Film Reviews from Two Guys in the Dark: April 2018

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Little Pink House and Short Takes on 29 to Life

Fighting Back Against “Enema Domain”—or so it probably felt like

(plus something completely different this time in Short Takes)

Reviews by Ken Burke

Little Pink House (Courtney Balaker, 2017)

Courtney Balaker, Susette Kelo, lawyer Dana Berliner

“Executive Summary” (no spoilers): Based on fact (so nothing important I'd say about this film would actually be a spoiler if you know what happened in 1998-2005 or care to do a little easy historical research), this is about Susette Kelo’s attempt (joined by similarly distressed neighbors) to keep her working-class-neighborhood-home (but nicely located on the Thames River) in New London, CT when Pfizer Inc. wanted to buy it for their needs, supported by the governor and a local redevelopment agency who attempt to use the lucrative higher tax base as rationale for supposedly helping the poor in this economically-impacted-city (where miseries of various kinds have been brewing ever since Eugene O’Neill recounted his intra-familial-traumas, some based in their summer home called the Monte Christo Cottage which serves as the fictionalized setting for Long Day’s Journey into Night [written 1941-’42, first performed in 1956; I attempted to visit this National Historic Landmark a few years ago but it was closed that day, yet even looking in the windows easily evoked that tragic play, just as other tragedies would play out later in another part of New London as shown in Little Pink House]). The events of this film largely focus on conflicting forces with their differing interpretations of government-allowed “eminent domain” seizure of private land for public purposes, as to whether greater revenues from the revised locale justify such seizures (even with adequate compensation) rather than what the Constitution implies about such actions being normally for actual improvement structures such as lakes and libraries. Given the outcome’s the main drama here (plus depictions of rousing community support for the Kelo-led-fight) I’ll leave that to your Internet searches or simply reading my extended comments just below.

Here’s the trailer: (Use the full screen button in the image’s lower right to enlarge it; activate that same button on the full screen’s lower right or your “esc” keyboard key to return to normal size.)

(Sorry, but I couldn't find a trailer for this film that doesn't look underexposed. What's up with that?)

If you can abide plot spoilers read on, but as this blog’s intended for those who’ve seen the film—or want to save some bucks—to help any of you who want to learn more details yet avoid important plot-reveals I’ll identify any give-away sentences/sentence-clusters like this:

⇒The first and last words will be noted with arrows and red.⇐ OK, now continue on if you prefer.

(You should know from the start I found a dearth of available photos to accompany this review.)

What Happens: Unlike with a lot of releases toward late 2017 based in factual material I haven’t been reviewing much of that sort of thing lately, the last one being Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle—just kidding, besides I didn’t even review it, just made some fleeting comments in a posting soon after Easter. Actually, the closest film based in reality I’ve explored somewhat recently was The Death of Stalin (Armando Iannucci, 2017; review in our March 21, 2018 posting), but I get the sense that one took great liberties with actual historical accounts for purposes of absurdist humor. Now, with Avengers: Infinity War (Anthony and Joe Russo) on the near horizon, I don’t anticipate any other “based on true events” cinematic critiques by me in the near future meaning this one’s not only a bit unique for such content but also resolved in its main events in 2005 so there’s very little I could actually ruin your anticipation with in a spoiler; however, I'll steer clear of the payoff as it really would ruin your anticipation of what’s this story’s all about if I revealed it to you without the proper warning noted just above. With all of that as a wordy prelude, let me take you back to 1997.

Susette Kelo (Catherine Keener) is an EMT paramedic (Redundant? Could be; I just want to make sure I’m identifying her properly.) in New London, CT—a pleasant enough place but presented as economically-struggling during the time frame of this film so there was mutual concern from city authorities to find ways of increasing the revenue base along with worries from limited-income-citizens to find affordable housing. (I went briefly through that area once roughly when … Pink House’s narrative winds down—a colleague from Mills College where I taught prior to retirement had taken a job at the city’s Connecticut College, another had retired a few years earlier and was living nearby—but can’t say I saw enough to get any sense of local impoverishment at that time.) She’s in the process of leaving her alcoholic second husband (we don’t get any testimony about the first one, very little about #2), investing her meager resources into her first owned-home located in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood, regarded as run-down by those of loftier means (not helped by its proximity to a sewage plant) but a comfortable locale for its inhabitants with a scenic advantage, being on the Thames River where it flows into the larger waters of Long Island Sound.*

*I don't know how accurately this film portrays Kelo’s private life (or that of her antagonists), but you want to get a fuller sense of the official record behind this presentation you can go here for a short (5:14) video of her speaking about her ordeal in 2009, or here for another video (6:05) from the Cato Institute about her situation; a slightly-longer-video (10:59) from the Institute for Justice provides a host of news clips from the time (along with many other options to explore this topic on the right side of the screen of this YouTube site—at least on my computer, but I also note links there to other videos I’ve recently used in postings so I’m not too sure what shows up on a more universal basis).

(I've learned from experience: Be wary of what you might hear from college presidents—especially this one.)

