Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
Len6789
Reviews
The Red Shoes (1948)
Comparison of the 1948 and 1990 Versions
Although I would rate both versions of "The Red Shoes" from good to excellent, I would rate the 1948 version slightly higher. Why? Because there are cultural differences, and something is lost in the translation. This is not to say that the 1948 interpretation is better or correct, but there are marked difference in the direction of each productions. In the cultural differences, there is a great diversity in beliefs and values. And, that diversity takes the audience on a different 1990's Hispanic trip, from where the 1948's Caucasian 'red shoes' were going. The 1990's version tells the audience that 'you don't have to have money, in order to be rich'. And, that 'if you're not connected to people, you might as well be dead'. In both versions, there is different music, and a different dance. And, there are different beats and different rhythms. This conveys a contrast in feelings. In the 1990's version, the 'red shoes' are dancing to an urban New York City, almost "West Side Story" kind of Latin beat. In the 1948 version, the 'red shoes' are dancing to the rhythm of a classical music's ballet, dominated by a golden-era Hollywood kind of Caucasian perspectives. The dancing, in both versions, is beautiful, moving, and striking. But, the pendulum in the 1990's version strikes a different chord, and that arouses a whole set of different feelings, evoking non-traditional and new ways of looking at traditional and nineteenth-century ways of looking at unresolved issues. Such emphatic differences make it clear that we as people, regardless of our ethnic and cultural backgrounds, are still engaging in avoidance and denial about some major and very significant issues, which are pertinent and relevant. Both versions of "The Red Shoes" make it clear that people are still unwilling to confront the pain, which sometimes accompanies the pleasures in life. Different beliefs and values are okay, but they must not interfere with people's willingness to look at issues with honesty and openness. The 1960's brought issues, out of their closets, in an attempt to evoke discussion. But, there was much bloodshed, chaos, and violence. Issues, which were brought out in the open to elicit discussion, instead evoked angry and frustrated reactions. In this, the New Millennium, the pendulum of time is swinging from the left's domain of liberal thought, to the right's domain of conservative expression. And, the rather ugly battle wages on, with the battering ram of liberal thought and conservative expression, and the middle-of-the- road dance caught in-between conservative and liberal thoughts, feeling, and acts. As I see it (and you don't have to agree with how I see things), the moderates are struggling to find a balance in their particular domain of thoughts and feelings. The problem is that the conservatives are on a narrow, rigid road. There is no flexibility. In sharp contrast, the liberals want a broad and tolerant, if not a completely-accepting road, and neither the conservatives nor the liberals will allow the moderates middle-of-the-road dance of in-between. It is clear that, in our battle for equality and fairness, a significant number of people still want all or nothing--they want the whole pie, or want none of the pie. As people, we still will not be satisfied with a more-equal, and more-fair, piece of the pie. We greedily want the whole thing, and we still have not learned to share. Will the 'red shoes' take us to where we need to go? Only time will tell us, for certain, but the 'red shoes' are learning new, non-traditional steps to an old and difficult dance between doing what is ethical, what is moral, what is politically correct, and what is the more equal and more fair thing to do. Caught in a dilemma, the 'red shoes' know how to dance, but they are uncertain of which way to go.
Das Experiment (2001)
A 'Shocking Film', Based on an 'Unethical Experiment'.
A disturbing and shocking film, based on the unethical 'Stanford Prison Experiment', that should not have been conducted. It's a sneak preview of 'The Holocaust' revisited, and what Americans can expect from the 'Bush Administration and 'conservatives' until the end of his 'Nazi-like re-election reign' but, then, you folks exerting the 'popular vote' in Ohio and the other 'conservative domains' re-elected him. I certainly did not vote for 'Bush', nor did the majority of voters in Connecticut. Thus proving, to this 'liberal left-winger', that the 'conservatives' and a 'representive government' (not-directly-run 'for and by the people') certainly stinks, and is far from 'democratic'. Movies like this, and such experimentation, 'heroizes' torture. If this film is like 'reality television', it surely presents itself in its distorted and flawed concepts and images of what an 'ethical' research study should be like, or purports to be. It can only be a 'blockbuster' to those supporting violence and war. 'Bush' probably loves this film as, no doubt, he 'gets off' on 'war and rumors of war' (using 'Bush/Christianeze' jargon). But, then, Christians, and significant numbers of other people, like to engage in 'war mongering'. Personally, I find such 'belief and value systems', as well as their sense of 'morality', to be nothing more than a 'ball buster'. And, there are certainly significant numbers of people, in America and throughout the world, who enjoy abusing gay and lesbian people in such a harsh, rigid, and hateful manner. Perhaps 'Bush' should consider setting up 'concentration camps for gays and lesbians', so that he can eradicate them from the universe. Some Americans could then celebrate their deaths, and their bloodshed. Let's kill off all of the gays and lesbians, and America can start an 'Arian race', a 'pure race' consisting ONLY of 'heterosexuals'. After all, 'heterosexuals' are the ONLY people 'blessed by God', and that makes the rest of us 'sinners'. Don't forget that 'Christians' are 'SAVED by GRACE' and the rest of us, 'being without grace', are 'unredeemable'. Many classes of people, without Jesus, are 'doomed to damnation'. 'Christians' will go to Heaven, and the rest of us will be 'forever lost in sin'.
