Welcome to WeeklyWilson.com, where author/film critic Connie (Corcoran) Wilson avoids totally losing her marbles in semi-retirement by writing about film (see the Chicago Film Festival reviews and SXSW), politics and books----her own books and those of other people. You'll also find her diverging frequently to share humorous (or not-so-humorous) anecdotes and concerns. Try it! You'll like it!

Category: Reviews Page 48 of 65

Virtual Tour of “Hellfire & Damnation III” Starts March 13th

“Hellfire & Damnation III,” the 3rd installment in the short story series organized around Dante’s “Inferno” and the 9 Circles of Hell, is going on virtual tour beginning March 3rd. This third installment consists of 9 stories that illustrate the 9 Circles of Hell,a few illustrations, and a cover by Vincent Chong, winner of the World Fantasy Award for Best Artist of 2013 and 5-time recipient of the British Fantasy Award for Best Artist. Vincent also did the cover for Hellfire & Damnation II and was shortlisted for a Hugo Award in 2013 and for a British Science Fiction Association Award as Best Artist.

The stops on the tour are as follows:

Teddy Rose Book Reviews Plus – March 13 – Giveaway

Xmas Reads
– March 16, Interview & Giveaway

Amber Stults – Reviewer and Writer – March 19, Review & Excerpt

Lisa’s Writopia – March 20 – Review

Indie Review Behind the Scenes – March 20 – Live Radio Interview at 6 p.m.CST

Cassandra M’s Place – March 23 – Review & Giveaway

What U Talking About Willis? – March 25 – Review & Excerpt

Pinky’s Favorite Reads – March 31 – Interview & Excerpt-

Truly Simply Pink – April 1 – Review & Excerpt

fuonlyknew – April 10 – Review, Excerpt & Giveaway

Deal Sharing Aunt – April 14 – Review

Not Now…Mommy’s Reading
– April 28th – Review, Interview & Giveaway

Post Oscar Withdrawal on February 26th, 2015

Another Oscar year over.

The traveling trophy this year came home to East Moline, with my 17 (should have been 18) correct picks out of 24 possibilities. It was fairly impressive that all 4 contestants (Craig Wilson, Pam & John Rhodes and me) scored in double digits, as a similar competition sponsored by my son in Chicago netted some abyssmal scores from a few (Ahem). However, son Scott picked 19 correct of the 24, which, considering none of us had seen some of the more esoteric categories, is pretty impressive.
Now, some comments on the show itself.

The predominant colors on the Red Carpet seemed to be (logically enough), red…and white. There were a few other colors, including the lovely Anna Kendrick’s dress in coral (one of the best) and the impressive number that Scarlett Johanssen sported.

But what was up with the hair? Patricia Arquette (who was the front-runner all along) showed up with a “do” that made her look like she had just stepped out of the shower. Likewise, the long pony tail, reminiscent of Ariana Grande, that Jennifer Lopez wore was ho hum and the lower-on-the-neck ponytail that Dakota Johnson sported just looked way too casual for the event and the dresses. And then there was Scarlett Johnssen’s shaved side of head look, after she decked out in a green dress that was to die for. There has also been a huge flap over the dreadlocks sported by one actress, which Fashion Police star Juliana Rancic dissed.

Neil Patrick Harris:

I’m revising my opinion of Neil Patrick Harris….downward. No, it’s not just because this year’s viewership was the worst in years and the entire night seemed lackluster (with the exception of the truly wonderful “Sound of Music” medley from Lady Gaga and Jennifer Hudson’s song). It’s also because I saw NPH in “Hedwig and the Angry Inch” on Broadway and was underwhelmed. He won the Tony for it, so I was perhaps expecting too much. I really didn’t think the play or Neil Patrick Harris in it was that great; my opinion was confirmed when the woman sitting next to me got up and left early.

I wondered about some of the ad libs (“treason” and “She had to have balls to wear that dress” in particular) that Harris threw out there, and I thought his much-vaunted song-and-dance ability was wasted. He did a very credible job hosting the Tonys, so someone erred in just giving him the lame joke about his predictions in a glass case. Plus, as none other than David Morrell noted, some in the audience and/or at home perhaps found Harris showing up in nothing but his tighty whiteys crass for such an upscale crowd, (even if it was referencing a scene from the night’s Best Picture winner, “Birdman.”)

I was not a huge fan of “Birdman,” except for the acting. Nor of “Boyhood.” If you are interested in some of the truly ENJOYABLE and entertaining movies of the year, see my previous post on same.

The night AFTER the Oscars we watched the Oscar-winning documentary “CITIZENFOUR,” which was the story of Edward Snowden’s release of classified documents. I had read the story in its entirety in “Rolling Stone” and it was presented there better. I saw 3 (of 5) documentaries, and this one was definitely my least favorite, although I recognize the fact that its World Headline Topic was Big News and “Finding vivian Maier,” the documentary about the Chicago nanny who took many black-and-white photographs, stored them in a storage locker and then died, broke and alone, so that others discovered her talent (and developed the photos, which she did not have the money to do) hen they purchased the contents of that storage locker, was just the longest-running show at the Chicago History Museum.

There was a very poignant follow-up to this interesting documentary, which is that the city of Chicago or Cook County now wants in on the Vivian Maier action ($) since she supposedly died intestate and had no living heirs. In an article entitled “Claiming Vivian Maier” (Chicago Tribune, Jan. 25, 2015) the entire sordid tale unfolds, with the comment that the City Fathers are intent upon tying up ownership of Vivian Maier’s photographs for years. This would seem to fly in the face of capitalizing on the fact that the documentary on Vivian was just nominated for an Oscar. (Talk about striking while the iron is cold!)

The article by Jason Jeisner reveals that Rogers Park artist Jeffrey Goldstein abruptly sold 17,500 prints of Maier’s work to a Canadian gallery owner. Stephen Bulger of Toronto, who bought the prints, has been forced to put them on ice in storage until the dispute clears the Illinois courts.

Anne Zakaras and Chicago silver gelatin printers Ron Gordon and Sandra Steinbrecher (Gordon came out of retirement to help restore the hundreds of images) say they feel tremendous sadness to have it all end this way. “Everybody loses,” said Gordon. “Vivian loses too. She goes back in the box.”