As Susette settles into her new house (refurbished solely by her, then painted pink [or so it looks; she claims it’s actually another hue, but I didn’t catch the name]), she makes friends with local deli owner Billy Von Winkle (Colin Cunningham)—who’s very glad to find any new customer for the meager merchandise on his somewhat empty shelves—and an antiques dealer (whose store is packed compared to Billy’s but not with the treasures dedicated antiques buyers hope to find), Tim LeBlanc (Callum Keith Rennie), with whom Susette soon begins a romantic relationship. Meanwhile New London’s mayor, Lloyd Beachy (Garry Chalk), desperately open for options to help his hardscrabble town, finds an attractive offer from the New London Development Corporation with local (fictional, but modeled on Connecticut College president of that time, Claire L. Gaudiani) Walthrop College president Charlotte Wells (Jeanne Tripplehorn), a good-looking-shark, newly installed as NLDC's head to essentially buy good PR with the community. She’s working in tandem with the Governor (Aaron Douglas)—also presented as a fictional construct but clearly referencing actual GOP officeholder John Rowland—and Pfizer Pharmaceuticals CEO Howard Munson (Michael Kopsa) (he's possibly another fictional construct but Mayor Beachy’s real; what else is real here is a nice comparison cut that would've made Soviet master filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein proud as we switch from Munson’s brain-trust happily eating lobster in an upscale restaurant to Susette and Tim munching on pizza in her modest home) looking for an ideal track of land for a huge new research facility to mass-produce the potentially (then actually) game-changing ED-solution, Viagra.

Here's a photo from actual Fort Trumbull area during the time period in which this film is set.

Everyone—except the residents of Fort Trumbull, some of whom are retirees who’ve lived there all their lives—thinks this riverside location would be ideal for the substantial employment/tax-infusion project (the Gov’s willing to invest $75 million for infrastructure improvements to help the project along, inspired by the promised publicity of how he helped these Democrat-leaning-citizens of his state would help his own Republican-Presidential-campaign-ambitions) so as the narrative shifts to 1999 we find the NLDC (represented by a young woman, Lynette Vargas [Donna Benedicto], with a big smile and a handy clipboard) offering Susette $68,000 for her home (an improvement over what she paid for it), although neither she nor most of her neighbors are interested in moving (as well as not able to then buy anything somewhere else nearby). Discussions of eminent domain arise (allowed under the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment) where governments may take possession of private land for public use (roads, bridges, hospitals, etc. after giving proper compensation to the private owners), which the New London honchos are eager to do (most of the Fort Trumbull residents aren’t selling) with Wells using the strategy of Pfizer’s local debut as an economic boon ($12 million) that could aid the city’s poor (sounds good until you see snarky Charlotte promoting it).

When local news reporters are stonewalled by NLDC for not responding to Freedom of Information Act requests, the story of threatened citizens vs. heartless bureaucrats starts drawing some national attention with Institute for Justice lawyer Scott Bullock (Giacomo Baessato)—as actual as Susette, in fact he’s now IJ’s president and general counsel—showing up to help, but the New London City Council goes ahead with the eminent domain plan (and accompanying eviction notices) at a meeting seeming to be over (to clear the few visitors attending) then quickly reconvened to slip approval through before the press is aware. By 2000, reluctant Susette’s become an outspoken community leader against this cruel land grab (as a counter to the public face of smug/glib Ms. Wells), but her resolve’s challenged when the house next door to hers is smashed apart by heavy machinery (reminding me of an equally-sad-scene in The Grapes of Wrath [John Ford, 1940] when Muley Graves’ [John Qualen] homestead farmhouse is demolished by a bank-approved-tractor as his family stands there, watching their entire existence ripped away, while Susette defiantly sits on her porch even as her neighboring home is destroyed). By 2001, the situation’s in the courts and the news, with a David vs. Goliath scenario easily gaining public favor; in 2002 there’s an offer for Kelo’s home to be saved but not those of most of her remaining Fort Trumbull stalwarts so she appeals it in court, continuing the fight with the Gov. dismissing Wells from NLDC in a nasty confrontational scene, but victories are matched by defeats as Tim’s badly injured in some accident, leaving him mentally and physically impaired so Susette’s now got to deal with his constant care as well, which she does including marrying him. Finally, the case winds its way to the CT Supreme Court which rules 4-3 in favor of Pfizer, accepting the argument its facility (along with upscale condos, a luxury hotel) will be an appropriate economic uplift for struggling New London.

(Another Fort Trumbull actuality photo, a feral cat now living in the abandoned area after Pfizer moved on.)

