't work we would all agree that they must be killed again.  I'm not so sure I wouldn't have just given up and moved away.  That's basically how I felt during the majority of the movie; like giving up.  The plot was just so silly.  And not only that, but it was unfolded poorly, acted badly, and never hooked me.  I really didn't care that Aman's past was sad, that his home was attacked, or that he felt he had to do something about it twice.  It's the film's job to make me like it; it's not my job to work at finding something worthwhile to latch onto.  And if it were, I would have been hard-pressed.

It definitely wouldn't have been Wesley Snipes' acting that allowed me to look past the other flaws of the film.  He's literally terrible at delivering lines, and since that's half of an actor's job I start to feel that special kind of anger that only comes when someone else in making millions of dollars for doing something that I could do better myself.  I'm mad that he's rich & famous, I'm not, and yet I could also have posed in the dessert with one leg cocked out pretending that I was a bad ass.  I'm not saying I'm a great actor, I'm saying that neither is he.  I guess these are the perfect kinds of movies for him, since he really can't make them that much worse, but I can't help giving him the majority of the blame for what turned out to be a pretty strange and crappy film.

And it wasn't even all bad, just mostly so.  There were a few bright moments that, sadly, were covered up by the large amount of bad ones.  The set was actually pretty cool; an alternate wild west landscape laid out across long desserts and rolling hills.  And the weird culture of the area was kind of interesting; it might have made for a good short story or graphic novel.  It had that feel to it, with some cool shots and a nice amount blood.  It was an odd mix of Blade and Mad Max that never really turned into a coherent film and left me more frustrated than bored.  There was plenty of action, it just seemed pointless, useless, and not very well thought out.  And I guess that pretty much sums it up.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 2.35:1 Widescreen, the video is a really nice quality.  The film was shot using a Panavision Panaflex, and the picture comes across clear and clean.  The set lends itself to a nice visual, with plenty of sunlight, good contrast, and crisp action.

Audio - The film was done in English 5.1 Dolby Digital audio, with an option for either English or Spanish subtitles.  The sound quality of the film was fine, with some good background music and no glaring problems.

Extras - There are few extras on the disc.  Behind the Scenes With Interviews is a ten-minute, self-explanatory segment that gives a little insight into the film.  And Also From Lionsgate shares three trailers: Warm Bodies, The Revenant, and Chaos.

Final Thoughts

Skip It.  Gallowwalkers just isn't a very good movie.  Its plot is shaky, the acting is fairly awful, and when it was over I just didn't care.  The story is slightly interesting, but it's badly done.   Wesley Snipes didn't help a bit, delivering every line with blunt force and fake emotion.  The video was nice, the audio was fine, and the extras were pretty boring.  I can't recommend this movie to anyone, unless you just want to see Snipes pretending he's a cowboy.  That's about all it's good for.

✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Boy

Director: Taika Waititi
Starring: Taika Waititi, James Rolleston, Te Aho Aho Eketone-Whitu
Year: 2010

I had no idea that I had seen Taika Waititi's work before.  I chose to watch this movie thinking that it was a completely random film from New Zealand that got some good reviews.  While I was watching it, I thought that it reminded me of Eagle vs Shark, which is the only other movie out of New Zealand that I had ever seen. Turns out, not only did Waititi write, direct, and act in Eagle vs Shark, but he also went on to work alongside the main character of that movie (Jemaine Clement) in Flight of the Conchords.  Now fast forward to Boy and Waititi is once again acting, directing and writing a strange comedy/drama about the people of New Zealand, their awesome accents, and their unique culture.

The Movie

Boy is the story of Boy, a kid from a small town in New Zealand whose imagination is larger than the confines of his limited world.  He lives in a ramshackle house with his brother Rocky, a bunch of young cousins, and his grandmother, who sometimes leaves for large periods of time and puts Boy in charge.  He entertains his brother with fictional stories of how things came to be; how Rocky has magic powers, leading to the death of their mother in childbirth.  How their father escaped prison using only a spoon and plans to take them both to see Boy's idol in concert; Michael Jackson.  His life is predictable and boring, that is until his father comes home.

