relate-47835 Reviews

Ikiru (1952)

Best Movie I remember. Still talking about it. Now.

[10/10 · 3 October 2020]

10 stars or 26 if i could -

Just conversed with an old friend from 80's about this film [the name I had forgotten from so long ago - about how this memorable film had previously connected me to another then-dying co-worker. The "meaning of life" plot was so poignant and impactful -and it still is now - from my just 1x viewing of IRIKU in '70's.

This movie's images & the story line continues resonating on, just as it did at that long-past 1st impressionable film viewing. It induced total immersion, which made remembering the whole film forever - to now.

So I had to search to find film's title. I now again - spoke to another of seeing IRIKU so long ago. In 1980's when I visited my terminally ill coworker, I noted that she too had a son -acting just like this film's heroic Mr. Watanabe's son.

The facing-death-bureaucrat - who humbly acted courageously - was also dismissed, mistreated, demeaned by his son in same manner. Sad. Ungrateful. A very disrespectful son.

It was this mere "civil servant" whom we still now recognize as a model of how we too want to become- [perhaps before such dire dx occurs - if such circumstances occur to us too. ....With Pandemic dangers of 2020 surrounding us now, too, it may.

It was then my surprise in carefully telling her the story plot, about un-grateful sons too - that I heard that my terminal-friend too had been taken by a group -long before - to see it - but that was also many years before we spoke. That coincidence of referring to this film, & w/o even knowing the title but only the story-line /plot - was also impressive & revealing: of how important a Good Film is to our different lives. How a film connects it's viewers closer -more than other talk can.

This fantastically seductive movie is so good that it can never be forgotten. IRIKU shows us what we could -maybe- also become like that secret-hero. With this memory, we may get closer to doing better than could otherwise be possible. How many films have this strong & memorable & continuing on-and-on effect? To remain in mind+memory - even after 40-50 years ?

Still i honestly have to say: this is the most relevant and intuitively resonant film I have viewed, appreciated & do honor to this day. Thank you, Mr. Kurosawa. Even now. oct 2020

The View (1997– )

"The View "show is so negatively provocative instead of positively informative

[2/10 · 2 July 2018]

I agree with what comes up as the "Dec 13, 2007" review about there being so much talking-over each over and racial-preferences displayed by who dominates the time and interrupts any, all other speakers.

There is no 'fair', equal share time given by whoever chooses or prefers to display which louder voice OVER the others.

The dis-cussion is more obvious dissing than giving us actual current events review. The big black woman- who repeatedly dominates and then pretends to be a "moderator "- NOT. while she is most often being speaker-selective and then taking Full Control -by being both louder, DOMINANT, and maybe she's given hidden permissions - by their editors ( being out of sight, unknown, and with those who run the show with un-admitted partialities )

The one named as main speaker, Joy, is mostly undercut, over-ridden, over-shouted and dis-allowed equal space on this show, now July, 2018.. And we want to hear more, not less, from a smart, more moderate central woman there.

The attorney who continually claims to be the most-smart-right-authority, because she has been a 'prosecutor' and thinks she is entitled to be RIGHT more often with more interruptions and more selective opinions than most others, guests included, is the most objectionable and obnoxious.

She continually gives "in My opinion" & "in My experiences" - as if she were the majority anywhere or a best example of anything - NOT. That the editors allow or encourage such elitist and pretend-to-be-highest-authority there is a bad, irritating to public, move.

The best way to keep an audience is not the continual OVER-shouting, to create stimulus, excitement and provocative negativity displayed by women who are rude and mean to each other.

But to show more information and opinions given in a cooperative, sharing the space more equally and proportionally ethnically and political-positionally than is present now.

The value of this show is to provoke others to write elsewhere about how disturbing this show is, instead of how valuable it is.

Getting profits and views from negativity seems to be the choices made now, sadly, and helping create the divisiveness that predominates the actual political worlds as well as 'entertainment' on this TV.

An unhelpful show to spend time otherwise spent to be learning, changing, growing, or helping make this a better place. DO not watch unless you too are willing to be angrier, more frustrated and have a bad view of how women can act with each other on TV.

Endless Poetry (2016)

Jodorosky is Trying to be oh-so-wise & rebellious, but overdoing it all

[6/10 · 20 July 2017]

Spoiler: note the Synopsis here is written by 1 of the producers, exaggerating the value and effects of what is seen in the movie on screen. Notice fancy words like "titan" + "foremost" + "liberated himself from all of his former limitations" , etc. A Not quite accurate promotional blurb here.

