ELB-6 Reviews

The Outwaters (2022)

A Non-compelling Mess

[2/10 · 4 October 2023]

I like movies that are difficult to follow, and that allow or require the viewer to figure things out. Even if a movie ends up being a fragmented mess, I can still enjoy it if it is compelling, or leaves me with a certain tone. This movie was a fragmented mess that left me irritated, confused, bored and finally vaguely angry. There *may* have been a story here but the writer/director did not seem to understand how to convey it. It is a rare director who can write and appear in their own work. The person behind this film would do well to concentrate on one of the three: either write, direct or act. This combination certainly did not work for me.

Ms. Marvel (2022)

What a terrific show!

[10/10 · 12 July 2022]

Ms. Marvel is a rarity: a superhero show that cares about its characters and their development more than just putting them in endless action sequences. By the end of the first episode I was completely hooked, and found myself actually caring about Kamala Khan and the odd turn her life was taking. I also find it amazing that the main character is unapologetically brown and Muslim. (We have had SO many white white white superheroes) The writing is smart, the dialogue is brisk and often funny. The actors are 100% believable in largely unbelievable settings.

This is a superhero tale for the current age, and I am HERE for it.

Badhaai Do (2022)

One of the best films I've ever seen

[10/10 · 20 June 2022]

'Badhaai Do' is an exquisitely funny, sensitive and heartwarming film. It is rare that a film makes me laugh out loud (Rajkumar Rao has impeccable comedic timing) and it is even more rare that a film makes me cry. This did both, in completely organic ways.

Seriously, this is one of the best films I've seen in my life, and I've seen thousands.

Space Station 76 (2014)

One of the funniest dramas/saddest comedies I've ever seen

[10/10 · 27 August 2021]

I've seen this film three times, and each time I marvel at the way the story unfolds. While Space Station 76 is set in space (on a space station, no less) it really is all about human interaction and how deeply we need and misunderstand one another. This is not a slapstick, har-har-har kind of comedy. This is a 'I don't know whether to laugh or cry' sort of comedy. And, in my book, that is the best kind.

This is one hella smart, hella well-acted, hella well-directed film. More like this, please.

Derek DelGaudio's In & Of Itself (2020)

Manipulative and Empty

[2/10 · 7 February 2021]

Watching this guy manipulate the audience was like watching a televangelist manipulate a congregation. By the end of this show I felt angry. I love being moved by an authentically moving story. I resent being expected to be moved by what amounts to nothing more than parlor tricks. The production values are good. I'll give it that.

The Zero Theorem (2013)

A Wretched Mess

[2/10 · 13 January 2016]

Terry Gilliam has made at least two brilliant films in his career: 'Brazil' (written by Tom Stoppard) and '12 Monkeys.' Other Gilliam films have flashes of brilliance: 'Time Bandits,' 'The Adventures of Baron Munchausen' and 'The Fisher King' are each cohesive and very worthwhile. 'The Zero Theorem' fails on almost every level, starting (as most films do) with a terrible script. It is painful to watch a director fall so slowly and completely from such great heights. It is sad to see so many references to many of Gilliam's previous successes in this mess; it's almost as if Gilliam is saying, 'See? This is what I was once capable of.' I would give 'Zero Theorem' one star but some of the visuals of the film approach interesting. And I love 'Brazil' too much to ever fault Terry Gilliam to the level of just one star. Even for the terrible failure 'Zero Theorem' turned out to be.

Resolution (III) (2012)

Atmospheric, twisty strange little flick with a lot going for it

[8/10 · 12 September 2013]

I really, really liked 'Resolution.' It's not an easy film, and it doesn't provide easy answers. I will take strange/atmospheric/well acted/creeping dread over cookie-cutter Hollywood horror crapfest any day of the week. 'Resolution' seems to be about two guys who are at the mercy of a storyteller that wants a story to be told. Where is the story coming from? Is it on their minds? Is there a puppetmaster behind it all? Or is it just some freaky meth-withdrawal side effect kind of thing? I don't know, and I actually really appreciate the fact that this movie doesn't tell you in clear cut answers. In a way it reminded me of 'Upstream Color' in that there is a lot to think and wonder and imagine about in this film. After I've done that for a few days I'll watch 'Resolution' again. I hope this writer/director gives us more.