⇒In 2004 the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the appeal, giving New London city attorney Tim Bratten (Jerry Wasserman) another chance to aggressively make his case against Susette and her vocal Fort Trumbull supporters; sadly, the Court's 2005 decision goes against her—5-4—so the remaining residents have 90 days to evacuate, although at least Kelo’s husband’s recovered by this time so he’s able to join with her in a final rousing crowd scene at the little pink house as her tireless efforts are celebrated by the many people locally (and nationwide) who stood with her in this fundamental Constitutional fight. Ending graphics, photos, and news footage show us the actual woman, along with noting many states have changed their laws to better protect homeowners and small commercial property owners from corporate business interests; ironically, when Pfizer’s tax break in New London ended in 2009 they moved out, leaving the Fort Trumbull area as a huge undeveloped vacant lot even today (a little extra research also reveals the pink house was moved to near downtown New London but Susette no longer lives there); another revelation is this film’s somewhat-fictionalized-Governor (and his real-life-model) went to prison for mail and tax fraud).⇐

Once again, the real Susette Kelo, this time with her husband, Tim LeBlanc.

So What? Given the events depicted (somewhat fictionalized as they may be) in Little Pink House are a matter of extensive public record (various search items such as Susette Kelo, New London Development Corporation, eminent domain, etc. could keep you busy for quite some time getting a full background on this event and its aftermath) I’ll just refer you to this IJ site for a summary of the situation, including a timeline of what happened along with copies of pertinent documents (including many amicus briefs filed in support of Kelo’s arguments), although you might also be interested in another site which includes details (scroll down quite a bit to get there) of how a dozen of 42 (some accounts say 44) states have since modified their eminent domain laws to give the better protection noted just above (along with President George W. Bush in 2006 instructing the U.S. government to also restrict use of eminent domain claims for such economic reasons as in the Kelo case). However, as a longtime-liberal (despite my family and environmental upbringing deep in the heart of Texas) I now better see at least some of the libertarian stances taken by those who oppose governmental meddling in private affairs (which in principle I support, notably in matters of personal choice such as interracial or same-sex marriage, a woman’s full command of her body regarding pregnancy vs. birth control/abortion, etc., but I’ve also found it often takes governmental action via courts and/or legislatures to insure such rights as well as more public protections regarding education, housing, employment given how entrenched the various hatreds, biases, and phobias are in so many global societies) because the normally (or at least often)-liberal-leaning-judges were the ones voting in favor of the City of New London in this case: John Paul Stevens (yes, the retired Justice now advocating repeal of the Second Amendment [I agree, although I might tolerate merely some modification of it, if only to get such an almost-impossible-concept to become law in our gun-happy U.S.A.]) wrote the majority opinion, agreed to by Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, and David Souter while the opposition (in favor of Kelo) was led by Sandra Day O’Conner, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas, so I can understand why some call this Supreme Court decision the most despised in U.S. history (I’d still give some consideration for that "honor" to the 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission result, which sanctioned the flood of corporate cash flowing into election campaigns).

This flip of the usual liberal/conservative Supreme Court votes (at least in terms of how they’re purported to come out) among 2005's group of justices notwithstanding, the public—and resulting state-by-state—sympathy for the principles Kelo, her neighbors, her lawyers, and her groundswell of supporters advocated led to significant changes in how corporate greed (and its attending influence on local governments) can just run roughshod over the interests of private citizens so the film’s ultimately an uplifting history lesson that most of us could use as an active reminder, because I doubt this situation or its aftermath is an active awareness for most of us unless some megabucks entity suddenly wants our property just for a big-box-store, multi-story-hotel, sports stadium, or additional Amazon headquarters (I’m not anti-Jeff Bezos like petulant President Trump—in fact my wife, Nina, and I buy quite a bit from Amazon even as disturbed as it makes us when such purchases help undermine our local merchants, while Alexa [when she’s in sync with our requests] has become a very useful daily tool, but you can see again in the rabid race so many cities are in for final contender status for that new sprawling corporate addition the obscene offers in terms of tax breaks and other perks being promised, all echoing what’s presented in Little Pink House). Citizen complaints of the most vocal nature—with their resulting round-the-clock-news-coverage—will continue to be one of the most effective strategies we can collectively take to at least attempt to protect outgunned-victims of thinking inside the (big) box, along with continuing to elect leaders, from city councils on up to our national officeholders, who demonstrate genuine response to constituent concerns (even when those constituents live in districts that don’t support the same priorities I do), but along with ongoing private activism it certainly doesn’t hurt to have vehicles such as Little Pink House appear in our mass media to help remind us of the personal dedication (and pro-bono legal support) needed to keep fighting for fairness in all of our nationwide-communities.