A

New Short Story Collection, “What Solomon Saw” by Mary Dean Cason

HeadShotMary Dean Cason and I were students together in Dr. Barbara Croft’s Short Story Writing Class at the University of Chicago over 10 years ago. The class was full of many good writers with a vast array of talent. (I thanked each one, by name, in Volume I of “Ghostly Tales of Route 66.”) There were retired newspaper writers and editors, the chief attorney for Kraft Foods (who has gone on to write a children’s story), retired educators like me, and a host of others.
Mary Dean’s stories were always among the best. We once stopped for a drink at the nearby Sheraton, discussing our works-in-progress, and I wished that Mary Dean lived closer to the city, because I knew no one in Chicago.
After a few classes, Dr. Croft took me out in the hall and quietly said, “You already know all this stuff. Just go home and write.” It is true that, during my college years on campus at the University of Iowa, I had been exposed to Kurt Vonnegut (interviewed him when I was 18), John Irving (classmate), Nelson Algren and David Morrell, but I was usually auditing those Writers’ Workshop classes with a 19 Journalism number, not the 8 English number. Back then, a callow youth, I really didn’t have anything worth making up a story about, let alone sharing any of the life experiences that give Mary Dean’s stories depth.
I’m not sure Dr. Croft was right. It is true that by 2004 I had been teaching other people to write for 33 years at levels from 7th grade up, including at six Iowa or Illinois colleges. But I had never “written long” (short stories, novels), although I’d read a lot of great literature as an English major with no minor. [My college major was Journalism until my junior year, when I switched to English and Education, finishing my Master’s at Western Illinois University.]
After our one class together, Mary Dean went on to study in the University of Chicago’s certificate program and many others, winning awards for her work.
Perhaps that is what I should have done, but I just went home and started making myself sit down and write.
In other words, I followed Dr. Croft’s advice, although I did take one more class on Novel Writing from Patrick Somerville, who is now writing for “The Bridge” on television and previously wrote for “24.” Twenty-two books or e-books later—3 within the past week— I’ve just read Mary Dean’s debut short story collection, “What Solomon Saw” and enjoyed her stories immensely, just as I did 10 years ago in Dr. Croft’s class.
So, we’ve both been very busy, but in different ways working towards the same goal: literary excellence. Hopefully, readers will agree that we’ve each come a long way, (Baby).
Mary Dean has drawn on her North Carolina roots to gather eleven short stories into a debut collection entitled, “What Solomon Saw.”