Alamein, the father, has been in prison but was recently released.  He and his new "gang", the Crazy Horses, have come home to find the money they stole and buried before they were caught.  Alamein has not been a part of Boy's life since his mother died, and Rocky doesn't know him at all.  But the boys attempt to reunite with their dad; going with him on drives, hanging out with his crew, and helping him dig for the buried treasure that he promises will buy them a better life.  But it's not easy to bridge the gap between years, and Boy becomes confused by his new-found family and his desire to be a man in his father's eyes, even when his father is no more than a boy himself.

I was completely blindsided by this movie.  I chose to watch it on a whim, didn't have any expectations, and was totally surprised that it turned out to be an amazing film.  It was literally incredible; I couldn't believe that a little movie from New Zealand made me feel the way that this one did.  It was a perfect story of boyhood; of the sadness of loss, the hope of a bright future, the disappointment that comes from believing too strongly in the perfection of a parent.  It was heartbreaking really; Boy's attempt to force his father to love and accept him, Rocky's assumption that this strange man didn't want him or need him.  It was an emotionally charged film, made better by the amazing comedic content and timing.

It was funnier than I ever could have imagined.  The Michael Jackson references, the "gang" that was too ridiculous to know that they were ridiculous, the microwave that the kids assumed was a strange television.  The jokes were sometimes silly, sometimes subtle, but always spot on and well paired with a dramatic situation that needed some juxtaposition to make it bearable.  When I learned that Waititi had created both Boy and Eagle vs Shark I automatically compared the two.  They were similar in how they portrayed both main adult characters as juvenile and stuck in a world of play war & fantastic dreams.  But they were different in their comedic style.  The former uses timing and chagrin to make things funny; the latter uses awkward moments and ridiculous situations.  Both movies were good, but Boy took a step beyond good and became great.

It wasn't like I cried my eyes out at the end of the movie because I was so moved by the father/son story.  And it wasn't that I cracked up laughing the entire show, enjoying joke after joke.  I think the reason I liked the movie so much was because it found a balance between heartbreak and humor that is really hard to achieve.  It was moving but silly, making it not seem heavy while not seeming flippant.  I can only credit Waititi, since he basically did everything to make this movie what it was.  Maybe he learned a few things from his other projects, namely how to hold back while holding the audience's interest.  He held mine, and I'm glad I watched this film that I had never heard of.  I would watch it again right now, and I would surely recommend it to anyone who is even slightly interested.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ration of 1.85:1, the video quality is what you're looking for from a modern DVD.  The picture was nice; not amazing, but nice, with no problems and no reason to be disappointed.

Audio - The disc has two audio options: Dolby Digital 5.1 or Dolby Digital 2.0.  There are no subtitles in any languages; the film is in English.  The sound quality of the movie was quite good, with creative and well planned music throughout.

Extras - There are a few nice extras on the DVD.  You can learn a little about the distribution company, Kino Lorber, in a brief section called About Kino Lorber.  There is a theatrical trailer for the film, a forty minute segment called Interviews and B-Roll Footage, and a short film by Taika Waititi entitled Two Cars, One Night.

Final Thoughts

Highly Recommended.  Boy was an absolutely awesome film, more so for being so unexpected.  It had heart, it was funny, it was relatable, and it left me wanting to pop it back in and rewatch it.  The video was a good quality, the music was excellent, and the extras were fun to watch.  This movie comes highly recommended by a guy who is very glad that he now owns the DVD.

✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Vivan las Antipodas

Director: Victor Kossakovsky 
Year: 2011

While I'm not a huge fan of documentaries, I try to give them a fair shot.  After all, documentary filmmakers are trying to shed light on a subject, open our eyes to a problem, give us a glimpse of a world that we don't normally see.  And isn't that what's missing from so many major movies, a real reason for the film?  So many projects are throwaways, meant to make a profit more than anything.  But documentaries are created for a specific purpose, and for that I respect them.  Now, that doesn't mean I always enjoy them, some are quite boring, but a few do come along that are both captivating and interesting and those are the ones that are worth looking out for.  If you've ever seen and liked Life in a Day you know what I'm talking about.  And I thought this movie would be just like that one, a great look at our planet in a breathtaking way.  Well, it was beautiful, I'll give it that, but it was about as captivating as watching a glacier move.