Bottom Line Final Comments: Of course, the connected difficulty of using media forums to promote progressive (or at least humane) public policy is the expense of getting these messages made, then distributed in venues where they can get some attention. Unfortunately, I can’t yet make that argument for Little Pink House although it might catch on enough to gain a bit more exposure than it’s currently experiencing. Despite solid reviews at Rotten Tomatoes (85% positive) that result's based only on 13 critics (if they’d ever let me join them this percentage would be even better, but despite your ongoing, loyal, worldwide support I can promise you I’ll never meet RT’s intended-for-those-who-review-movies-for-a-living-criteria) while those who attend to the normally-more-stringent-Metacritic results won’t be much encouraged (55% average score) but that’s based on just 9 reviews so attention’s been slow in coming even from those whose careers are focused on film analysis. Likewise, even though … Pink House dates back to early 2017 it’s just now in domestic (U.S.-Canada) release in a mere 9 theaters (no info on international distribution but unlikely at this point, especially in countries where “eminent domain” means “move now or else”); that’s resulted in a very impressive per-theater-return of $7,612, yet the sum total’s only $68,507 so far, with my hopes you might keep an eye out for it in various video options as that’s your most likely access to this well-intentioned, thought-provoking sample of cinema. I'll admit it’s more of an illustrated history lesson than a tension-filled-drama (especially if you look anything up on the Internet before attending or are conditioned by fictional courtroom victories to assume justice will prevail in the end), but at least it shows pursuing due process can lead to after-the-fact-victories even if they may be slow in coming through the usual backroom-bargaining-legislative-processes.

I’ll conclude my comments on this film of modest proportions (especially compared to the Avengers … juggernaut set to hit thousands of theaters this coming weekend) with an obvious, equally-straightforward song—chosen for my usual wrap-up-device of a Musical Metaphor—John Mellencamp’s “Pink Houses” (from his 1983 Uh-Huh album) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOfkpu6749w (the official music video, that, in my mind, attempts to illustrate how patriotism can be displayed in contexts that aren’t always right-wing-based), which might could have served as an inspiration for Susette Kelo to choose the color she did for her precious domicile (but I have no idea if there’s any connection) given its lyrics about “Ain’t that America Home of the free Little pink houses For you and me [although Kelo’s initial exhilaration about her new home takes a turn she never expected] But just like everything else Those old crazy dreams Just kinda came and went.” Mellencamp reports he was inspired while driving through Indiana where he saw an old Black man sitting contentedly on his porch of a little pink house, but it’s clear the overall tone (despite the upbeat tempo) contains some sarcastic commentary about how “there’s winners and there’s losers But they ain’t no big deal ‘Cause the simple man, baby Pays for thrills, the bills, The pills that kill” (with that last line more poignant than ever due to our current opioid crisis in those same Middle America areas long touted—especially lately for political payoff—as the true “home of the free”). There’s joy (even if faked a bit) and heartache in this song, just like in the film. (A final political note on “Pink Houses”: lefty-Democrat Mellencamp questioned the John McCain 2008 Presidential campaign’s use of the song so they voluntarily stopped but in 2010 when the National Organization for Marriage [an anti-gay-matrimony-group] also tried to use it they were hit with a cease and desist order; however, Mellencamp performed it himself at the 2009 Barack Obama Inaugural Celebration.)

SHORT TAKES (spoilers also appear here)

29 to Life (Alex Magaña)

Barnaby, a young (but getting older) one-time-wannabe-chef living in L.A. is having a miserable blockade in his life as his girlfriend angrily breaks up with him, his parents kick him out, he has no prospects except to sleep in his car and shower at the beach until former high-school-friend Madison comes back into his life, at least offering encouragement to trust his talents.

Here’s the trailer:

Before reading any further, I’ll ask you to refer to the plot spoilers warning far above.

As I’ve noted periodically in past postings, Two Guys in the Dark are always open (as time permits) to consider reviewing cinematic products from independent filmmakers (no compensation to us) still establishing themselves in this competitive industry, so when someone makes us an offer to review a movie we’d likely not be aware of otherwise we try to respond, which is the case here with 29 to Life, described to me by the director (who’s truly an auteur, in the fullest sense of the word, being also the producer, scriptwriter, cinematographer, editor, chief lighting technician, and sound designer—in fact, he lists only 2 other crew members for this feature-length production) as “a mix between a coming of age drama and a romantic comedy” about a guy, Barnaby (Murphy Martin)—prefers "Arnie"—who at 29 is already about to give up on life because nothing’s really gone the way he’d hoped it would be by now nor does he have a job (he graduated from culinary school but ended up employed at a place where the food’s intended to be functional, not exceptional, while he considers himself a chef not just a cook), a girlfriend (Elaina [Hayley Amriz] has just angrily broken up with him citing all of his inadequacies), a place to live (his parents [Sherry Driggs, Rocky Hart]—well, mostly Dad—have grown tired of him still living at home so they’ve kicked him out, put all his stuff on the lawn, left him a few bucks in the mailbox), or much of anything else (he even gets hustled on a local basketball court by a mouthy little kid, losing $40 he can’t afford to part with as his resources are almost gone) so he’s now sleeping in his car, showering on the beach (naked, so he’s quite the morning vision for occasional passersby), hungry with not much hope for any improvement so, with nothing better to do, he wanders off to go to his 10-year-high-school-reunion.