Solomon, for those curious about the title, is a 300-year-old willow oak in North Carolina. At least 5 or 6 of these stories Solomon could not have “seen” because those stories are set in other parts of the world (“Girl Interrupted at Her Music,” “A Split in the Seam,” “Avalanche,” “The Penitent” and “A Whore for Thursday.”) I hope the critics that savaged my “Laughing through Life” reminiscences of my days as a young wife and mother, moving through time up to the present day, don’t dissect and criticize Mary Dean’s decision to write stories about places and times other than the North Carolina of her youth. Every writer should be able to write across a broad spectrum, and confining Mary Dean Cason’s observations to just her North Carolina roots, while tempting, would put her in the same category as Nora Steele of “Girl Interrupted at her Music” who says, “I can’t be a prisoner. None of us can.” I have fought against this tendency to pigeon-hole writers for a decade, and I shall continue to fight the good fight, both for Mary Dean Cason and for myself.
Write what you want and what you feel and what you feel like writing and to thine own self you will be true (to roughly rip off Shakespeare).
But I will say that those stories that draw on her Southern roots and the South of Broad that Pat Conroy wrote about were the best in the book, for me. I’ll be waiting for her North Carolina-influenced novel, which is sure to follow. What I like best about Mary Dean’s stories is that SOMETHING HAPPENS. None of these wimpy plots involving a bunch of people going on a picnic or 300 pages describing a bicycle leaning against an ivy-colored wall (both actual instances whose authors shall remain nameless). SOMETHING HAPPENS!
Hallelujah!
And the”something” is interesting and well-described and leaves you wanting to know more about the characters.
Maybe it’s just because, a native Iowan, I know nothing of pluff mud (“Rich As Pluff Mud”) , but I look forward to Mary Dean’s taking the many Southern characters she has sketched so well in these short stories and watching her weave them into the tapestry of a novel. It seems as though characters like Jack Tree and Libby Gordon and Mildred Tatum are assembling themselves and crying out for novel-length treatment.
But I digress. (Which, if I’m being honest, I’m often criticized for, also).
Let’s examine the first story in the book, “What Solomon Saw,” in which our narrator is Martha Johnson, the younger sister of 13-year-old Lester Johnson, who, as the author tells us in the opening line, is eager to get a gander at Libby Tatum’s breasts. (“More than anything in the world, Lester Johnston wanted to see Libby Tatum’s titties.”)
I hate it when reviewers give away my entire plot in a review, especially if it has an unexpected ending, so I’ll simply say that this one has echoes of the novel “The Help.” It is set against the backdrop of the sixties with lines like, “For many things were changing: coloreds to black, flat chests to bosoms, a Catholic was running for president and my brother was becoming somebody I didn’t recognize.”
As the plot makes clear, “Everything changes. It’s the only thing you can count on.” This story provides the cover image and the first line, alone, will suck you in.
Story #2: The Army Jacket
Jack Tree’s place—a restaurant—figures prominently in this one with Mary Alice, the cook and Jasper Lee Pinewood (“Piney”), her ne’er-do-well jealous husband, thwarted by Walter Johnston, who happens to be in the restaurant with his family at a key juncture. The first of more than one tale of a woman who is at the mercy of a bully but is brave enough to stand up to that bully. Beleaguered womenfolk and dealing with grief resonate in these eleven stories, in various oft-repeated ways.
Story #3: Oh! Canada
Although this one departs from the rich Southern tales and takes us into the world of organized crime and one couple’s attempts to escape it, there are some great lines:
“I’m ready to leave your family behind…and I ain’t gonna’ miss mine either.”
“…he had a smile that had been bruised and battered but wanted bad to beat, even if it had to bleed its way back to life.”
“You rub up against a guy and he thinks you’re just dying to do him.”
(From Loretta, one of the two main characters): “I can’t fuck you, ‘cause it’s against my morals for a first date. And I won’t blow you, ‘cause it’s dirty, but I’ll pull you off and you can touch me anywhere you like. OK?”
“…was it that long ago that she felt free?” (Loretta, thinking back to when she was eight.)
Story #4: “Rich as Pluff Mud”
Some rich, well-drawn characters here, best represented by Elizabeth Tatum Gordon, who is infertile and yearns for the ability to bear children that Addison McMahon, who married money, takes for granted. “The fact that Addison McMahon could do that very thing so easily, an announce it so casually, and be so annoyed by it, burned a hole in Libby like a cigarette that stayed lit until it came out the other side of your hand.”
Libby, who is thin and gorgeous, yearns for children: “Month after month, there was a bloody reminder of the barren wasteland she called her body.” Somewhat depressed about this and over-served, Libby behaves badly at a party. (“Libby, you’re a sin just waiting to happen.” “The crowd was growing and Libby was well aware she was the show.”)
Addison, the plump pregnant hostess, takes umbrage at her guest’s behavior. “Addison didn’t have an ounce of humor, but she had tons of bitter.” As the story notes, “A strategic whisper” and the country club you thought you were a member in good standing with will cut you dead. (Boy, will they ever! Don’t run afoul of the Queen Bee(s) of your local social circle!)
Another story set in Charleston, referencing class distinctions, new money versus old, and Gullah, the old slave language and culture of the area.
Story #5: “Speckled Bird”
Yet another abused woman makes an appearance: Bailey Rose Abernathy Dunham of Carolina Preserve (an area between Asheville and Greenville.) Bailey’s plight reminded me of a supposedly true story I read about the matriarch Rose Kennedy, who showed up at her father’s doorstep as a newlywed, miserably unhappy with her marriage to the philandering Joseph P. Kennedy in their early years as a couple, and was promptly sent home and told to do her duty as his wife.
The description of a husband who is “mean as a snake one minute, talks sugar and rose petals the next—” brings the disclosure that Bailey Rose “learned to be just like mercury—fast and slipping out and hiding the who of me.”
Another great line: “Nothing says loving like a 9-millimeter Italian handgun.”
Buy the book to find out if that handgun is used and, if so, by whom and on whom or what.
Story #6: “Girl Interrupted at her Music”
Based on the 17th century Vermeer painting, this one leaves the Southland and journeys to Scarsdale, telling the tale of Nora Kanter Steele and Barbara Steele, her mother-in-law, who have a basic disagreement about what should happen to some frozen embryos after Nora’s beloved husband (and Barbara’s son), David Steele, dies on 9/11 in the Twin Towers.
Nora goes through some understandably rough times dealing with her grief, but “Nora knew that she had separated from the world, but she had not broken from herself.” Nora must stand up to her overbearing in-laws, telling Barbara, “I can’t be a prisoner. None of us can,” and is less-than-admiring of Barbara’s “take charge” attitude, saying, “I wasn’t so sure I could handle your handling it.”
What will become of the children frozen for a future family, now that David is gone?
Story #7: “A Split in the Seam”
I’ve written a lot of ghost stores over the course of collecting “Ghostly Tales of Route 66.” The project has grown ever more diverse with 3 paperback volumes and soon-to-be seven e-books of same.
This story takes on spirits visiting an adult child who may need their emotional support (Amelia and Thad visit Tess Delaney). It was interesting to me as (yet another) way of describing what “spirits” and “ghosts” may be—if they exist. Quote: “Leak through—like a seam in a curtain that kind of—splits sometimes.”(*Full disclosure: I’m not one of those people with tons of equipment taking pictures of orbs and ranting; I was hired to collect the stories and I tried to make them interesting and remain non-judgmental about the existence or non-existence of ghosts and spirits.)
Story #8: “Avalanche”
Another story of love and loss, this time involving Olivia and Jonathan and Ben and Peter and Cynthia Murphy. A recurring theme is loss and grief. “We revel quickly in joy, but grief, she was discovering, takes its time before it crushes.” A nicely turned surprise ending of sorts after the death of Olivia’s husband in an avalanche.
Story #9: “Liar, Liar”
Some semi-comic moments in this tale of a woman (Louise Wilson, wife of Charlie Wilson) who just can’t tell the truth. She wants to have a face-lift and does so, arranging everything so there will be secrecy, only to learn while in recovery that her mother has suddenly died.
Learning this news while black-and-blue, totally unprepared to be seen in public, Louise says: “I had a funeral in front of me. I was just wishing it were mine.” This story made me think of an episode of “Sex & the City” where Samantha unwisely had a facial peel right before a big social event.
Story #10: “The Penitent”
Set against the backdrop of the World War, a nurse (Catherine) goes off to help at the front, leaving behind her severely wounded soldier husband. “She knew that obligation and comfort were a poor substitute for passion.” There, Catherine meets someone she could madly and passionately love, against the dramatic backdrop of the war in progress.
But there are complications. (Aren’t there always?)
Story #11: “A Whore for Thursday”
Frank Pella dies and his widow, Gina, learns some unsettling facts about how, where and why her loving accountant husband, Frank, was spending his Thursdays for the past 30 years.
Conclusion:
I think you will like this debut collection which I heartily recommend, enjoying the imagery and lyrical turns of phrase, with enough plot twists to surprise and entertain.
Now we’ll all be waiting for the North Carolina novel.

Musings on Academy Award Nominees One Day Before They Are Announced

AMC Theater, Chicago, 50th Annual Chicago Film Festival.

AMC Theater, Chicago, 50th Annual Chicago Film Festival.

It’s one day before the Academy Awards nominations are officially announced, and I’d like to put my 2 cents’ worth in, before the experts weigh in.

It seems a foregone conclusion that we are going to see “Boyhood” nominated for many things, including “Best Picture.” I was driving along when a radio disc jockey who had just viewed the Golden Globes asked his listeners to let him know if he should rent “Boyhood” or stream “The Affair” that night, not having seen either. I wanted to call in and tell him to view the latter, because “Boyhood,” while a great achievement in following the real people for so many years, was meandering, overlong (2 hours and 45 minutes) and not that riveting. That said, Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke did well with the material and it would not surprise me to see them be nominated, either.

Four other films that we can expect to see mentioned and nominated in various categories are “The Theory of Everything,” the bio-pic about Stephen Hawkings that makes him come off as a bit of a cad, I thought; “The Imitation Game,” with Benedict Cumberbatch; “The Grand Budapest Hotel” with Ralph Fiennes; and Michael Keaton and/in the film “Birdman.” I expect that “The Theory of Everything” with Eddie Redmayne, who portrayed Hawkings, or Cumberbatch, who portrayed the computer genius at the heart of cracking the “Enigma” code, will win the Oscar, and deservedly so, but I was wrong about a lot of categories at the Golden Globes just past, and now we have Clint Eastwood eking out a Director’s Guild nomination (DGA) for “The Sniper,” which does not start playing till tomorrow.