This is a way too long repetitive (while being visually creative) movie with more symbols than any religious books, including bibles. This poetic legacy-insuring movie about the writer/director,Jodorowsky, looks like a homage, honoring of himself - and insuring his poetry is heard, if not read elsewhere. A man attempting to insure his words and images are never lost, if preserved on a (2 hrs+ more min) self-story, as rebel.

Notice not only is Jodorowsky shown on screen as himself, but apparently others with his name are actors showing him at younger ages. How self-glorifying is this casting ? Is this a paean to the man who long ago created "El Topo" and now is wanting to insure he is never ever forgotten, not now nor later? the usual theme: son who has a strict father rebels and escapes, only to go to other extreme in all physical, emotional, psychological realms, to show his father he was not "that way" – as father was, or as father feared a "maricon !" (a homosexual – the usual fear & accusation to males who did not conform to social strictures of that era…never forgetting it is not 2017 but 1940's in Chile, as it was then).

Now Jodorowsky, at his older age,appears in film with white hair, with desperate words trying to impart his wisdom (nothing unusual, nothing not read in Buddhist, zen, Taoist, and other philosophical religions too).

While more interesting at beginning of movie, as plot develops and viewers have not been bombed and splattered with repetitive not-ashamed-scenes of extremes: in sex, in females, in nude bodies, in unusual bodies (not as 'normal'-usual ones), the exhaustion sets in after the first hour. While the colorful, obvious symbols of social-rebellion are shown, and more are depicted, and more are displayed and more…. the " way too much" effect sets in, anyhow.

Any male who wants to claim superiority to their parent, especially to the Father figure of authority, who is not explored as a character there, but just depicted as a terrible ,cruel father will agree that sons are deprived of their "rights" as children should have, get, demand.

And as so much is also repeated at end of movie with the 'poor me – I was not treated as I should be" lament (as is so popular and believed by many adult-children and adult-males too) many will say "this movie is also my story" and bleed for their own imperfect parents and deprived-of-hugs childhood. Hooey !

Had this film been the more tolerable length or made into 2 segments with an intermission in between, perhaps, maybe, the repetitive effect would have dissipated and the author's poetic words (obviously intending to be 'of deep meaning' & wisdom') to teach us, the viewers & audience, what we must never have heard elsewhere nor know ourselves. How demeaning to be treated as if the artistic author knew & learned so much More than 'the rest of us, peons'.

Spoiler: The film was spoken in Spanish with quick-disappearing English subtitles. The action and images moved quickly so to absorb the dialogue and view the film was a bit tricky. Listening in Spanish and confirming inaudible part with subtitles allowed this reviewer better understanding of what was portrayed than just the reading in English before the next scene explodes on screen.

It is worth seeing for the visuals, the interesting symbols, costumes, even extreme-rebellious scenes of bodies not commonly viewed in usual films.

Or see as much as is enjoyable,as much teaching as viewer needs and walk out before the over-long + over-stretched +over-ego-applause -to-author-The-Originator sets in, because then, the viewers of this film walked out looking for light, ....for air, for the bathroom, quickly !

• - - - - - - -

More info found : re: Peggy Cordero in Wikipedia Spanish says:in July 2015 when she acted as the mother of main protagonist in his youth ....." but "cast" list on IMDb does NOT list her at all anywhere to be found there....except a found 'trivia' comment.

see Wikipedia in Spanish for Peggy Cordero- it includes: Peggy Cordero died on July 9,2017 of heart attack. B.1935-d.2017 She was a social activist during Chile's coup & dictatorship and before then, she was also a recognized actor since 1962. (see: images for this name)

Q: why is hero's "father" or "mother" not listed as characters nor are actors named/ found on IMDb movie site ? see: "contribute.IMDb.com/updates"

13 Minutes (2015)

An (unusual?) view of war resistance from a German against Nazi's.

[8/10 · 13 July 2017]

Most films about Nazi war era is made about victims of any Other ethnic, social group and I have never heard of a common-man-German's resistance nor any Germanic people daring to act against the strict, strident Nazi forces. WWII was horrendous.

This film makes that vision clear and scary, still today. Nazis, as they were clearly depicted in "13 minutes" film still inflicted fear in an audience who knew they were sitting in a safe movie theater…and yet the fanaticism and coldness, heartless obedience was shown, effectively.