There he gets some light back into his life via reconnecting with old friend Madison (Diana Solis), offering him the first nice conversation we’ve seen so far. Promising to stay in touch, Arnie goes about seeking jobs but the absurd lies on his résumé (including a claim he cured SARS [Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome]) leave his potential employers either incredulous or convinced he’s overqualified for their offerings. The only thing he finds is raking leaves in a park but he’s so bored he sleeps most of the day under a tree, leading to an immediate firing (and $1 for his "work"). Madison manages to get him a gig catering a party for her friend, Chloe (Lauren Waites), which goes well regarding his food preparation (so he makes $300) despite bickering with the hostess over his lame attempts at jokes. In an attempt to celebrate with Madison at a local club they run into Elaina and her new guy, Geppetto (Rhett Wellington), leading to a revelation she was cheating on Arnie long before they broke up (he's really hurt by this). In retaliation, Arnie orders an enormous bunch of junk food to be delivered to Elaina’s place, later he and Madison cover Elaina's car with Saran Wrap, but then Madison has to bail him out when a couple of cops finally arrest him for his nude beach showers. ⇒This doesn’t discourage her from continuing to help him, though, so she sends his honest résumé around, gets him an interview with a respected restaurant, leading to a job offer as a head chef—but only if he’ll move to Seattle, an option coming after their snuggly-night at a hotel where he assumed sex but she only wanted to give him a chance to fulfill a childhood dream of jumping on a commercial bed. Finally, as the result of an inside-joke about New England Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady, he decides to skip the job, stay in L.A. with Madison, now self-confident enough (we hope) to find another opportunity, allowing their new romance to blossom.⇐

29 to Life’s an oddly charming movie, "oddly" because Arnie’s clumsy manner coupled with a hefty dose of self-loathing makes it hard to warm up to him (Martin’s portrayal only enhances this, intended as a sincere, not a backhanded compliment, really!)—although Madison’s always a pleasant presence whenever she’s on screen. Further, despite some useful humor in the exaggerated résumé routine and unexpected funny bits using a mysterious thief (Minchi Murakami) who robs Arnie of his attempted bag of recycling items, then tries to break into the car where Arnie’s sleeping followed by an attempt to hide in plain sight on the pavement, there are just too many scenes where the dialogue falls flat (sorry, Alex; I know you wrote it) or the situations just drag on too long (Arnie—misportrayed in the nightclub scene as “Barney,” as in the famous kids’ TV purple dinosaur—and Geppetto—with obvious reference to Disney’s Pinocchio [extensive directors, 1940]—trade insults about their names) so even though the 100 min. running time isn’t excessive at all for a feature, this one could easily have been cut back by 10 min. or so to have better pacing. Still, 29 to Life (clever title, indicating Arnie’s sense of being sentenced to a seeming-eternity of continuing to be himself) is a pleasant amusement (containing some great aerial cinematography of L.A. along with a very energetic soundtrack), available now on Amazon Prime, although you can also get a bit more information at IMDb (where you’ll find a few user/external reviews in addition to mine [a bit more embracing of this odd movie than I'm being] but there’s nothing yet at RT or MC).

I liked watching 29 to Life, appreciate Alex Magaña making it available to me, encourage you to see it on Amazon Prime if it sounds appealing to your tastes, and will leave you for now with a Musical Metaphor that speaks to me about Arnie’s generally-adolescent-attitude that’s left him in a state of arrested development long past when such feelings and behaviors were more appropriate for high school (admittedly, with Madison’s help he finally seems to be on the road to rising above such limitations but that’s how he functions for most all of the movie; thus, on with the song). It’s the Beach Boys’ “Girl Don’t Tell Me” (from the 1965 Summer Days (And Summer Nights!!) album) which you can enjoy at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS94YK3pscs presenting a brief story about a haughty girl (like Elaina), a now-cynical-guy who was devastated by her (like Arnie), and a set of adolescent feelings and actions on the level of the football that Arnie painstakingly forged famous player signatures on, all hopefully to be washed away by the new tide Madison’s ridden in on. (Just to help take us out this week in an equally-clumsy-manner, though, here’s one more video of that song with the only live performance I could find, not all of the Beach Boys but at least we get Brian Wilson, Al Jardine, and David Marks; the video imagery is often terrible here in an acknowledgement to Mr. Magaña that no matter how hard you work on polishing your presentation somebody [like me] will always come along to undermine it for you, even with their best intentions.)

Related Links Which You Might Find Interesting:

We encourage you to visit the summary of Two Guys reviews for our past posts.* Overall notations for this blog—including Internet formatting craziness beyond our control—may be found at our Two Guys in the Dark homepage. If you’d like to Like us on Facebook please visit our Facebook page. We appreciate your support whenever and however you can offer it!

*A Google software glitch causes every Two Guys posting prior to August 26, 2016 to have an inaccurate (dead) link to this Summary page; from then forward, though, this link is accurate.

Here’s more information about Little Pink House:

http://littlepinkhousemovie.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvYQpSDbURs (3:52 interview with director Courtney

Balaker and actor Jeanne Tripplehorn) + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94manpPJUjs

(2:57 completion of that interview)

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/little_pink_house

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/little-pink-house

Please note that to Post a Comment below about our reviews you need to have either a Google account (which you can easily get at https://accounts.google.com/NewAccount if you need to sign up) or other sign-in identification from the pull-down menu below before you preview or post.