Another category that seems to be wide open is Best Foreign Film. At the October Chicago Film Festival, all the buzz was about France’s entry “Force Majeure” and Israel’s “The Gett” and neither won the Golden Globe. Go figure.(Of the two, “Force Majeure” was far more entertaining.)

There are so many great performances from actors this year, especially the men. Good luck in picking those to round out the nominees other than Redmayne and Cumberbatch. You might see Bill Murray (who wandered onstage during the acceptance for “The Grand Budapest Hotel” even though he wasn’t in it) for “St. Vincent” and I was and am a fan of Robert Duvall from “The Judge” (who was nominated in the Best Supporting category and did not win the Golden Globe.) Steve Carrell from “Foxcatcher” was mentioned prominently earlier in the season and was nominated for a Golden Globe, also. And what about Ralph Fiennes from “The Grand Budapest Hotel” or Michael Keaton in “Birdman,” who DID win the Golden Globe?

As for women, my personal favorite is Felicity Jones as the long-suffering wife in “The Theory of Everything,” but Kiera Knightley’s scientist helping crack the German code has a shot, and some say Meryl Streep as a witch in “Into the Woods” is deserving, although I think she has had earlier stronger performances and probably will not prevail, if nominated. (*Personal disclosure: the only one mentioned above that I have not yet seen.)  Two others mentioned frequently are Jennifer Anniston for “Cake” (a woman suffering from intractable pain) and Julianne Moore for her portrayal of a professor suffering from early onset Alzheimer’s. Reese Witherspoon is a good bet to be nominated for “Wild,” a film that I found incredibly boring, but one in which Ms. Witherspoon did a credible job of hiking through the desert and teasing us that something might actually happen (which, sadly, it did not.)

I finally did rent “Boyhood” and got exactly what I expected. I can sum up the message as, “Is that all there is?” It will probably win, and my predicting (or preference?) career will take yet another hit.

Tonight, we are going to wade through a Liam Neeson night, with 2 of his older films. He is a seasoned veteran experiencing fame as an action hero late in life, and I couldn’t be happier for him.

If you want to know what the most ENJOYABLE films of the year were, for me, go back a few entries. These were NOT the ones that we’ll see competing for Oscars, necessarily, but I enjoyed them the most. And I’m sure I forgot a few.

We’ll find out tomorrow who gets the nod from the Academy, but the historical brouhaha over LBJ’s actual relationship with MLK seems to have torpedoed whatever momentum that  film had, going in, and it seems that “Foxcatcher’s” miffed Mark Schulz (Steve Carell is frequently mentioned as a Best Actor nominee for that fine film—which needed some editing but was very good) may have done that film a disservice by taking to Twitter to condemn its director (Bennett Miller) and the entire project, supposedly because he didn’t like the homo-erotic vibes that the film did contain.  I was very impressed with Channing Tatum’s and Mark Ruffalo’s acting in the film—more so than Carrell’s, which was more a case of heavy-duty make-up and underplaying than actually excelling in the part. It’s still a good rental and including it in one or more categories wouldn’t surprise me, but the only 2 sure things seem to be “Boyhood” and “The Theory of Everything,” with “The Imitation Game” right up there, as well.

After that, it’s anybody’s guess whether Wes Anderson’s “The Grand Budapest Hotel” or “Foxcatcher” or “Into the Woods” or “The Sniper” or any of a number of fine films (“Night Crawler” with Jake Gyllenhaal; Joaquin Phoenix”s most recent foray into weird portraits, or yet another underdog in the competition) will triumph.

Looking forward to hearing the nominees tomorrow.

New Review from “Legend in Dark Fantasy” for KHAKI=KILLER

KHAKIKiller[From the online magazine “Nameless” by William F. Nolan (“Logan’s Run”) comes this brand-new review of KHAKI=KILLER]:

 

Here is book three in Connie Wiilson’s award-winning  paranormal thriller series, following The Color of Evil and Red Is for Rage.

The story is set in a high school (Sky High High School) in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and the complex plot involves a serial killer, kidnap victims, a pregnant teenager, a dying girl, a climactic Mano-a-Mano fight on a bridge, a collapsing staircase, and a main protagonist (Tad McGreevy) who possesses a special power (Tetrachromatic Super Vision) that allows him to read good or bad auras.

Wilson keeps the action moving briskly in a tight time frame from December of 2004 into June of 2005.

Having been a teacher for more than 30 years, she knows her subect. (Her first book, in 1989, was a volume on teaching for Performance Learning Systems, Inc.)

Says Wilson, “My true inspiration for this book was a double homicide that took place in the real-life setting of Cedar Falls, Iowa.”

Wilson’s style is non-intrusive, grounded and smooth.  It more than gets the job done in holding a reader’s attention from front page to last.

I’d advise you to grab a copy of Khaki = Killer for yourself and one for the teenager in your family.

Trust me: you won’t be sorry.

(William F. Nolan, reviewer, and author of “Logan’s Run,” Nightworlds” and numerous other novels and short stories.)

Most Enjoyable Movies of 2014

Let me begin this rant by admitting that I did not go see “Boyhood,” on purpose. I spoke with a close friend who said it was boring, pretty much unscripted and rambling, although an interesting concept.  I decided that the perfect way to see it would be when I had the ability to fast forward through the boring parts—which, to hear this extremely well-versed movie fan tell it—was most of the film.

 

The other film I missed that many like was the “Lego” movie.

Unfortunately, I did not miss “Guardians of the Galaxy.” I insisted we rent it, despite my instinct that it was going to be really uninteresting in that overly CG way. I became very bored very fast. So did my spouse.

I’ve been reading the “Best Movies” lists printed in magazines like “People,” “Entertainment Weekly” and “Time.”

Wow. These lists are absolute crap, for the most part, especially “Time’s. Here are the films “Time” listed as “Best” of 2014:

“The Grand Budapest Hotel” – mildly amusing. Definitely not THAT great!

“Boyhood” – See comments above.