And without extra drama or fluff or exaggerations to get ratings or profits. This movie is a necessary 'correction' to the more popular WWII movies, those depicted with "victim-fighting-and-losing" or "victim-turns-hero-and-wins" – the popular, very common versions.

These Nazis were mainly shown as males, as stiff, sharp, stone-immobile -faced and with rigid bodies, even in gestures, expressions & all their movements. Surprisingly, only very few Nazi females were included in film, to balance the understanding of which Germans submitted, why so many Germans obeyed, or how most Germans actually lived their lives within those actual Nazi enforced strictures. yet. these were believable. As was the man who refused them - and suffered strongly for disobedience.

The movie tension was constant & visceral - felt strongly, throughout most of the long movie- even in flashbacks and scenes of the hero's attempts to explain himself after being caught. Torture was difficult to watch - and though this writer is mostly proud of "facing reality, no matter what it is" did close eyes and ears at 2 points to not indulge in horrors on screen.

And to avoid having later prolonged effects from seeing real-life torture, as viewed on such a Big Screen - with loud sounds & music, with gore, extreme pains shown. The cruelty was so easily inflicted - and the helpless of this proud man, who was very brutally punished. For disagreeing, disobeying, failing.

There are No Heroics in watching brutal humanity enjoying or obediently acting-out-orders. The inclusion of no-apparent-exaggerations- but here probably showing realistic depictions - were acted out dramatically, as subtly as is necessary, to make this film appear valid.

"13 minutes" should be seen by all & anyone who has been alive - then and who escaped such pains. And equally by those who have never lived inside such war-gutted societies and with the people who collude in wars - do so for their safety - or they lived there for their benefits of being with those who are the "Winners and In Power & Control" - or are those who collude, and become collaborators. Or those who had to be there mainly for their body-survival - as occurs, in any war, any where else.

Especially those of a younger demographic should view this film, which exposes Germans and Nazis more realistically than American or some other Japanese/European movies dare do.

A Hero is one who acts on their own honorable, responsible, ethical convictions - not hurting others - but who act to prevent worse happening to others too, in their world/ town/ country.

Not to "kill 'em all & sort them out later" . But a hero has to have serious convictions and to be personally courageous - to take personal actions that may put that person in serious danger . To do something on & with purpose - to prevent worse happening for others – that becomes a higher calling / purpose.

Comparatively, all other -mostly American- movies that are Not nearly as realistic, pointed and directed to our heads, as is this one. This film is not just to provoke fear & easy emotions. Most others do not meet the level of truth & honesty, as is well depicted here.

Violet (III) (2014)

More of an Art piece, made in film, than a "movie" ?

[7/10 · 18 May 2017]

Thus movie was strange. So, while in USA we are inundated with silly, superficial movies, films from Flanders (gotta go check a map ?) must inform us of our limitations. This was more of a long-slow-still-unspoken (even with seldom-displayed subtitles in English)so that I often was confused. Not a common or comfortable state of mind.

There was so little dialogue in Violent-Violet that it pointed out how vociferous & vocal we always are in USA . Americans, by comparison, are all-ways burbling, blurting, grimacing and doing some gestural antics... while apparently in Flanders they don't do all that.

That this film was deep, slow, still, photographed mostly with-in shadows, the mood elicited emotional difficulties, but it was still difficult to decipher what and who was who/why/how and what was happening there. The big color blasts and arty-filled screen created the dynamics that the plot, acting and non-dialogue didn't do.

But even then, some scenes had me distracted - thinking "who is that ?" and "what are they doing ?" and "what is happening there?",-like in 1 set of scenes of a man (unclear who he was to story's content) that hinted at a possible secreted-gay clue, maybe ? Or maybe not ? This distraction was not helpful to continuity or being able to follow along and even enjoy the film.

Main theme noted was not 'grief' as advertised, but that young guys in groups – like some of these - who ride low bikes (like "low-riders" but more into learning bike tricks than drunk/drugged and haranguing other people). The male victims can be killed by unknown other males - or even be helpless victims of any crime - and then affected, repressed, confused for long after any traumatic event.

And male-like behaviors require that all remains mostly 'unspoken' - and thus not examined nor well understood. Dangers are not admitted, but happen to young males everywhere, in any culture/country : like in this film where 1 got killed - by someone in another gang (motives unknown, so story was not clear).

And how another 1 young guy - who witnessed his friend be stomped to death - kept quiet. He did not display grief, but rather was unable to express himself, though he was offered the chance more than once.