If you’d rather contact Ken directly rather than leaving a comment here please use my email address of kenburke409@gmail.com. (But if you truly have too much time on your hands you might want to explore some even-longer-and-more-obtuse-than-my-film-reviews—if that even seems possible—academic articles about various cinematic topics at my website,

https://kenburke.academia.edu, which could really give you something to talk to me about.)

By the way, if you’re ever at The Hotel California knock on my door—but you know what the check out policy is so be prepared to stay for awhile. Ken

P.S. Just to show that I haven’t fully flushed Texas out of my system here’s an alternative destination for you, Home in a Texas Bar, with Gary P. Nunn and Jerry Jeff Walker. But wherever the rest of my body may be my heart’s always with my longtime-companion, lover, and wife, Nina Kindblad, so here’s our favorite shared song—Neil Young’s "Harvest Moon"

—from the performance we saw at the Desert Trip concerts in Indio, CA on October 15, 2016 (as a full moon was rising over the stadium) because “I’m still in love with you,” my dearest, a never-changing-reality even as the moon waxes and wanes over the months/years to come.

OUR POSTINGS PROBABLY LOOK BEST ON THE MOST CURRENT VERSIONS OF MAC OS AND THE SAFARI WEB BROWSER (although Google Chrome usually is decent also); OTHERWISE, BE FOREWARNED THE LAYOUT MAY SEEM MESSY AT TIMES.

Finally, for the data-oriented among you, Google stats say over the past month (which they seem to measure from right now back 30 days) the total unique hits at this site were 4,793 (honestly, this is an enormous drop from a previous high of about 80,000, which occurred just around a month ago;
I have no idea what causes the ebb and flow of our international readership so at this rate we may vanish completely, but I’ll hold out hope an upward trend might emerge again soon); below is a snapshot of where and by what means those responses have come from within the previous week:

Thursday, April 19, 2018

Beirut and Short Takes on A Quiet Place

Disturbing Horrors, Past and Future

Reviews by Ken Burke

Beirut (Brad Anderson)

“Executive Summary” (no spoilers): Beginning in 1972 Beirut we find top diplomat Mason Skiles in a secure position, given his previous studies of Arabic language and culture; however, his pessimistic-tranquility is shattered when gunmen invade an Embassy party to grab his teenage ward, Karim, with unintentional gunfire accidentally killing Skiles' wife, Nadia. Jumping ahead to 1982, Mason’s in Boston in a new career as a negotiator (not entirely successful) when he gets an offer (more of a demand) to return to Beirut to give a lecture. Once there he finds his real purpose is to negotiate the release of kidnapped CIA agent Cal Riley, his former close friend. To further complicate matters, the Palestinian terrorist group making the demands is headed by Karim who wants to exchange Cal for Karim’s notorious brother, assumed to also be held but it’s unknown as to who has him. There’s a lot of well-crafted-tension in this drama set in a time when civil war was brutally tearing Lebanon apart, with Israeli invasion on the horizon, so there’s constant deception, infighting (even among the U.S. diplomats and spies), along with danger as Mason tries desperately to resolve his time-dictated-crisis, ultimately with aid from CIA agent Sandy Crowder, initially more of an antagonist to him. Critical response to Beirut is mostly positive, but there are also complaints that despite its previous-century-setting this story continues to stir contemporary Islamophobia with further complaints it was shot in Morocco without the use of Lebanese actors; you can examine some of that controversy below without getting into spoiler territory if you desire.

⇒The first and last words will be noted with arrows and red.⇐ OK, now continue on if you prefer.

What Happens: In 1972 we meet Mason Skiles (Jon Hamm), a seasoned-yet-properly-cynical-career-diplomat (Deputy Chief of [Embassy? It's not clear—to me anyway—as I tried desperately to follow the narrative.] Mission) stationed in Beirut, Lebanon with his wife, Nadia (Lïela Bekhti), and a formerly-homeless 13-year-old, Karim (Idir Chender), who’s been living with them for awhile. Their relatively-peaceful-lives are disrupted one night at a lavish U.S. Embassy party when authorities show up wanting to take in Karim because his older brother, Rafid Abu Rajal (Mohamed Attougui [according to one cast site but noted as Hicham Ouraqa at another—some list him as Raffik but that’s not how it’s spelled in the trailer’s subtitles—where Karim is listed as Yoav Sadian Rosenberg, with neither name appearing elsewhere so the actors may be as oblique as some of the plot; sorry for any mistakes presented here]), was just part of the atrocious Palestinian attack on the Israeli Olympic team in Munich where 11 hostages died (actual killers were from a group calling themselves Black September but in this film they’re referred to as the Militia of Islamic Liberation). Skiles objects, tries to hide the boy, but the party’s interrupted by masked terrorists (including the brother) with one of them holding a hostage while Mason’s friend Cal Riley (Mark Pellegrino)—either a diplomat or a CIA agent, hard to tell what the difference might be in this film's political situations—sneaks up for a shot at the guy which kills him but as he dies he pulls the trigger on his semi-automatic-weapon with the resulting hail of bullets killing Nadia. By 1982 Mason’s in Boston as a conflict negotiator (as well as a serious alcoholic) trying to bring unlikely resolution to a labor-management-dispute which is going badly enough already when the partner in his 2-man-firm tells him he’s leaving for another job. Mason soon gets another opportunity, though, when former contacts at the State Dept. tell him he’s been invited to lecture at Beirut’s American University, an offer put to him in such a way that he has no choice but to accept. Back in the Middle East he finds he’s been assigned to CIA agent Sandy Crowder (Rosamund Pike) as his handler because he’s there to negotiate the release of captured hostage Cal, thus Mason has been specifically requested.