“The Lego Movie”   – ” ”

“Lucy” – Been there. Done that. An interesting premise, but not a “best” of this or any other year.

“Goodbye to Language” – WHAT?

“Jodorowsky’s Dune” – Say What, again?

“Nightcrawler” – the first film on this list I can get behind.

“CitizenFour” – This doesn’t really seem like it belongs on a movie list, being about Edward Snowden and more accurately a documentary.

“Wild Tales” – Uh—–no.

“Birdman” – This one has everyone buzzing about its Oscar potential, and there is no question that the acting is uniformly great and should be rewarded. Otherwise, the long tracking shot? Meh. The drummer instead of a real soundtrack? Annoying. It did raise some important topics, such as critics and their biases, and discussed them well, so it does have that going for it, but it was definitely not one of my most enjoyable films of this year.

Here are 10 or so that were:

“The Imitation Game” – This British film is far and away the most superlative production I saw this year, with a performance by Benedict Cumberbatch that deserves the Oscar for Best Actor.

 “Gone Girl” – Well done all the way around. Absorbing. Haven’t read the book, but loved this movie.

“Night Crawler” – the only movie on “Time’s” list that deserves to be there. Jake Gyllenhaal does himself (and us) proud as the skeevy sort who profits from taking pictures of accidents and murders and other seamy things in a dingily-lit Los Angeles. .

“The Fault in Our Stars” – Yes, it’s weepy , but it is wonderfully weepy and I saw it 3 times.

“The Judge” – I am still trying to figure out why other critics felt it necessary to rain on Robert  Duvall’s (and Robert Downey, Jr.’s) parade by belittling the female roles and not thoroughly enjoying this tour de force acting class for its wonderful plot.

“The Theory of Everything” – The movie, itself, moved slowly at times, true, but Eddie Redmayne’s acting was terrific, as was Felicity Jones’ as his wife. Nominations, for sure.

“Foxcatcher” – This one needed some editing, but Steve Carrell’s performance is a revelation, as is Tatum Channing’s.

“The Drop” – Our last chance to see Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) in a wonderful film.

“Get On Up” – Chadwick Boseman playing James Brown not only acted, but danced his heart  out, but I think it was released too early. I also would mention “Selma,” which I have not yet seen.

For the last couple of films of 10 , I’d run in “The Well,” due out in May, a film by new-comer Tom Hammock about a post-apocalyptic world where water is the most precious commodity. Also, since documentaries seem to have made “Time’s” really bad list, we might add “The Look of Silence,” about the massacre of over a million Filipino men and women suspected of being Communists in the 60s, killed by their own neighbors. [For more about this riveting documentary, check the archives of Weekly Wilson.]

Others I enjoyed:  “Whiplash,” “November Man,” “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” “Force Majeure” (foreign film). I’ve heard great things about Julianne Moore’s performance as Alice, who is suffering from early-onset dementia and about “Cake” (Jennifer Anniston) and “Into the Woods” (Meryl Streep) but these I have not yet viewed.

Highly over-rated was the actual film of Reese Witherspoon walking across the desert (“Wild”). Yes, Reese, herself is good and deserves a nomination but the film was not interesting; I found myself checking my watch at intervals, which is never a good sign. Plus, nothing ever really happens, despite many teasing situations. I did not enjoy “Life Itself” which follows us through the final, agonizing days of Roger Ebert’s tortured battle with cancer. I cringe thinking of it even now. “Interstellar” was going along well until the confusing and unsatisfying  end, and Israel’s “The Gett” (foreign film) about a woman seeking a divorce was boring, boring, boring. “Snowpiercer” had a few moments, as did “A Walk Among the Tombstones” (Liam Neeson) but just avoid all the movies “Time” singled out, unless you are a real masochist and want to be terminally bored by 80% of them, with the exceptions noted above.

 

The Christmas Cats in Silly Hats: “Life Is Great; This Book Is Better”

 

I was checking on Amazon to see if there had been any “new” reviews of the newest Christmas Cats book. I’ve sent out about 20 FREE copies, and I even experimented with setting the price (temporarily) down to 99 cents in Kindle, as per instructions in one Webinar I recently sat through.
After the Webinar, I decided to keep the price of Book One (“The Christmas Cats in Silly Hats”) in Kindle permanently at 99 cents, because the 2 illustrators were, at the time, a high school student (Andrew Weinert) and a Venezuelan nanny (Emily Marquez Vlcek) NOT the professional illustrator who now handles those duties (Gary McCluskey of Rhode Island).
Now, as someone who taught in Silvis (IL) for close to 20 years, I recognize the surname of 2 of the young friends of Andy’s who have, apparently, decided it would be great fun to make merry at his expense. “Lampo” (Tom and Steve) was a name I was familiar with, and I remember that one of them I hired to tutor son Scott before he took algebra in 9th grade. That particular brother, one of 2 who graduated Valedictorian of their United Township High School class(es) and became engineers, was a recent graduate and looking for work. What year was that, you say? Well, it was BEFORE I opened my Sylvan Learning Center #3301 in 1986 and my son (who is now 47) was getting ready to enter 9th grade, having just completed 8th grade, so YOU figure it out. (A long time ago).
Andy always did have a good sense of humor.
Apparently, his friends do, as well.
Thanks for the FIVE-STAR reviews, guys! I really need them! You can’t even advertise your book or books on various “FREE” sites until you have something like 15 five-star reviews, and getting them is like pulling teeth. And I was delighted to see that I had 4 five-star reviews of “The Christmas Cats in Silly Hats.” But, I must add, the SECOND book in the series (“The Christmas Cats Chase Christmas Rats”) was just named one of the 7 Best Books of the Year from a Chicago author by the CWA (Chicago Writers’ Association) in October. Yes, I know: I don’t “live” in Chicago. But I DO have a condo there and daughter Stacey uses it as her crash pad to fly out of Midway, so I’m allowed to enter, anyway, and they picked 7 books that were “non-traditionally published” and mine was one of the Honorable Mention ones out of literally hundreds (OK….not quite hundreds. All right, 75. Well, maybe it was 71, but it WAS more than 7.)
Here are the reviews that I enjoyed tonight on Amazon for “The Christmas Cats in Silly Hats,” which, by the way, is the FIRST book in the series and will be on sale at various venues around town, including the Festival of Trees and the Moose Lodge in Geneseo on Dec. 7th, but never again in the Book Rack because there was absolutely NO foot traffic. None. Zip. Zero. AND a mean teenager shoved her cell phone in my face and was rude when I asked what happened to my expensive poster(s) and the like, so forgetabout THAT place in the future, but you might check Book World (South Park) at the holidays (signing there 1 to 3 on December 6) and/or Amazon or Sean Leary’s new “online bookstore,” which I can never find or I’d give you the link.
So, without further ado: the reviews. And yes, I WILL be reading these reviews aloud during “Read Local” at the Bettendorf Public Library at 7 p.m. on December 10th.
And, by the way, the very first and oldest book in the series (“The Christmas Cats in Silly Hats”) is permanently 99 cents on Kindle. If all of the effects of this book are true (Latin? Potty training?) you might want to pick one up for your kids!
So, I go out there to read the reviews, and I am here to tell you that I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars I purchased this book for my two young beautiful daughters. They were acting like chi chi batty …, November 19, 2014
I purchased this book for my two young beautiful daughters. They were acting like chi chi batty boys before I bought it – and I was very concerned about their mental states.After I purchased this book, my two year old instantly became potty trained and learned Latin. I heard that Andrew Weinert really goes by ‘Randii Weinert’ – and has subliminal messages in his drawings to force children to not be as chi chi – or batty.