Personally, if 'Christians' truly represent God, I wouldn't want to go to Heaven. I firmly believe that the entire 'God concept' was created by man (not by God), to 'keep human beings in their place' by perpetuating 'guilt and shame'. People engage in 'avoidance and denial', so that they do not have to deal with real-life issues, thus 'avoiding' honest and open discussion. Such people are 'in denial' about certain issues, but perpetuate 'violence and war'. If you positively support this movie, and such research, why not 'kill your neighbor'? After all, your neighbor may be gay, or some other minority, that you hate. That may justify murder, watching this movie, and supporting unethical research. Kill 'the bastards', and 'hang them by their balls'. Perhaps we should re-institute the death sentence, and have public hangings in every town and city. And, at these events, we could sell hot-buttered popcorn and ice-cold beverages, to increase our very frigid, capitalistic economy and increase revenues. After all, Americans will do anything for 'the almighty dollar'. And, we'll get more excitement for 'the buck'. We've 'sunk very low' in America. The question is, 'how low' will we allow ourselves to go? Perhaps we could insert electrodes in every female's vagina, and every male's penis, when they do not behave, feel, or think in accordance with the status quo. After all, 'ethics' should have no place in establishing societal norms and, under such circumstances, isn't punishment (no matter how harsh) justified? We could also perform involuntary lobotomies and sterilizations. Such things would make people adhere to standards, by forcing them to live in constant fear. So much for 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'. We have a right to violate a person's civil and constitutional rights. Liberty invites license, and we can't allow people to be happy.
Obviously, this film is intended to attract those who indulge in 'cheap, low-level, and mindless' entertainment. It would appeal to those who have a 'sado-masochistic' bent, and endorse the very sick 'military code' inside and outside of the prison environment.
Red Dirt (2000)
"Red Dirt" is earthy and funky, dramatic and real.
I enjoy this film, and give it a 'Netflix rating' of four (4) stars (good to excellent). It has flaws (such as the southern accents), but the production makes its audience very aware of the conservative context and the gay-repressed setting. Karen Black is believable, and gives a strikingly realistic performance, particularly from the middle to the ending of the film. Although the production gets off with a slow start, the action picks up midway through the film. But, the director/writer is effective in making the audience aware of its theme (oppression in a sexually-repressed environment). From start to finish, viewers are made continually reminded of the negative impact of a 'kiss-and-don't tell' environment. That is why the kiss between the two (2) male leads is so brief. The two (2) men feel deep love for each other, but are denied the opportunity to openly show their affection and emotion. They both are filled with passion, but are entrenched in a red dirt's quicksand of guilt and shame. There is also plenty of avoidance and denial in their harsh, inflexible, and narrow environment. Boy meets girl but, in this film, the boy does not fall in love with the girl. Boy meets boy, and they fall in love. The plot leads up to the girl leaving town. There is no happy ending. Although the male leads convincingly assure the audience of their profound love, there is at least a temporary breakup of their relationship, due to societal pressure. In such an environment, this is true to life. But, there is hope. The two (2) males may still end up in a lasting, long-term relationship. A weakness of the film, the directing and writing lacked a gripping and suspenseful buildup of tension. At the end of the film, it is unknown whether or not adversity will be overcome, and the two (2) males will bond in a growing relationship of acceptance and gay pride. In an atmosphere of discrimination and prejudice, it is essential that a gay person develops a strong sense of self. In this film, it is uncertain whether this crucial stage of development will occur. I would like to see a film in which a gay person happily jumps six (6) feet in the air, exclaiming that he (or she) is proud of the 'who and what' that person is. This film provides encouragement, but gay and lesbian people also need empowerment. Life holds the promise of attaining mountaintop's goals, but what good is getting to the mountaintop, if we don't enjoy our journeys along the way? If you asked me to rate this film from 0 to 10 (bad to excellent), I would give it an 8 (the film is good, but has a potential for excellence). Like Mart Crowley's "The Boys in the Band", this film does positively break ground for insight, reflection, and introspection in gay, classic material. At the very least, this film gives us something to work with, and to build on. Less abstract, and more concrete. Less surreal, and more real. The plot unravels on a 'road of diversity', rather than taking us on a "Trip to Bountiful". It stands on its own, containing both dependent and independent variables.