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004)

Not Anderson's best work

[5/10 · 10 October 2012]

I've seen several of Wes Anderson's films. I think 'Life Aquatic' fails on as many levels as it succeeds. It's a very well-shot film: Anderson has an amazing eye and can really stage a frame. But the story/script doesn't allow this often gorgeous-looking film to really achieve much of anything. I was thoroughly charmed by 'Moonrise Kingdom.' Seeing the difference between these two films I think the fault with one (Life Aquatic) and the success of the other (Moonrise) lies with the script. Give a good director a good script and s/he can do wonders. Give a good director a bad or problematic script and sometimes s/he can work wonders but more often than the holes in the script doom the end result.

I think the bad (and often unnecessary) CGI did 'Life Aquatic' a disservice as well as its uneven score. One of the things that made 'Moonrise Kingdom' so fantastic was its magnificent score.

My 2¢.

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010)

Freaky Awesome

[9/10 · 4 October 2012]

This is the kind of movie that is going to garner strong opinions for and against. I really, really enjoyed it. First off, the design element is stunning. I don't think I've seen such attention to detail since Kubrick's 2001. This director is clearly going for an 80s aesthetic here, in the overly saturated colors, the synth-heavy music, the future-of-days-gone-by set pieces. Is it slow? Yes. It is very slow. Is it easy to understand? No. It is not easy to understand. Is it cohesive? Yes, I think it is very cohesive. Beyond the Black Rainbow reminds me a lot of some of David Lynch's films, mixed with The Man Who Fell to Earth and - let's be honest - John Carpenter's Halloween. And THX 1138. And Logan's Run. While the movie pays a lot of homage to these styles and films it is still completely its own. If you don't like movies that can be deeply, maddeningly inscrutable, if you need fast jump-cuts and quick, zippy editing, perhaps Beyond the Black Rainbow isn't for you. But if you like immersing yourself into a strange, oddly beautiful psychotic dreamscape, then dive right in.

Heartless (I) (2009)

Means well but falls flat

[2/10 · 1 September 2011]

The main problem with 'Heartless,' in my opinion, is the script. The actors' lines are so riddled with clichés that it's hard to take any of it seriously. There are hundreds of things that people do and say in films that they never do or say in real life. Many of these stock lines and stock actions make appearances in 'Heartless.' I found it difficult to feel any compassion for any of the characters because of this, and because the actors were working up a storm to fight their way through the clichés. Here is the spoiler: really? A gay hustler? Tired. Oh so very tired.

There is some talent here. The camera work is good. The lighting, the color choice are quite nice. But all in all, 'Heartless' is not very good at all.

Staying Alive (1983)

So bad it's great

[26 August 2011]

I would give Staying Alive 1 star for actual goodness, and 10 stars for being in that rare category of movie that is so awful it's great. I will say that John Travolta is good dancer and his character is actually rather well portrayed here. But the film itself: ZOMG. The dance sequences are cheesy as hell. I have almost hurt myself from laughing so hard. It's like everyone in the movie lives in a world where cruise ship shows are considered the apex of entertainment. The script is a knock off of a knock off of a knock off of 42nd Street, with obvious rip-offs of All That Jazz. The choreographer character is straight out of the book of Hollywood clichés. The love triangle is as flimsy and transparent as used Saran wrap. The songs are all ridiculously over-earnest, especially the echo-laden 'Dance Close to the Fire' sequence. But I gotta say: watching this is pure joy. Pure 'oh my god I can't believe I'm watching this' guilty pleasure joy.

Where the Wild Things Are (2009)

An odd, unsettling but not entirely worthless movie

[4/10 · 6 July 2010]

There is a big gulf between 'adapt' and 'reimagine.' The book this movie was based on was childlike, innocent raucous fun. This movie isn't an adaptation of the book. One could say it's a meditation inspired by the book. If there is a message in the book, it's basically, 'Come back when you want to behave. We'll still love you.' If there's a message in the movie it's basically, 'My personality is split into a group of warring monsters who are lonely and violent. And if you make friends with one of them it will come back to bite you in the ass. And if you try to organize things they will fall apart because basically you're a liar.' An interesting meditation on the theme to be sure, but I really don't think this is what Maurice Sendak had in mind. On the plus side, the monster costumes are really pretty cool, and the fort they build looks like a lot of fun. Hearing James Gandolfini and Lauren Ambrose voice the monsters is a lot of fun. The score is pretty nice, too. I don't regret watching this movie. But I can't imagine what kind of audience it was intended for. Too dark and weird for kids. I daresay kids would be bored to tears watching this. At the same time it's too disjointed and self-conscious for adults, swinging from overly precious to bizarre exercises in self-destruction.