Thank you so much Andii Weinert for everything you do for the kids. Now if only he would read his own book – so of course – he can cure his own chi chi batty boy problem – the world would be a better place.

Thanks again!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Reading this book together resolved the beef between rappers Stitches …, November 19, 2014
Reading this book together resolved the beef between rappers Stitches and Young Jeezy. They realized they can both be snow men with silly hats.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A work of Art, November 19, 2014
By far the best book about Christmas and cats. I used to be an atheist dog lover, but now I’ve seen the error of my ways and joined the local congregation, sent my dog to the pound, and adopted a litter of 7 kittens.
Life is great, this book is better!
The art brought tears to my eyes.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars, November 19, 2014
I can’t even.

New Review of “Khaki=Killer” from Andy Andrews on “True Review” Website

KHAKI=KILLER by Connie Corcoran Wilson. Quad Cities Press (www.khakiequalskiller.com), 2014, 235 pp., no price listed, ISBN 978-0-982444-82-5. Click here to purchase.

Tad McGreevy, the young protagonist of KHAKI=KILLER and in the previous two novels in the series, is back. The task this time: track down two missing girls, Heather Crompton and Kelly Carter. Both were abducted by sociopath and Vietnam vet Declan Hunter and taken to an underground bunker. Declan doesn’t appear to want to kill them – but simply wants to keep them hostage, as he claims too many people have “deserted” him in life.

Meanwhile, the clown psychopath Pogo is still after Tad for the events in the previous books. But Tad’s visions, based up on Tetrachromatic super vision, allow him to “see” the color of evil and ID evil (which he sees as the color of khaki).

Wilson moves the plot along with a lot of subcharacters/plots from the previous two novels. She keeps you in suspense and the Pogo character remains terrifying.KHAKIKiller Andrew Andrews

“Force Majeure” is Front-runner for Best Foreign Film Oscar

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjjzVbTBF8o
”Force Majeure,” a joint Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and French foreign film, is one of the front-runners for an Oscar nod in the Best Foreign Film category this year. Directed by Ruben Ostlund (“Play”), the movie is the story of a family of four that goes on holiday to a ritzy ski resort (Les Arcs in the French Alps, but augmented cinematically), only to find that, just as skiing itself can be a dangerous sport, relationships within a family unit can be unpredictable and risky.

The film covers five days with Tomas (Johanne Kunke), his wife Ebba (Lisa Loven Kongslo) and their two children, a small boy Harry (Vincent Wettergren) and his older sister Vera (Clara Wettergren).

There are also a few minor characters who enter the drama, including an old buddy of Tomas’, Matts (Kristofer Hivju), a divorced man in his forties vacationing with his twenty-year-old girlfriend, and a free-spirited married woman who expresses little concern for traditional convention(s).

The turning point of the film occurs when the family is seated at an outside restaurant and a “controlled avalanche” becomes not-so-controlled. All those who had been dining suddenly flee for their lives. Tomas, in particular, grabs his cell phone and his gloves and hot-foots it away from the table, leaving Ebba, his wife, to grab both children and pray.

As it turns out, the avalanche does not reach the chalet and Tomas returns to the table to rejoin a not-very-happy wife who comments later in the film that Tomas is “always running away from” his wife and children. The white fog from the near avalanche is as eerie as in movies like “The Fog” and, later, during a ski excursion on their final day (Sisla Dagen/Final Day), it also appears to hold all sorts of dangers for the family of four, but their patriarch insists that he will lead the way and all will be well as they ski down a slope where they can barely see their hand in front of their face.

Tomas—not unlike other men in real life—won’t admit what has occurred.

Ebba says, “It’s so weird that you won’t admit what happened.”

Tomas responds, “I want us to share the same view.” He also expresses the opinion that he wants to “put it all behind us,” which seems quite convenient, since he has come off as a bit of a cad. This “let’s sweep it under the rug and forgetaboutit” attitude is prevalent in many marriages, whether short-term or long-term, and the attitude never fails to breed resentment when it surfaces. In fact, when a situation cannot be discussed, openly and candidly, [but must simply be “forgotten about”,] for many personalities (like Ebba’s), the effect is to create a situation that cannot help but erode the relationship, whether that relationship is a marriage or simply a friendship. Some of us need to get things out in the open and talk about them. Others—especially if the situation might reflect poorly on them—-refuse to talk about it. That is part of the foundation on which this film’s issues rest.

The title “Force Majeure” comes from a legal term where an unforeseen event prevents a contract from being fulfilled.

Ebba cannot seem to put the frightening ordeal out of her mind. In fact, she seems to be experiencing a bit of PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), reliving the event for Matts and his young girlfriend Fanny (Fanni Metelius) and the woman traveling alone who discussed her more “open marriage” philosophy and tells Ebba that she purposely left her kids home with their father as a welcome vacation from them.

“They need therapy,” says Matts to Fanny after Ebba shows a video of the event that puts the lie to Tomas’ tendency to minimize the event and dismiss it as a “force majeure.” This former buddy of Tomas’ even offers an extremely lame excuse for why Tomas might have run away, saying, “The enemy is this image we have of heroes” and suggesting an alibi along the lines of: “You were going to save yourself to dig them out…right?”