When the kidnappers arrange a meeting with Skiles their angry leader’s complaining about various irrelevant things when he’s suddenly shot from behind by a young guy who turns out to be Karim, offering to trade Cal for Rafid who’s being held by someone, probably the Israelis because he’s been involved in so many gruesome attacks on them. They refuse to acknowledge having Rafid in custody but imply they do, say they’ll turn him over if the U.S. provides them info on military installations in neighboring Syria (which are assumed to actually be Russian bunkers—the situation on the ground doesn’t seem to have changed much over the decades, has it?) because they’re about ready to invade Lebanon anyway. Matching the locations of devastated neighborhoods everywhere is the anger shown by Cal’s wife, Alice (Kate Fleetwood), when she meets with Mason at her partially-destroyed-former apartment, then the intensity rises as a bomb goes off during Mason’s lecture allowing him to evade Sandy, then be taken by Karim to meet briefly with Cal to verify he’s still alive (although time’s running out for him because no progress has been made on finding Rafid). ⇒Through some coded words with Cal, Mason returns to that apartment to search for something when Sandy finds him there, tells him she already retrieved what he’s looking for which is evidence Cal was gathering on crimes by some of the American diplomats (giving us reason to think they may have aided in his abduction). At this point Mason and Sandy decide Rafid’s actually being held by the Palestine Liberation Organization in an attempt to prevent this more-radical-splinter-group from drawing Israel into an invasion of Lebanon (with misguided hopes from Rafid’s group they’d be better able to battle that fierce army on what they now know as “home turf,” I assume) so she steals $4 million from the Embassy, they make a deal with the local PLO honcho, an exchange is set up (with the usual nail-biting-scenes of Mason and Sandy getting through various obstacles to deliver Rafid), but as Cal is freed one of the snipers Sandy recruited to keep things honest gets carried away, shoots Rafid. As it all wraps up, Cal’s exposé leads to some Embassy/CIA arrests clearing Sandy of her unauthorized actions while setting her up to take over the operation with a hint that she might be in contact with Mason again sometime in the future.⇐

(In all honesty, to acknowledge the naysayers about Beirut here's a comparison between then and now.)

So What? Beirut marks the second cinematic story I’ve seen this year presenting Lebanon in what could be considered a negative light. The first was The Insult (Ziad Doueiri, 2017; review in our February 1, 2018 posting), an Oscar finalist for Best Foreign Language Film which was focused on contemporary problems in this oft-maligned-country, exploring intense tensions between native Lebanese—especially Christians—and the many Palestinians who’ve been relocated there into refugee camps because of the hostilities with Israel, with the irony that it found little opportunity to be screened in the director’s home country as a result of his having shot his previous film, The Attack (2012), in Tel Aviv, Israel, marking him as a traitor in the eyes of many of his countrymen. Beirut’s come in for a lot of criticism as well but this time from Lebanese and other Arabs/Muslims (there’s no automatic overlap between these ethnic and religious groups, just a strong likelihood) who’ve taken offense at what they perceive as Islamophobia, depictions of the Arabs in this film as being vicious terrorists, as well as complaints it wasn’t even filmed in Lebanon nor does it feature Lebanese actors. You can begin to get the complaints from a video (8:23) featuring a young Lebanese woman railing on the trailer—which she hadn’t even seen, so we watch her immediate, dismissive reactions (although she seems to be citing the contemporary situation in her country rather than focusing on what the film depicts in 1982, when she was likely not born yet), then there's a more nuanced response by the New York Times’ Sopan Deb: "What seemed to bother viewers most was the trailer’s almost exclusive focus on Americans, signaling that the film might reduce Lebanon’s complicated, sectarian civil war to a flashy backdrop for Mr. Hamm. Some worried that Lebanese people would not only be bit players in their own history, but violent ones at that. [¶] There are so many stories to draw from the civil war," Ms. Charafeddine said, but the filmmakers 'chose o overlook all of that because they wanted to portray Lebanon in a certain light."