The Movie

First off, what is an antipode?  Well, very simply, it is a direct or exact opposite.  Antipodes, in this sense, are places on Earth that are diametrically opposite each other on the globe.  So if you drilled a whole down through the ground under your house, dug a straight line directly through the Earth's core and kept going, where would you pop out?  Apparently there are very few antipodes in the world that are both populated by humans, given the large percentage of water covering the surface.  It's very rare to live in a place in which, directly under your feet, people are living their own lives "upside down".  This documentary was created to examine the lives of the people, the beauty of the environments, the differences in culture, of those who live on opposite sides of the world.

The locations tell the story more than the few words spoken in the film.  The antipodes are the plot, and the environments of each spot are the background.  The first pair of opposites are a riverbank in Argentina and a booming city in China.  Second are a lake in Russia and a sheep farm in Chile.  Third are a village in Botswana and a volcano in Hawaii.  Lastly are the landscapes of Spain and New Zealand.  These locations are compared, juxtaposed, and ultimately shown to us as exact opposites in location but somehow similar in their variety.  The message seems to be that life on Earth is both abundant and original; that life exists in some strange and wonderful places that most of us may never see but that flourish in their own unique ways.

Maybe it sounds like an interesting documentary, one that really showcases the beauty of planet Earth and the people who call it home.  Perhaps the still pictures from the DVD are so vivid and stunning that you want to watch this film.  Well, don't.  I had hope that it would be as good as Life In a Day, but it wasn't, not at all.  I was very disappointed after watching the movie; I felt like I wasn't given what was advertised, that I was denied something beautiful.  Now, maybe that's not fair.  Maybe the director had a vision and met that goal perfectly.  Perhaps it's my fault for creating expectations.  But I don't think it's too much to ask to want a documentary to be engrossing, not boring.

And boring it was, wow.  Every scene dragged and felt torturous.  It was like watching a plant grow using a fast-motion camera.  Except imagine that it's just a normal camera and you still have to sit there and watch the plant grow even though you'd rather be doing almost anything else in the world.  The shots were just too long; someone needed to scream "cut!" about 10 minutes earlier in about every shot.  And I'm not exaggerating that much.  There were some extremely long pans of some extremely boring material; buzzards sitting on rocks, lava oozing centimeter by centimeter, a tour of what seemed to be the entire city of Shanghai.  If I wanted to get to know the planet in this way I would have just looked up some Google maps.

Now, it wasn't all bad.  It was a very visual movie; you could have just watched it in complete silence and gotten the same out of it.  It was often relaxing, sometimes sleepy, and showed some cool parts of the world that I had never seen in such detail.  The movie was beautiful in that way.  The sunsets were great, the landscapes were lush, Earth was shown as a canvas wonderfully painted.  And the effects were pretty neat too.  It seems too simple to be any good, but just by turning the camera upside down or sideways the director showed us a literal view of the planet that we don't often think about.  It was surprisingly surprising to think about the globe as a sphere.  Of course we know it is, but to literally see it that way was nice.  Still boring, but kind of nice.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 1.85:1, the video quality was good.  Since the movie relied almost completely on the visual, I had expected the picture to be a little better than it was.  It was still good, the sunsets were brilliant, the plant life was detailed.  But it wasn't a breathtaking movie; I wasn't blown away by the visuals or the quality of the video.

Audio - There are very few audio options on the DVD.  You have the choice between Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround and 2.0 Stereo.  There is also an option to turn the subtitles to English or off.  There was nothing amazing about the sound quality and not much in the film to showcase.

Extras - There is only one extra on the disc; a trailer for the film.

Final Thoughts

Skip it. If you're looking for an excellent documentary about the diversity of life on planet Earth, this isn't it.  It might sound like it and look like it from the stills, but you might find it hard to stay awake long enough to see anything worth while.  There are some beautiful shots in the film, but a serious lack of editing created a very boring movie.  The video quality was good, the audio options few, and the extras nonexistent.  The stills from the film turn out to be all you really need to see, unless you enjoy watching a man walk, walk some more, and then keep walking.

✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ - Extras
✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Fred Won't Move Out

Director: Richard Ledes
Starring: Elliott Gould, Fred Melamed, Stephanie Roth Haberle
Year: 2012

I've got to be honest; the only way I know Elliott Gould is as Ross and Monica's dad from Friends.  Well, I take that back.  I think I remember him from an episode of Touched by an Angel, but I'm not proud of that.  My point is that I knew going into Fred Won't Move Out that I was going to have a hard time separating Fred from Jack Geller.  And especially since Jack is so funny and I didn't imagine a movie about the end of an old Jewish man's life would be.  And it wasn't mostly, and yet was sometimes.  Confusing, I know, but then so was the movie.  Not plot-wise, that was straight forward, but by the end I was unsure whether I had enjoyed watching it or not.

The Movie

The story of the movie revolves around the last phase in the life of a man named Fred.  He has lived in his current home for fifty years with his wife, Susan.  She requires a constant attendant, as she is incapable of taking care of herself.  The attendant's name is Victoria, a very caring yet stern woman who takes Susan to the bathroom, feeds her, and is beginning to need to keep a watchful eye on Fred as well.  He is beginning to become forgetful; not paying his taxes, not going to the grocery store.  And after he has a fall, his grown children begin to worry about his safety.  Their names are Bob and Carol, and while they love their parents very much and respect Fred's desire for freedom, they understand that he is no longer safe on his own.

Most of the action of the film takes place on one day during a visit to the family home.  Bob and Carol have driven in from the city to spend the day with their parents, bringing Carol's daughter Lila with them.  They stay to help Victoria around the house, to have lunch as a family, to attend an eclectic music therapy session, and ultimately to convince their father that the time has come for him to leave his home.  Susan is moving to a care facility and the plan is for Fred to accompany her.  But he becomes resistance.  For Fred, the move means an end to his old life and his independence.  For his children it means a lessening of their daily worries, as they know that both of their parents now need more attention than they can give.  The family struggles with the impending move, as the individuals that make up the group don't always see eye to eye.

When a movie has this little action and relies so heavily on dialogue, the acting really comes to the forefront and can make or break the film.  I don't think the acting broke anything, and yet it didn't really blow me away either.  Elliott Gould actually had a small part, which was surprising when you consider that the movie was named after his character and that he's the only well-known actor in the entire project.  The bulk of the lines were given to the son and daughter, and while they were just fine they definitely couldn't carry a heavy story like this one.  They were almost too real, too flippant or amateur or something.  They seemed like actual people and not actors, but for some reason it didn't work and just felt strange.

The story and plot as a whole were well thought out and realistic.  Perhaps not all of us have been in a situation quite like this one, but I for one can imagine it pretty well, be it with my parents as they get older or with myself, as someday I may be incapable of taking care of myself and a decision will have to be made.  It was a very sad scenario, and the characters were accurate depictions of how we might react were we put in a similar spot.  And the flow of the story was pretty straight forward, except for a few weird dream-like sequences that didn't really make much sense.  They definitely didn't add anything to the movie and should have been edited out by someone with a good eye.

All in all, I'm on the fence with this one.  It's not like it was a bad movie.  The acting was fine, the story was real, and there were some great emotional triggers.  There was even a funny scene with the music therapist who played piano and led the family in rousing song.  But I just can't say I liked it, because I often found myself a little bored.  Maybe it was the low-key acting, or the elderly people sitting around getting older by the second, or the conversations about bagels and who ate whos bagel and how many bagels were bought.  I just found myself not caring; about the bagels, about the family, about how the story would end.  The movie wasn't bad, it just wasn't good enough to illicit a major reaction. 

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 16:9 Widescreen the picture quality is just fine.  Nothing spectacular, but nothing distracting either.  The majority of the movie takes place in and around a home, with a lot of dialogue and people sitting down.  In other words, the video wasn't really put to the test.

Audio - There are zero sound options on the disc.  No audio choices, no alternate languages, and no subtitle choices.  The sound in the film was fine, with no obvious blemishes, but again there wasn't really any chance to try out anything more than a raised voice.

Extras - The only extras on the DVD are three trailers: Fred Won't Move Out, Gun Hill Road, and Future Weather.  Let me recommend watching Gun Hill Road, a terrific and moving film, one that's worth a first and a second watch.