To display and remind us all of how dangerous it is for young males in ANY society to be damaged by other males -- for reasons often unexpected or unknown -- is important and relevant.

A story that is ignored in the usual push to try to make males be strong "heroes" of every man-child born. It happens. But still this is not very human/ humane.

Violet was very arty and displayed great photography - with big color changes and unexpected stills... darkness prevailing, shadows dramatizing most scenes, totaling a strange viewing experience... it was more like an art installation-exhibit, but put onto film in a darkened theater.

Well worth the ticket price though, for sure ! Even if I did not fully understand nor have all facts or the stories resolved. The experience, the process of viewing what is unknown but often arty is good.Reading reviews Before spoils the unexpected and experience, with expectations and others' spun views. And Violet reminds us that we just don't hardly do ART in USA films.

As Distributors pick the best of foreign films for public's viewing, the movie corporation is Selective for the showing of those who come, pay, leave, & maybe wonder what they had just experienced ? This one thus offers good & unusual film viewing experiences.

The film title was very misleading and seemed not pertinent to the story or viewing, unless one treasures songs over other art forms. Probably very few even knew or had heard of that song or noticed it while viewing a violent-themed film.

Risk (I) (2016)

Must-see-film for those who want to know more than TV news dares reveal.

[9/10 · 15 May 2017]

Preferring to find a movie on what the theme is and liking more imported foreign films and documentaries than those made in prolific USA, here the main person and the well-known 'Wikileaks' was an instant  click,  so had to go and see & learn more than mass media informs us about Julian Assange.  And this writer was totally fascinated and involved throughout entire film. 

While Poitras' personal inserted comments came in  - but voiced more quietly,volume down-  we  had to attended  more to hear and absorb these inserts.  We needed to hear these  added, helpful information bits to the scenes portrayed. 

Assange was mostly seen in close-ups, so his every impartially-held facial expression could still not be easily read.  But some  good glimpses of his attitude were revealed anyhow. He hid some when filmed, even while talking lots, and he sometimes droned on ....so  when his words were mumbled / hummed Assange was  heard less. So while he was carefully conveying some info in his not-subtle ways, at times he left this writer confused, as when he refused to give direct answers to clear questions asked in film.

His female associates were not identified if in  what kind of 'relationship'  to Julian, or what their expertise was.... other than being always there, supportive, helping him groom or  make escapes. That women were always in the " rescuer" roles left the impression that they may be  & still are attracted to Julian as "hero", and  thus to do the usual 'woman's work' only.  As  only assistants ?

Their other values, whatever they are, were not clarified nor appreciated either. Julian's mother, also included in such roles,  was seen as only-adjunct helper. Can this be so ? 

But other scenes showed Julian more actually responding to his circumstances -which is mostly well known & displayed in ordinary TV news clips.

His complaints - while living well - and while limited to living in only 1 fancy embassy- bldg seemed petulant and childish, as he refused to admit  responsibility to eliciting the  'unexpected unwanted consequences' to his work .  His own actions  affected many political people, who still want to censor and punish any 'whistle-blowers', including but not just Assange.

Wikileaks has emerged as a very influential media platform source and  as a threat to those who prefer their secrets kept away from the many people the actions do affect, kill, and distort . Many lives may have been/ are still changed from their exposures, as noted even in the most recent / now current events. 

To  learn more about the main man, tho not the only 1, who still holds dominance on the organization is very relevant and important to us all = the viewers and citizens of these media-blitzed and news-censored worlds. Tho film was a bit long, but still held the viewers' full attention,no one walked out.

This is a must-see film to those who want to better understand the man who  helps  still now reveal" what is happening " behind many locked 'confidential' doors/ documents &emails.  Those are, perhaps, more real than what is exposed  as governments' workings elsewhere.  " Risk" is not a risk but a must-also-see-this-film.... for anyone watching daily propagandized & commercialized  & censored news anywhere.

The Lovers & the Despot (2016)

Brief photo-insights into a land we know about which we know little

[4/10 · 29 September 2016]

BBC is always a label that indicates I will be interested more than American films. The main review above indicating the many lapses of 'what happened then?' to the story presented left gaps to the understanding of the story of these 2 South Koreans, and left me, the viewer, wondering.

And this gaping was not just occasional but repeated with no further references to the lack clarifications - or the 'filling the holes' of their life's story.

However, because it is actual as documentary and many still fotos included where some filming was obviously impossible, the result is what is commonly seen on screens of historical events or celebrities. But then the repeated shots of a tape recorder became boring because they were continually used to validate the story. So those recordings were meant to be educational or make believably.