Repo! The Genetic Opera (2008)

Visually arresting but deeply stupid

[2/10 · 2 April 2010]

I'm giving Repo two stars rather than one because it did have a few redeeming elements in my book. It was visually very arresting, and the world depicted was oddly believable. I watched it all the way through, although I have to admit I watched most of Repo with eyes rolling and several derisive barks of laughter. The comparisons to Sweeney Todd and Rocky Horror do not fit for me. Sweeney Todd is one of the most intelligently written pieces of musical theater in the history of theater. Repo the Genetic Opera is, ultimately, deeply stupid, boiling down to a) the plot, which has more holes than cohesion and b) the lyrics, which are just about the worst lyrics I've ever heard sung. And I've heard a lot of lyrics in my time. So what now follows is a series of questions, all of which are probably spoilers. ¡ ~ ~SPOILER ALERT~ ~ ! 1) So, wait, people take the glowing blue drug in order to feel no pain from the surgeries they are addicted to? So are they addicted to the surgeries or the drug? 2) So the Repo Man apparently can find you wherever you are. Why is it, then, that all of his victims come to him? 3) Is there just one Repo Man? Just one? For all of this population who is apparently having all of these surgeries done? That would be one heck of a busy man. 4) So, wait. The surgeries people are having are life-saving surgeries in order to have failing organs replaced with new ones? If this is the case then why are people 'addicted to surgery?' Where does this whole plastic surgery fit in with this picture? Are they life-saving organ transplants or face-changing surgeries? 5) So, with the Paris Hilton character. If her father is the richest, most powerful person on the planet then why is she getting surgeries on the street? 6) Is everyone goth in the future? 7) I would just like to point out that 'anatomy' and 'surgery' do not rhyme. Ever. 8) So, wait. Paul Sorvino is this humanity-saving person who found a way to replace organs. Why, then, is he also humanity's scoundrel, taking the organs back? Did he develop this system of organ replacement simply to take the organs back? If that is the case then isn't humanity in the same place as it was during the 'plague' (or whatever vague thing it was that made organs fail in the first place) with organs failing or being ripped out? 9) So, the Repo man rips out an organ. Then what? Does it get re-used? Or does he do it simply to punish people who don't pay? 10) Okay, wait. So the father/Repo man/doctor character is told that he has to take out Blind Mag's eyes because he believes he poisoned his own wife 17 years ago? What kind of logic is that? "Dude, you have to take this lady's eyes out." "Why?" "Because you poisoned your wife 17 years ago." "Yes, I see what you mean. Where's my scalpel?" 11) So, wait. If the father is so concerned about his daughter not dying then why is he poisoning her? Um, what? 12) Why does Blind Mag yank her eyes out? 13) So, wait. Shilo obviously thinks Blind Mag is super cool. Why, then, does she not let her in the house when she visits? "Oh hi, Blind Mag. You're an international superstar and everything and I think you're really cool but no, you can't come in. For some reason, I'm inexplicably afraid of you right now. Nope. Can't even open the door. My father will be mad, although I can't explain why." 14) Riffing on #13: if Shilo's reason for not letting Blind Mag in is because her father will be mad (why would he be mad?) then why is it when her father comes home Shilo insists that they let Blind Mag in all of a sudden? And if Shilo is all afraid of her father then why does she start yelling at her father when he says Blind Mag has to go? Is Shilo the only person who sees the article in the tabloid that says Blind Mag is going to have her eyes repossessed? Are tabloids 100% accurate in the future? Did anyone read this script through before they started filming? 15) And, yeah. Shilo's father locks her in her room, right? And Shilo goes to her balcony and sings that she wants to go outside, indicating that she is locked in. In subsequent scenes she just, um, walks outside. Doesn't even climb down from her window. I am making a call to the Continuity Police. 16) I know this is way too much to ask, but why are Paul Sorvino's kids all one-dimensional unpleasant idiots? Don't give me this 'they're fighting over the family business' hoo-hah. 17) If grave robbers are executed on sight, then why doesn't the grave-robber-executing-squad execute the grave robber when they see him? Why do they mill around and around, ignoring him completely but then suddenly focusing on Shilo who is hiding behind a tombstone? 18) So you just put a needle into a dead person's nose and extract a glowing blue drug? I see. That makes sense. There's a lot more, of course. But I don't want to think about this any more. As I said, there are far more holes than there is any continuity. But above all, the lyrics are wretched. Bad, bad lyrics.