Final Thoughts

Skip it.  I almost wish I could give it a higher rating, but the film just isn't worth a lot of time.  It's not an awful movie, but there have got to be so many other ones that should be above it in any movie queue.  The video was fine, the audio was whatever, and the extras were minimal.  An overall fine film that comes off as bland and won't be memorable.

✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ - Extras
✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Dead Man's Burden

Director: Jared Moshe
Starring: Barlow Jacobs, Clare Bowen, David Call
Year: 2012

Although I'm not a western aficionado, I've seen my fair share.  Films like Unforgiven, The Outlaw Josey Wales, Shane; the classics.  I'm not big on spaghetti westerns, I was always more of a John Wayne guy: The Searchers, The Cowboys, El Dorado.  So while it's never been my genre of choice, I do enjoy a good wild west tale.  When I came across Dead Man's Burden, it looked like a homage to the old stories; a simple plot, clipped conversation, beautiful sunsets, and a whole lot of death.  I didn't know if it would be up to par with the great desert dramas (Lonesome Dove) or sink to the bottom of the barrel (Texas Rangers).  I guess it shouldn't surprise me that it fell somewhere in the middle, teetering on the edge between subtle genius and farcical flop.

The Movie

The story takes place on the post-Civil War western frontier.  The McCurry family has been attempting to scratch out a living in the dessert, burying sons along the way.  Wade, the only surviving brother, is disowned due to his supposed betrayal of the Confederate cause.  He has been long away from home, taking work as a deputy, but now wants to return to his farming roots.  His sister, Martha, remains on the family homestead, having married a good Southern soldier, Heck Kirkland.  The two siblings haven't seen each other since they were children and much has changed, but they are about to be reunited.

The pater familias, Joe McCurry, has died, leaving the future of the family's land up in the air.  Joe was for keeping the homestead, as it is the only acreage in the area that has a good supply of water.  Martha is for selling it to the mining company, making a good chunk of cash, and moving to San Francisco, leaving the dessert behind her.  She's set to make her dream a reality when Wade shows up.  He received a mysterious letter from his estranged father, saying that in the case of his death Wade would be needed back home.  Now he and his now-grown sister must decide the fate of the farm, a decision complicated further by Wade's suspicion that Joe didn't die from natural causes.

The story seems pretty simple, and perhaps even a little silly, but looking at the plots of other westerns puts it into perspective.  It's actually a pretty standard storyline; the fractured family unit, the greed that breaks them apart, and finally the conflict that settles the matter better than words seem able to do. So, in a way, Dead Man's Burden is the quintessential cowboy drama, using the old formula to make a modern film.  It doesn't rely on action and it definitely doesn't rely on breathtaking performances, but it does deliver a strong feeling of western.  Now, whether you view that as a rip-off or as a nod is a matter of preference.  Because this film seems to walking the fine line of believability.

I could see how, depending on their mood, someone could either love or hate this film.  It's a polarizing movie apparently, as audiences hate it and critics love it.  And it's because, as I've mentioned, it's right on the edge.  At times I felt like I was watching a very good portrayal of a deceptively simple plot.  What I was hearing were the standard western lines and what I was seeing were the standard western scenes, but they seemed to be genuine and classic at the same time.  But if I tilted my head slightly and tried to remember my high school days it was almost like I was watching a drama club performance.  I can't be sure if it was a classic rendition or a fake version, and I might change my mind the next time I watch it.

What wouldn't change would be the beauty of the scenery.  From the very beginning each shot seemed hand-crafted to be the most amazing picture you could imagine.  The sunsets were epic, the landscape was barren, the houses and dress were authentic, and it was very apparent that the director and his team took this film very seriously.  There were some breath-taking shots in this movie, as hopefully you can see from the few stills I incorporated.  It was a visually stunning film if nothing else.  And it may be more than that, it may be an extremely lovingly made western homage.  But there's still that edge that the cast was walking, on the verge of over-acting every scene.  I felt like they held back just enough and I bought into it.  But I couldn't blame someone for being harsh with this film and feeling as if they crossed a very subtle line.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 2.35:1, the video is everything you're looking for.  The film was shot on a Panavision Panaflex Platinum camera, with Panavision and Cooke lenses.  The scenes are beautiful and lit with an artistic flare.  The colors were made for an HD TV and you won't be sorry you watched this film from a visual standpoint.