That the couple were abducted and held against their will is believable. But how the '5 yrs' of the actress's life in North Korea were lived was unclear - as to whether she was a mistress, only-an-actress-object, or a mainly a celebrity -- used to prove North had what the South loved and lost.

And while there is indication of her being drugged when abducted, but then that was left as a vague hint but w/o a more comprehensible description of the drug effects on her - or how long that drugging continued, or did not. I wondered.

That the dictator/ruler of North Korea used these celebrities for PRO-paganda purposes was the important msg. learned, Kim's holding people with the military power all autocratic rulers use. Some descriptions of the North Korea population's emotional reactivity was interesting, and while not stating clearly how that was produced, one could imagine some psychological ways that the repression and group-identity of large groups of people could then enclose them and reproduce their extreme attachment to 'their leader'.

So there were some revealing and educational benefits, plus the unusual topic, and real-story was a good lure to this movie. The female star's descriptions of her life then were believable too. Documentaries are appreciated when they show, teach, reveal, educate and explore what is lacking elsewhere and unknown. This film did so, tho the techniques were often repetitive and boring at times. Still worth watching for the rarity anyhow.

Nova: Cold Case JFK (2013) Season 40, Episode 22

Bullet theory to claim 1 bullet theory, may be mistaken too.

[2/10 · 19 August 2016]

PBS just repeated a 2016 viewing on this JFK 1-bullet-did-it-all theory, with a clear intent and attempt to prove this is "truth".

However, even from this film's beginning it was apparently trying 'too hard' to convince viewers. And it tried to claim 'evidence' - with the use of a sharpshooter, many mechanical measurements, and repeated scenes of the main Zapruder film used to review the actual shooting. Zapruder was a private individual who captured most clearly the events of the shooting, inadvertently.

The desire of this NOVA done mostly 'to convince' became quickly evident -so that the viewer had better watch carefully about what they were being led to believe. The repetitive scenes of a replication of shooting the same type of gun and bullet, and repeated excessive focus on that 1 shiny bullet - the one that was said to have been found on a stretcher, as none were removed from the 2 hit bodies. This part of film quickly became boring and tedious.

Because of the old doubts and still relevant questions of our USA's very famous president's sudden shooting death, a viewer chose may watch the entire NOVA documentary. And because of NOVA's other scientific-like films, some of which are more intriguing than others, viewer may linger to the end of this one. Otherwise, a viewer may choose to quickly change channels or dismiss this documentary as not documenting, but rather as another attempt to propagandize the Official Government's repeated version of events.

The original shooter -Oswald- was not discussed nor his history nor his expertise in being able to shoot so accurately -- and then hit 2 important officials with just 1 of 3 bullets – apparently from a cheap Italian gun. Nor did the film explore or discuss the man who shot the shooter -Ruby- and why that killing was so easily possible – even with trained secret servicemen and so many other law enforcement all present. Both shooters were given short shrift and quickly dismissed, as if apparently not so relevant to this story.

The bullet was the star of this show and remained the shiny gold-like looking phallic symbol - like a hero would be, if encased in a metal jacket.

Other theories of how the tragedy happened were never mentioned, nor was it even hinted that other versions and questions still existed. Leaving so much controversy, and other versions of how these events occurred, out of the film then erroneously left the viewer with the seemingly 'intended-idea' that this was Proof - and no further questions need be asked.

This is an error, as so far J.F. Kennedy's death and all the strange, illogically & not explainable facts and unreasonable stories have left The People insecure. This very important aspect of our USA government's ability to tell The American People a story that sounds truthful, has been still left in doubt.

The result contributes to The American People's distrust of their elected representatives and politics- and as these 2016 political campaigns further indicate - the public distrusts and does not believe a lot of what American government claims to be telling us - it's citizens – hardly a few truths they can agree to - and versions the public would really like to believe.

This film is only worth watching to see yet another JFK shooting story – one trying to claim it can verify what it clearly cannot. Otherwise, the film is a strained effort to convince. Time wasted. Once again, yet another one.

quote from film: "LUKE HAAG: The essence of good forensic science is to look at what are the competing explanations of an event. And if you can rule out that which is impossible, that which remains, however seemingly improbable, is the truth." This was a clever wording - to end show and imply- falsely – that what was there so beleaguered and strained to present as 'evidential' was "the truth" – but it is NOT.