When Ebba trots out the story of Tomas defection under stress, Tomas says, “I don’t share that interpretation of events,” and adds, to his upset wife, “You’re entitled to your own interpretation.”

This inability to admit the truth nearly drives Ebba to distraction When Tomas finally does break down and admit that he is “a bloody victim of my own instincts,” telling Ebba that he hates his weaknesses, he has a near-breakdown. That wakes the children and becomes a scene requiring the wife (Ebba) to act as the steadying hub of the group, calming everyone down. She seems “the strong one.”

In a later skiing scene, Tomas has his chance at redemption when Ebba must be carried to safety. Matts also gets an opportunity to act responsibly and maturely in a scene on a bus being driven rather recklessly, when he instructs the panicked riders to exit in an orderly manner.

It was interesting to me that the only person who stayed on the bus was the risk-taking married wife and mother involved in a dalliance with another single tourist. She refused to consider herself a “bad” mother or wife because she was vacationing without her children and not adhering to society’s marital norms. She was the only one of those on the bus who toughed out the driver’s incompetence and took the risk (and, as a result, didn’t end up having to walk halfway down a mountainside when Ebba panicked and insisted that the bus driver let them all out).

It seemed that Ebba was being depicted, at this point, as being a bit of a ninny who over-reacted to things. I wondered how the film-maker could have it both ways: either she is the strong center of the family hierarchy or she is a personality who panics at the merest hint of danger.

Which is it, for Ebba?

The avalanche is considered a metaphor for small situations that snowball out of control. There have been comparisons to Ingmar Bergman’s 1973 “Scenes from a Marriage.” Ostlund won a Jury Prize at Cannes. “Entertainment Weekly” in its October 31st issue has termed it “a quietly devastating tinderbox psychodrama.”
The film is a comment on marriage, in general, since Ebba is heard talking to a girlfriend on the phone. Her comment is: “You’ve been in a relationship for five years and you want to fool around. I understand.”

So, to sum up, the film confirms the view that women, almost in a matriarchal fashion,  hold a family together, but hope for more support from the men in their lives (who often behave like overgrown children). These scenes were both psychologically revealing and humorous, as a resort employee has occasion to watch Tomas losing it.

It also gave us a sad glimpse into the psyches of small children who think their parents might be going to split. Both children are shown listening to their parents arguing and crying. Little Harry admits aloud that he is afraid his parents are going to get divorced.

The movie also made a good point about how, in a crisis, we sometimes do not behave as admirably as heroes do in the movies. The boredom of marriage, with its repetitiveness and the humdrum chores that accompany it, is aptly portrayed, both in scenes where the youngest child, Harry, is acting “owly” and in scenes involving preparation for bedtime. The bloom is off the rose. This is a family that must share space (in one case, they are all shown in the same bed) and, while there are rewards to having a family unit, those rewards do not come without sacrifice. The randy behavior of Matts and Fanny is in stark contrast to the ho-hum nature of Tomas and Ebba.

The movie, which has beautiful photography by Fredrik Wenzel and Fred Arne Wergeland using an ARRI Alexa, had a great message for all partners, whether male or female, who are in a long-term (or short-term) relationship: “Admit what you did when you’re wrong.” It is thought-provoking and both humorous and serious. Only the ending proved anti-climactic and was a bit of a let-down, but this solid, provocative film with solid performances from all, will give movie-goers much to ponder.

“The Look of Silence” Documentary Is Powerful Testimony to Man’s Inhumanity to Man

 

The heinous massacre of anyone who had been affiliated with the Communist party in Indonesia is the subject of “The Look of Silence,” a documentary directed by Joshua Oppeheimer that was produced by such important documentary and filmmaker names as Errol Morris (“The Fog of War”), Werner Herzog and Andre Singer. It is a joint production from Denmark, Indonesia, Norway, Finland and the United Kingdom that tells a harrowing story every bit as horrible, in its details, as the Holocaust.
Indonesia’s transition to the “New Order” in the mid-1960s, ousted the country’s first president, Sukarno, after he had spent 22 years in power. One of the most tumultuous periods in the country’s modern history, it was the beginning of 31 years of Suharto’s presidency.
Described as the great puppet master, Sukarno drew power from balancing the opposing and increasingly antagonistic forces of the army and the Indonesian Communist Party, or PKI. By 1965, the PKI extensively penetrated all levels of government. The army lost power as the PKI gained it and this led to a coup.
On September 30, 1965, six of the military’s most senior officers were killed by the 30 September Movement, a group from within the army, and the Indonesian government was overthrown by the military. Within just a few hours, Major General Suharto mobilized forces under his command and took control of Jakarta.
Subsequently, over one million citizens who were on lists as being Communists were rounded up, hands bound behind their backs, and either killed immediately or imprisoned until they could be systematically exterminated, much like Auschwitz but in a much bloodier and more primitive fashion. It was a method no less systematic and inhumane testifying  once again to man’s inhumanity to man. The PKI, which was officially blamed for the crisis, was destroyed.
The film follows a local optometrist, Adi, age 44, whose brother Ramli was murdered in the anti-Communist purge. His mother and father’s lives were totally shattered by the brutal slaying of their oldest child. As Adi’s mother says, it was only Adi’s birth two years later that saved her sanity.
One interview subject says, “We did this because America taught us to hate Communists.”
The politically weakened Sukarno was forced to transfer key political and military powers to General Suharto, who became head of the armed forces. In March 1967, the Indonesian parliament (MPRS) named General Suharto acting president. He was formally appointed president one year later.
Suharto’s pro-Western “New Order” stabilized the economy.
However, those whose mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and children were brutally murdered for no offense other than affiliation with the Communist party, the memories do not fade. They must live next door to those who murdered their beloved family members. We learn, as the film progresses, that Ramli, was gathered up, bound, and initially imprisoned. Trucks would take loads of 30 prisoners per truck each night and either hack them to death, throwing their remains into the Snake River, or, in some cases, the victims would be buried alive.
One survivor, Kemat, describes how he jumped from a truck with his hands bound behind his back and escaped through a warehouse. He reminisces, “Ramli was screaming for help saying, ‘They’re going to kill us.’”
“Were there any spectators watching the trucks taking people to be murdered?” asks Adi.
“No. Everyone was too frightened to watch,” says Kemat. “I thought, ‘I’m about to die. I’d better accept it. I’m going to be beheaded, my body and head thrown into the river. And then I ran.”
Adi, the protagonist, decided to search out each of those responsible for ordering the murders or implementing the murders of his brother and others (simply for being members of the Communist party). He used his vocation as a traveing optometrist as entrée.
As we learn, “In many cases, entire families were eradicated, and it happens to this day. Some Communists were starved to death in prison or released periodically to be killed by the local citizens.” The group responsible for the executions was Komando Aksi. Adi searches and finds Amir Hasang and Imang, leaders of the Death Squad in one city.
Not only are these perpetrators not ashamed of their actions, Inong, aged 72, who was the leader of the village Death Squad, appears onscreen as a bit of a loon, repeating that he would take two cups to the executions in order to drink human blood from the severed jugular veins.
“If we didn’t drink human blood,” says Imang, “we’d go crazy. Many went crazy. Drink your victims’ blood or go crazy.” He adds, “Human blood is salty and sweet.”
Imang also claims that he “only cut once.” pantomiming the use of a machete to cut a victim’s throat, but then adds, “Once I cut off a woman’s breast. It was just like a coconut inside.” He pantomimes how he would use a machete on a woman, and his wife giggles while he does so.
“But I thought you said you only cut once?” reminds Adi.
Imang becomes hostile. He says, “I don’t like deep questions. It’s over. Everything is safe now. The past is the past.” He also shows a book with sketches depicting how they killed their neighbors. There is absolutely no remorse or regret shown by anyone who, firsthand, either ordered the murders or committed them. The exception is one murderer’s daughter near the end of the film, who murmurs, “Sadistic” and semi-apologizes, saying, “Adi, we apologize. We feel the same way you do. We knew nothing about this.”
Aside from this one lone young woman, who appears to be about Adi’s age, nobody else—especially those who actually committed the crimes—shows any remorse or expresses regret. In fact, the head honcho at the time, Secretary General of Komando Aksi, expresses the opinion that he should be thanked for his actions and perhaps receive a free trip to the United States—perhaps to Disneyland—maybe a cruise.