Audio - There are two sound options on the disc: Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround or 2.0 Stereo.  English subtitles are available for the hearing impaired.  The audio quality of the film is good, not amazing.

Extras - There are few extras on the DVD.  You can watch four short deleted scenes, and there is a trailer for the film.  Nothing to get excited about and not much to see.

Final Thoughts

Rent it.  Dead Man's Burden is a nice throwback western that's not amazing but doesn't embarrass itself, although the visuals are better than the actual film.  You could make the case that the characters are too stereotypical and that the actors are overdoing it, but I think they toed the line and did their best to deliver authentic performances.  The video was great, the audio was good, and the extras were just OK.  Not an exciting film maybe, but a decent one.

✰ ✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ ✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - Neighboring Sounds

Director: Kleber Mendonca Filho
Starring: Gustavo Jahn, Irandhir Santos, Maeve Jinkings
Year: 2012

I've never seen a Brazilian film before.  I'm not even sure I've seen a South American film before.  I guess, for a person who considers himself open and experimental when it comes to movies, I haven't seen that many foreign films.  I mean, I've seen more than Joe Sixpack over here, but I definitely specialize in modern American film.  So when I heard that Neighboring Sounds may be the best movie to have ever come out of Brazil, I had no way of judging whether or not that was true.  I knew I'd just have to watch it, try my best to appreciate it, and not compare it too much to the cinema that I'm used to.  Well, it turns out that greatness speaks for itself, in whatever language.

The Movie

The story takes place in Recife, Brazil.  The characters live in a fairly nice neighborhood, an area filled with condos, gated houses, and apartments.  Their lives are not that extravagant, they are a sample of the average community that could be found all over the world.  One of the main characters is Bia, a stay-at-home mother of two.  She spends much of her day cleaning, spending time with her children, feuding with her sister, smoking pot, and attempting to silence the extremely noisy neighboring dog with whatever means necessary.  Also living in the area is Joao, a good-looking, single, realtor.  He spends his time showing condos, visiting his father and grandfather, chatting with his house maid, and dating a new girl to the area, Sofia, whom he has come to have some very strong feelings for.  Their lives are not heroic, but are interesting in their simplicity.

Things get shaken up in this quiet community when Sofia's car is broken into.  Joao suspects his own cousin, a strange young man with odd habits, but a member of the family nonetheless.  He is protected, in a way, by the money and power that Joao's family has in the area, as everyone respects and listens to his grandfather, Francisco.  And when a group of night watchmen form a fledgling security firm, Francisco is the man they must approach in order to be accepted.  The community takes them on as guards, fearful of more robberies and feeling just a little safer at night.  But all is not well, as the new members of the community bring their own problems to the group, creating a tangled network of issues, histories, and fears that complicate what seem to be simple existences.

If this film is what I should expect from Brazilian cinema, then I need to be watching more of it.  And if it's the best movie to ever come out of the country, I still need to give the rest of them a chance.  This was an surprisingly wonderful film, one of those that you just never see coming.  The director originally created this story as a short film, which you can watch on the DVD.  He wrote the script in 1994, shot it in 2004, and released the feature length version in 2012.  The short follows only Bia the housewife, and doesn't involve Joao or the neighborhood.  Some of the events are the same in both films, and the short serves as sort of a guideline for the feel of the feature. 

It's not coincidental that the short is about Bia, because she becomes the focal point of Neighboring Sounds.  She is a tremendously interesting character.  Her life seems pretty boring; vacuuming, waiting around for delivery men, doing the laundry.  But there's a desperation under the surface that's really easy to connect to.  The director uses the dog who's driving her crazy to show us this tension, as barking becomes a constant pressure in her life, a driving force for a lot of her actions.  The actress who played Bia could not have done better; she was intense and frustrated, human and likable.  The same could be said for almost every actor/character in the film.  They were just so believable, so easy to relate to, that you fell into this world and never doubted it for a second.