The Room (2003)

The Lonely Lady meets Ed Wood but with only 2% of the finesse.

[1/10 · 5 March 2010]

As I watched The Room I thought, 'This can't be real. Seriously - this is a parody, right?' But what I've read leads me to believe that yes, the intent was to make an actual, serious movie. But it views like a perfect dead-on, deadpan parody of the worst possible movie ever. From the ludicrously inept script to the bad soft-core porn scenes to the acting that makes Edith Massey look like Agnes Moorhead - it's just ... mind-crackingly horrid. I am a fan of unintentionally bad movies (The Apple is my favorite so far) But this ... this one takes the cake. I think the line that is said the most often is "Don't worry about it!" This line is an all-purpose line that can is said in response to everything from 'I have breast cancer' to 'I am leaving you.' The second-most popular line in this movie is 'I don't want to talk about it.' This is a great device to indicate the characters like to bring things up just for the sake of dropping the topic four seconds later. I confess I had to fast-forward through much of this (like all the sex scenes) But I had to watch Johnny's breakdown. This was like watching someone imitate Christopher Walken sleepwalking. But without any of the passion. I shan't see The Room again. Not only is it aggressively inept, it's tedious. Bad piled upon bad piled upon bad with no sense of direction or purpose is hard to watch for more than ten minutes. I don't regret seeing The Room, in the same way I suppose someone wouldn't regret having been run over by a slow-moving train and living to tell the tale.

The Last House on the Left (1972)

What's the big deal?

[1/10 · 8 January 2009]

I remember when Last House on the Left came out and the commercials urging audience members to repeat 'It's only a movie ... it's only a movie.' Back then I was not inclined to see horror films, and the movie looked far too bloody, dark and disturbing for my taste. So I avoided seeing it until last night. Maybe it was the years of build-up, or horror fan friends of mine saying this was the 'best horror movie EVER.' Maybe it's the fact that I've seen a lot of horror films in the past few years. But I found LHotL to be one of the dumbest things I've ever seen. Okay, okay, I know. It was 'seminal' in a lot of ways, and Wes Craven 'went on to do great things' (debatable) after this one. I know that the zeitgeist has changed dramatically since 1972, as has film technique/technology, acting styles and everything that goes along with and into making a film. I know that it was difficult to get funding and good actors for a film that was horror and showed bare breasts (two things that have been oddly paired in this kind of movie) back then. But come on. The acting is ridiculous, even when it's supposed to be 'real.' The script reads like something straight out of an 8th grader's English project. Two things I enjoyed: the songs in the soundtrack and the fact that it seems a real chainsaw is being used toward the end (you can see actual cuts on the chair and desk). I would recommend other movies far, far above this one if one wants to see 'the most disturbing horror film ever.' Into that category I would have to place 'Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer,' a movie that disturbed and haunted me for months after I'd seen it. I actually regret seeing it - it is that bleak and nihilistic. For a movie that blends comedy and horror one can not do better than Jodorowski's Santa Sangre, a gleeful, bloody, horrifying, hilarious Fellini-esquire take on the Psycho tale. For a dissolution of 'family values' done up in bloody horror one is much better off with Miike's 'Visitor Q.' (Be prepared if you rent and watch this one - there is virtually no social taboo not exploited in Visitor Q) For a similar (although much milder) and far superior movie from the same era, I recommend 'Homebodies.' But I have to say, all the comments praising Last House on the Left as being some sort of work of genius truly have me scratching my head. I found it hard to watch - not because it was disturbing, but because it was so darned bad.

Across the Universe (2007)

A visual, aural and emotional feast

[10/10 · 3 November 2007]

I grew up with the Beatles. I remember when Magical Mystery Tour came out - my brother bought it and played it non-stop. I remember the riots of the 60s, the horror of the Viet Nam war and the feeling of hope that saturated this time in history. This movie captures all of it: the look, the sound, the feel, the hair (Lucy's mother's hair in this movie is PERFECT) I got full-body chills about twenty times during this movie. It was like I was living those moments again: the fear, the joy, the hope, the wonder. And the music. Once again I am filled with gratitude for the Beatles and the miraculous songs they wrote. Just these disparate elements would have been enough, but Julie Taymor (and the writers of the screenplay) weaves it all together with a cast of believable characters caught in the throes of youth and revolution. I left the theater feeling like I was walking on air. A wonderful, wonderful film.