The Colours of My Father: A Portrait of Sam Borenstein (1992)
reaches the highest pinnacle of excellence...
The Colours of My Father reaches the highest pinnacle of excellence, and is the most outstanding Captioned Media Program (CFV.org) video I have viewed and evaluated, to date. This video, which won an Academy Award nomination in 1992, is more than a portrait of Sam Borenstein. It also is his loving daughter's tribute to a gifted artist who, in turn, pays a tribute to living a high-quality life.
Sam Borenstein's heart was as generous and warm, as the bold and bright colors he used to paint his glowingly vivid images, thick layers of colors applied to a canvas with a trowel (which may, in itself, be a tribute to the fields of flowers he so ardently loved). Fortunately for those of who truly appreciate his great gifts, Sam Borenstein's legacy is his many works of art which still bud and blossom, tintillating and awakening the senses, and getting us to be aroused by the precious gift of life.
If obstacles get in our way, he encourages and empowers us to use the artistic and creative to not only reach for, but to actually realize our many dreams.
Borenstein's expression of art, and his own individual style which some critics deemed 'uncontrollable', serve as a way to effectively communicate with others. Although an artist must be disciplined, his timely works prove that there is a distinct difference between 'discipline' (practice provides a mastery of one's work) and 'control' (there is an insecurity involved in trying to manipulate everyone and everything). If a door of opportunity appears to be closed, Borenstein shows us that alternative measures may help us gain our rite of passage, rather than futilely attempting to be one against the universe (an impossible and overwhelming experience that only leads to anger, anxiety, depression, frustration, helplessness, and hopelessness). No-one is an island. Although there is a sense of accomplishment in completing some tasks on our own, we require the people and things around us (such as the beauty of nature) to do, or help us to complete, other tasks. As human beings, we cannot happily live life alone and, in appreciating the people and things around us, we learn to live our lives to the fullest and richest, rather than merely existing. And, in this way, we become more than survivors.
In the video, black-and-white and color stills, combined with live action, become a viable vehicle to capture timelapse changes (such as darkness, light, movement, and shadows) and to create very artistic and creative forms of animation (such as a violin creating waves of emotion). Here, Joyce Borenstein (like her father) is more than aptly able to share artistic gifts with us. The video is also rich in Jewish culture, as well in its inclusion of some significant demographical and historical events. There are some graphic depictions of the harsh life that Jewish people have traditionally experienced with gentiles, particularly noting events just prior to the atrocities of the Nazi war camps. Jewish people have a longstanding reputation for being hard workers. Characteristically, Borenstein worked 10 to 12 hours a day (in and out of a factory), he was poor (he once slept in a cemetery), and ate in a soup kitchen (where he established some lifelong relationships). Being in some bleak and formidable surroundings, Borenstein always managed to make the very best, out of the worst, of his situations and surroundings.
Sam Borenstein brilliantly integrated various art forms (such as reading about his subjects, using bold colors, and incorporating contextual music), specific to the particular settings in which he painted his vivid images and magical effects. There is positive energy, infused by spontaneity, honesty, truth, and integrity in all of his works. Particularly astounding was Borenstein's innate ability to create 'something' out of 'nothing', and turn the beauty he saw into classical art. He not only developed his own individual style, but was familiar with the eclectic styles of other painters (including Bercovich, Heimlich, Utrillo, and Van Gogh).
Borenstein was also gifted as a very delightful storyteller, and he created fascinating storylines to go along with the beauty, magic and music of his magnificent paintings. Art to Borenstein was, indeed, a magnificent obsession. His works display great enthusiasm and various moods, through composition and form, to brilliantly convey feelings ablaze in color. Borenstein used experience, and nature, as his guide. When painting a particular scene, it would evoke emotions in him and, sometimes, he would repetitively paint the same scene, over and over, as an effective way of conveying changes (such as changes of mood, the seasons, and the time of day). Along with his vivid images, he used very descriptive words in his storylines (such as breathing in the delicious smell of food, the city smelled of death, crossing fields filled with the scent of lilacs, and walking the streets in gray weather filled with a feeling of loneliness).
I particularly responded to Borenstein's astute comment that "too much sunlight washes out the color." Too much of any one thing is not desirable.
Last but certainly not least, Borenstein who did not have a formal education, makes a positive role model in empowerment and self-determination. By reading books, for example, he learned the English language--and how to make his way, as well as how to make a living, in Canada. Most importantly, Borenstein teaches us how to maintain a high quality of life, and being more than sole survivors. We are not alone. The beauty of nature is all around us, just for the asking and supporting us. We just have to reach out for it and touch it, just as nature--and people like Sam Borenstein--touches us.