But we can put the story and the characters aside for a minute, because they actually weren't the important parts of the movie.  The film plays a lot with sounds, giving us real examples of everyday sounds that we sometimes tune out and that sometimes drive us crazy.  And the director uses not just sound, but other senses to bombard us with physical sensations that force us to feel a certain way.  A scene that is extremely uncomfortable, a shocking moment, a beautiful image, a boring silence; it was as if our emotions were being played with, but in a good way.  The film was all about sensationalism, relying not on the content of the message but on the way it was delivered.  By the end of the movie, I realized that I had felt more during ninety minutes than I usually do in a whole day.  I felt a waterfall hit my shoulders, I was hot on a summer day, I was in an elevator in silence, I was annoyed by a dog, I was sad for a friend.  And that's what was so great about this movie; some try to get you to feel one thing, but this one made me feel a hundred.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ratio of 2.35:1, the quality of the video was everything you could ask for.  The picture was crisp and the colors were great.  The neighborhood was a perfect location to show off some nice camera work, and the architecture of the city was superbly shown on film.

Audio - On the DVD you have the option of Portuguese 5.1 Dolby Digital or 2.0.  There are also English subtitles.  The sound quality was excellent, and the director used sound and silence in many ways to create moods and to force us into feelings.

Extras - There are quite a few extras on the disc.  You can watch the film with audio commentary by Kleber Mendonca Filho.  There is the short film that I mentioned, called Electrodomestica.  There are three deleted scenes that can be viewed separately or all together.  And there are nine trailers: Neighboring Sounds, Leviathan, Night Across the Street, The Law in These Parts, The Day He Arrives, Patience, Once Upon a Time in Anatolia, The Turin Horse, and Aurora.

Final Thoughts

Highly recommended.  This film surprised me, and I'm so glad it did.  It was an interesting and physically stunning piece of art, one that started out being about the characters and ended up being an attempt to make us feel.  Be it love, fear, heat, shock, amused, aroused; you can't watch this movie without feeling something.  The video was superb, the audio excellent, and the extras plentiful.  A wonderful film that I could watch again right now.

✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ ✰ ✰ ✰ - Replay

Read More

DVD Review - The Lesser Blessed

Director: Anita Doron
Starring: Joel Evans, Chloe Rose, Benjamin Bratt
Year: 2012

You never know what you're going to get from a first time film actor.  They could have "it" or they could be dead wood.  And it's especially unpredictable when they have no previous experience whatsoever.  Joel Evans had never acted before, never had a lesson, and yet was approached by Anita Doron and asked to audition for the lead role in The Lesser Blessed.  Evans is from Fort Smith, Northwest Territories, Canada, the same home town as author Richard Van Camp who wrote the novel of the same title from which the film is adapted.  Incidentally, the novel is Van Camp's only full-length book.  So we have a writer who has only written the one book, an actor who has never acted, and a director who is roaming the streets looking for someone who might want to try being in a movie.  I wish I had known all this before I watched it, because it would have at least alerted me to the possibility that this whole film might be a complete failure and that I might want to avoid it.

The Movie

The film is based on the life, past, and angst of teenager Larry Sole.  Larry is a member of the Dogrib First Nation people, a native tribe from northwest Canada.  He and his mother live in Fort Simmer, where Larry attends the local high school and his mother obsesses over a man named Jed.  He is, in many ways, a substitute father, as Larry's real dad is history.  A tragic event, which Larry calls his "accident", is responsible in some murky fashion for his current position; new town, no dad.  But Jed has issues of his own, and will bolt into the bush whenever he is faced with confrontation, which is not what Larry needs right now.  He is a self-loathing mess, spending much of his time listening to heavy metal, practicing the drums, avoiding eye contact, and hiding his scars.  It's not apparent at first why, but Larry has serious burn marks, and his "accident", his father, his past, and his current troubles are all wrapped up in a knot that is likely never to come loose.

Enter trouble in three different forms, all more confident and volatile than Larry.  First, Juliet Hope, the angel of his daydreams.  Juliet represents all that is beautiful and perfect; her blond hair, her pale skin, her kind manner.  But she hides a disastrous desire to be loved that is not easy to fulfill.  Next, Darcy McManus, the joker/punk/bully/jerk who knows the secrets of Larry's past.  Darcy picks on him relentlessly, frightening him with fire, and treating him as if he were less than dirt.  And finally, Johnny Beck, the new kid and the only person who seems to like Larry.  Johnny sticks up for him, teaches him to fight, makes him feel cooler than he's ever felt before.  But this new-found confidence will lead to more trouble than it might be worth.  When the gorgeous Juliet falls for the suave Johnny, Larry becomes the third wheel.  And when the group begins to enter into the cool world of sex, drugs, and pseudo-adulthood, Larry finds himself in over his head, forced to confront all the issues that have held him back and stopped him from loving anyone, especially himself.