I am relatively hard to please when it comes to movies - a bad script, bad directing, careless attention to details can all damage my enjoyment of a film. Hollywood seems to crank out steaming crap pile after steaming crap pile these days. But Across the Universe is a revelation. In my opinion, it is a masterpiece.

El Topo (1970)

How the West was Surreal

[8/10 · 29 September 2007]

I have been a fan of Santa Sangre ever since it first came out in theaters. (I have been eagerly awaiting its release on DVD) When El Topo was released on DVD I snapped it up right away and gave it a watch last night.

First off, knowing the time period this movie came from, I have to say that Jodorowski was years ahead of his time. That said, I think many of his images and intent owe as much to Dali and Dada artists than to other filmmakers. The scene where the rabbit pyre bursts into flames is pure surreal imagery. It was at this moment that I decided: I like this film.

It does seem as if this is two films spliced together. The first half is a revenge story/spiritual quest (if tracking down people and killing them can be seen as spiritual) This half seems less successful in its narrative and approach than the second half of the film.

The second half finds the re-invented and shorn El Topo rescuing a community of in-bred freaks trapped inside a cave. (I say 'freaks' not disparagingly, but because they resemble a carnival sideshow more than anything else) I read another comment that said the second half was a 'New Testament allegory.' I don't see that at all. What I see is an allegory between Mexico and the US, Mexico being those trapped in the cave and the US being the fat, over-dressed citizens of the town decorated with eye-within-the-pyramid banners. This new El Topo and his beloved are forced to beg and clown for a living, and clean toilets, and wash windows. When they finally do break through the wall to the cave and the 'freaks' venture forth into the town, they are all shot and killed. Maybe this appears to be an allegory for how the US treats Mexican immigrants when seen today, given the ironic difficulties so many Americans have with immigrants. Even so, it made a very strong impression on me.

All in all, I think Santa Sangre is a much more full, rich, imaginative and cohesive film. It is interesting to see many of the same themes from El Topo in Santa Sangre: right of passage into manhood, armless people using another's arms as his own, physically and mentally challenged people, magic tricks, circus music and, of course, a lot of bloodshed. I wish this filmmaker would make more movies.

1408 (2007)

What a waste of time

[2/10 · 24 June 2007]

I had great hopes for this movie: I like John Cusack a lot, and had enjoyed 'Identity' a lot. I saw the trailer for it about a month ago, and so I went to see it on its opening day.

There were a few good jumps, but mostly in the beginning. As the story unwound itself I found myself thinking more and more: they really thought they were making a good movie here. The closer it got to the end the more I hated the movie.

I found it formulaic, predictable and pretentious. The moments that should have been subtle foreshadowing were ham-fisted telegraphing.

What I find astonishing is how many people are saying this is a good movie. Have we become so used to bad movies that we can't tell the good from the bad any more?

Inland Empire (2006)

The Lynchiest of them all

[10/10 · 25 January 2007]

I saw Inland Empire in Seattle; David Lynch introduced the film (with a cellist playing an improvisation, followed by DL saying about 2 sentences) I knew only a few things about the film: it was shot all on digital video, and it was 3 hours long. Having seen all of Lynch's previous work I knew that I was in for a ride. I also knew that there was no way to know what kind of ride it would be: I was strapped in and ready. I heard the woman sitting behind me say, 'I've never seen a David Lynch film before. What are they like?' And I thought, 'She is either very lucky or she is going to have a horrible night.' Or both. I remember the first time I saw Eraserhead. It was playing on the midnight movie circuit when I was in college. After I stumbled out of the theater I realized that my perception of the world had changed, perhaps unalterably. The movie knocked on some of the darkest doors in my psyche, and I didn't like that one bit. At least at first. Then I noticed that there were times in my life when I could sit back and say, 'This is life imitating Eraserhead.' There was a bizarre comfort in that. A friend persuaded me to see Eraserhead again about a year later. The second viewing revealed a deep level of comedy I had completely missed the first time. ("Do I just cut them up like regular chickens?") By the end of the second viewing I knew I would seek out whatever this guy might put forth. And I am ever so glad I did. Okay. Back to Inland Empire. The only thing I can say, really, is that the best way to see this movie is to just sink into it. Let it wash into you. Don't try to figure it out. Don't try to find linear threads, clues, connections. The movie exists in its own space, dimension, world, and time. It is, at times, too close. It is, at time, achingly beautiful. It is, at times, exceedingly funny. It is, at times, unutterably dark. If you have seen a David Lynch movie in the past and have stomped away from the theater saying, "It doesn't mean anything! It's stupid! David Lynch is just being cryptic for no reason at all!" then I suggest that you stick with movies where the hero is easily recognized as such, his girlfriend always wears pretty clothes and everything turns out just right in the end. Because you are not going to get that in a David Lynch movie. Things will not be spelled out for you in block letters. Today may turn into tomorrow, and there may be no way the beginning of the movie can exist in the same world as the end of the movie. There may be images that are startlingly disturbing, but with no clear explanation as to why they are there. You need to be willing to let the images be the images, let the sounds be the sounds, and let the experience be the experience. That is the way to enjoy a David Lynch film. And this one is the Lynchiest of them all.