It’s nearly impossible to believe how callous the killers are.

We also learn that children in school are indoctrinated with propaganda that teaches them things such as, “The Communists had to be killed because they were sleeping with each others’ wives.” The entire schoolteacher snippet is ludicrous in justifying the mass murder of 1,000,000 people.
Adi tells his small daughter and son that what they are being taught is all lies. One teacher actually says, “Some of the Communists want to be killed.” The teacher adds, “The Communists were cruel, so the government had to repress them. Their children could not work for the government or be in the Army.” [Actually, after the actions of Komando Aksi, there weren’t that many Communists left alive.]
There are extensive film clips of the Death Squad leaders explaining in great detail (and often with laughter) how they would systematically murder men, women and children. Their excuse, “I was only following orders.”
We learn that Adi’s brother, Ramil, who was then a young Communist male, was initially stabbed repeatedly in the shoulder and stomach (The Death Squad members laugh at the memory of his intestines spilling from his stomach.) He managed to crawl through the rice paddies back to his parents’ house, where he asked his mother to help him and make him a cup of tea. While she attempted to attend to his grievous wounds, the Death Squad Komando Aksi members—who received the names of their victims from the Army—returned to her house and promised to take her son to the hospital. She begged to go with him and offered two cows to barter for Ramli’s life; they refused.
Rather than taking Ramil to the hospital, he was taken back to the Snake River where he was stabbed repeatedly and then flung into the river, where he clung to foliage and begged for help. They fished Ramli out and cut off his penis. (The men demonstrated how this maneuver could be done from behind, with a push of the boot to the victim’s butt to push the corpse to the ground where the body would bleed out.) The victims’ bodies were then thrown into the Snake River. (Villagers would not eat any fish from the Snake River for two years, knowing that the fish had been feeding on human remains.)
Those in power made it appear that the people were rising up spontaneously to exterminate the Communists, in order to protect the image of the Army nationally and internationally. This was not true. The Komander Aksi members got lists of 500 to 600 victims’ names nightly from the Army and acted on that information.

When the Secretary General of Komander Aksi is seen onscreen, he seems completely unconcerned about his role in ordering the purge, saying, “That’s politics. Politics is the process of achieving your ideals.” This man continues to be head of the Legislature, since 1971 and says, to Adi, in a threatening manner, “Do the victims’ families want the killings to happen again? Sooner or later, it will happen again.” The message to Adi (who refuses to divulge his last name or city of origin): “Drop it!”
Throughout the film, the insistent messages are these:
1) The past is past. Forget about it. Don’t speak of it
2) I was only following orders.
3) Revenge for these murders will be taken by God after death.
One of the most revealing moments comes when Adi visits his Uncle (his distraught mother’s brother). He learns that his uncle was a guard and, in fact, in charge of guarding Ramil the night he was killed. Adi’s uncle is now 82 years old. The uncle protests, “I was just a guard. They came and took truckloads of 30 at a time. I was just told to guard the prisoners. I did not help! I did not take a machete and murder people!”
But, objects Adi, couldn’t his uncle have tried to defend his own nephew, Ramil?
“I did it to defend the state. Better just to follow orders,” says the elderly uncle.
When Adi later tells his mother that her own brother was complicit in the savage death of her son, Ramil, she is shocked at the sadistic news, saying, “I never knew this before.”
Some notable quotes from the film that illustrate Point One (above):
#1) “Because Joshua makes this film all the wounds are open. Forget the past. You want us to be open, but how can we be? I don’t want to remember. It’s covered up. Why open it up again? What are you trying to do? Just leave it? Let it go. Leave it to God.” (From various speakers)
The revenge motif (Point #3 above) is voiced this way, “It’s up to God to punish those who hurt our friends and family. It’s not up to us.”
This mini-Holocaust makes you instantly think of Auschwitz and the Nazi Death Camps, and those who made it obviously do not feel safe in Indonesia even now.
Nearly all the end credits (other than Joshua Oppenheimer) are listed as “Anonymous” because those who contributed video and reminiscences to this film still fear retribution. “The Look of Silence” is a joint production of Denmark, Indonesia, Norway, Finland and the United Kingdom and it’s an eye-opening film.

Page 48 of 65

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén & Blogarama - Blog Directory Best Entertainment Blogs - OnToplist.com