You can probably gather from the summary that the plot of The Lesser Blessed is a little bit contrived.  It just feels like we've seen it all before; the loner, the hot girl, the new kid, the big bully, the daddy issues, the weak mother, the high school teachers, the school dance.  It's not like the film is 10 Things I Hate About You, but you get the point.  It's a dramatic take on a tired storyline and the result is that it doesn't feel very honest.  I wonder how the book reads, and if it feels more like the autobiography of Van Camp's life, as opposed to the movie, which feels like a cheap knock-off.  If Larry is supposed to be Van Camp then that explains a little; perhaps these cliche things really did happen to him.  After all, cliche things are cliche because they happen.  But regardless, it just didn't translate into a feature film, because this isn't a big Hollywood production, which seems to be the only way we can forgive recycled plots.  Maybe that's our problem and it's a double standard, but that doesn't change the fact that we expect something unique from a film festival movie.

With all the amateurs involved in this film, the director was even more important than usual.  There was no falling back on the talent of the veteran actor or the well-known novel or the original plot, because those things didn't exist in this movie.  There was a lot riding on Doron's shoulders as the only experienced player in the game.  Unfortunately, it seems like all the pressure got to her.  The movie was over-directed, quite simply, although I'm not sure if the alternative would have been any better.  The film was too reliant on an artificial mood created by the director and not enough on the emotions of the actors.  Again, I understand why, but that doesn't make it a good thing.  The result was that every scene seemed so incredibly heavy and overbearing.  The music, the voice overs, the cold locale; everything was produced to be dramatic, and it was just too obvious.  Because you could see all the work that went into trying to make the movie believable, it was of course not believable.

There was one piece of the film that could have fixed the plot and direction problems, could have made them fade into the background, and that piece was Joel Evans.  As the center of all the action and emotion, a great performance from him would have swept away all my doubt in the production of the film and allowed me to really buy into the story.  Well, that didn't happened.  Evans isn't an actor.  He just isn't, and although he looks the part, he was never up to the challenge of supporting such a complicated role and pivotal character.  He came off as more of a set piece than an actor, with a wooden performance that lacked any sort of believable emotion.  I was never rooting for Larry, never hoping his dreams would come true, and that's a major problem.  He was even supported by a pretty nice cast; Benjamin Bratt giving perhaps the best true performance I have ever seen from him, and Adam Butcher playing Darcy the bully perfectly.  But it just wasn't enough; you can't really overcome a bad script, heavy-handed directing, and a lead actor who just seems to be phoning it in.

The DVD

Video - With an aspect ration of 16:9 widescreen, the picture quality was just fine.  The video was produced and edited well, it just didn't have a chance to shine.  Much of the movie is drab and cold, not really providing much opportunity for a high quality picture to show off.

Audio - The sound is done in 5.1 surround, so that's fine.  But there are no audio options on the DVD; no language selections or sound selections.  There is, however, a Descriptive Video Track, which can be turned on to run with the film.  It provides a mix of the dialogue with some scene narration during natural pauses, intended to enhance the experience of the visually impaired.

Extras - There are a few good extras.  Interviews with the cast and crew, including Benjamin Bratt, Joel Evans, Kiowa Gordon, Chloe Rose, Tamara Podemski, Adam Butcher, Anita Doron, and Richard Van Camp.  And five trailers; Take Me Home, Looking For Palladin, The Sensation of Sight, Pearl Diver, and The Lesser Blessed.

Final Thoughts

Skip it. There just aren't enough positives to recommend this film.  It wasn't horrible, but it just had too many problems.  The directing needed to be lighter and the lead actor needed to be better, simple as that.  The video, audio, and extras were all fine, but unimpressive.  And that's a good word to describe the whole film, as it didn't leave me with much to remember.  Fondly, at least.

✰ ✰ - Content
✰ ✰ - Video
✰ ✰ - Audio
✰ ✰ - Extras
✰ - Replay

Read More