I loved the fact that the comments David Lynch provided after the movie were not explanations, or a key to symbols, or anything that would tell us how to interpret the movie. Someone asked him point-blank: "Will you tell me what it means so I don't have to go to the internet to find out?" And he said, "It's on the poster." ("A woman in trouble") She said, "Is that all I'm going to get?" And he said, "That's all you're going to get." There was a round of chuckles in the audience. I think DL may have felt a little bad for being that terse, so he went on to say, "Everyone sees a movie in his own way. No one's experience is any more right or wrong than anyone else's. I don't talk about my films after they're finished, because I don't want to turn film back into words." I think I know what he means. After you spend so much time conveying thoughts - via words - into actions, sounds and images, it seems backwards and pointless to reverse that whole process.

So.

Watch Inland Empire. Go with your mind empty. Don't expect anything. Let the movie carry you along on its own tide. When the movie is over, get out of the boat and go home. You don't need to know any more than that.

I think this film is one of the purest expressions of art that I have seen.

The Fountain (2006)

A haunting and profound experience

[9/10 · 26 November 2006]

My partner and I saw The Fountain last night. One of our tests of whether a movie is good or not is if it 'wears' well. Some movies I forget as soon as I see them. Other movies bring up a bad taste in my mind when I remember them. Others come back to me in various ways days or weeks after seeing them. The Fountain was such an experience for me. All through the day I kept remembering bits of the movie: the tone, the mystery, the journey. I wanted to tell people about the movie. This is another good sign. I have not read any reviews of the film, nor have I talked w/ anyone who has seen it other than my partner. I can hear some people saying now: "It doesn't make any sense!" or "What was that bubble? Why was he floating?" These are the same kinds of people who are better off seeing one of the 'Ernest' movies, in which everything is spelled out in numbing detail. I prefer a movie that leaves questions in one's mind. I like to be involved in the unfolding of what is on screen. I don't generally like, or trust, a director who feels it is necessary to explain and underscore every single significant moment in a movie, nor one who feels it necessary to wrap everything up in a cute Dickensian bow. There are two things I liked most about The Fountain. One is its beautiful imagery and creative use of myth. The other is its emotional rawness. If anyone has ever faced losing a loved one, s/he will know just how desperately helpless one can feel. It is incredibly easy to believe anything in a state of denial. It is also tragically easy to miss the most important thing that is always in front of us: the present moment. There were times in the movie when I felt like it was too much --- I felt many times like I needed to stop the movie and go somewhere and sob for an hour. This is probably what I will do when I watch the movie at home when it comes out on DVD. This is not an easy movie to watch. But it is extremely rewarding, if you open the part of your mind that allows mystery to exist. I highly recommend it.

Inlaws & Outlaws (2005)

The heart of love

[10/10 · 1 December 2005]

What makes this film so wonderful is that it is simply true. The people speak of their experiences with love, honestly, genuinely, touchingly. This movie made me (and the whole audience) laugh that kind of deep belly-laugh that only comes from truth being spoken. And there were many tears as well. Very moving. Very warm. Very uplifting. So much of the debate over the 'sanctity of marriage' has taken place with picket signs, in courtrooms, and in political arenas. It is so refreshing to see something that takes the issue where it belongs: the heart. It makes the whole question of legislating against the 'right' kind of love ridiculous. After seeing this film I feel as if I have a whole bunch of new friends. I want to hug Frank and tell him 'thank you.' I want to invite Jane and her partner home to bake cookies with me. I hope this remarkable film gets the wide theatrical release it so richly deserves.