Screenwriter/co-producer Tony Gilroy (who admits he's never been to Lebanon but does have an extensive résumé producing successful scripts focusing on dramatic conflicts and/or extensive action—including Dolores Claiborne [Taylor Hackford, 1995], The Devil’s Advocate [Hackford, 1997], The Bourne Identity [Doug Liman, 2002], The Bourne Supremacy [Paul Greengrass, 2004], The Bourne Ultimatum [Greengrass, 2007], Michael Clayton [Tony Gilroy, 2007], The Bourne Legacy [Gilroy, 2012], Rogue One: A Star Wars Story [Gareth Edwards, 2016; review in our January 4, 2017 posting]) counters the above complains (in a 4:40 video where he’s facing a similarly-oppositional-interviewer, but she's not seemingly of a Muslim/Arab heritage) by noting such explanations as there are no notable Lebanese actors because there are notable Lebanese characters (he sees all of the primary cast—American, Palestinian, Israeli—as being invaders) and the film was shot in Morocco for insurance purposes (with locals for the minor roles and extras) as well as Tangier offering neighborhoods that still have the bombed-out-appearance needed to depict 1982 Beirut while the actual city has been notably rebuilt, yet he still considers the country’s former status as being “the Riviera of the Middle East” as now reduced to “Paradise lost” due to the constant invasions, occupations, and surrogate governments representing powerful players in these regions.

Noting the script was written in 1991 but not financed until recently, Gilroy said this about his revived-tale of a bygone era: “I was impressed with the research when I went back and checked all the research and had the benefit [of] the internet at that time. Also, there had been a lot of other journalism and books that had been written about the period of time that had closed down the verdict on a lot of things that were kind open-ended back in 1991. [… ¶] I really accurately set this down in the winter of 1982, and the competing ugly forces that were wreaking havoc on Lebanon at that point, from the PLO to the Reagan White House, to Israel and Syria, and Russia. Those forces all coming down on this one moment in time, which is why I picked that moment in time. ¶ Several months after this movie is over in real time, everything is gonna fall off the plate. Everything is just gonna get so much worse. If you went back and told people in 1982 in Beirut that as bad as things had been and as bad as the civil war had been, and the city destroyed, and everything, that things were gonna deteriorate from there in the Middle East, they’d think you were out of your mind.”

So, your response to this film may well depend on what you wish to encounter in such a scenario. If what you prefer is something meticulously exploring the myriad factions within and beyond Lebanon (including their Civil War which began after the 1972 events of this film) in 1982 prior to the Israeli invasion, the stationing of American and Western European peace-keeping-troops which resulted in a 1983 Hezbollah terrorist attack in Beirut killing 241 U.S. Marines and other service personnel [plus about 58 French in a separate assault]), and related matters of this period then you’ll have to consult some historical sources prior to watching Beirut because all you’ll get is Skiles’ assessment about Lebanon being under duress for centuries from a variety of internal and external sources. But if all you want is a well-crafted-drama where tensions mount as the protagonists are put under intense pressure to provide some semblance of justice (debatable as to what that means, depending on whose perspective you believe) even when it means going rogue to rescue one of their own despite opposition from their superiors/allies, then Beirut delivers in the midst of (in my opinion) a story that does indeed use a Palestinian terror group as antagonists (not untrue to the history of the time) but counters that with a view of our U.S. intelligence operation as being just as devious, much more concerned with protecting state secrets than the life of a career spy. I agree this film won’t do much to soften the attitudes of those who put the blame on Middle East atrocities (and their expansions into Western nations) on all Arabs/Muslims, fomenting hate campaigns (and travel bans) against all members of these cultures including peaceful people who’ve tried hard to assimilate into our foreign-to-them-industrial-societies, completely ignoring the counter-impact of centuries of Western colonialism and financially-lucrative-pacts with hard-liner-dictators, but if you can accept this story on its surface as the sort of thriller Gilroy’s famous for in his Jason Bourne plots or even see why the antagonists in this film can be found in all of its oppositional factions then I think you can get some enjoyment out of a fast-moving, surprise-ridden rescue story, as long as those regular bursts of formerly-allied-violence aren’t too disturbing for you.

(Hey, Jon, don't go all Mad Men on us, OK?)

Bottom Line Final Comments: As my wonderful wife, Nina Kindblad, would say “I’d listen to Jon Hamm read the phone book” (for those of you not born in the 20^th century—especially way back in that century, like me—you may need to Google what a “phone book” is), a statement I agree with, setting up the first reason for us to be intrigued by Beirut, probably a more compelling interest than seeing devastation of a personal and national kind in a too-often-occupied Middle Eastern hotspot, especially given the animosity toward the presentation of Muslim freedom fighters/terrorists (take your pick; until—if ever—a truly peaceful 2-state-solution is agreed upon between Israel and Palestine, along with a cessation of proxy wars between Saudi Arabia and Iran [with destabilizing-intervention from the Russians wherever they can push themselves into these conflicts, now that the U.S. may—or may not—finally be ready to stop pushing our destabilizing-interventions into these conflicts, I have no dog in these fights—as a Southern saying goes—just a hopeful wish the other dogs would finally declare a real truce]) in this film, as noted in the segment just above. Other critics weren’t totally overwhelmed by it either, with those surveyed by Rotten Tomatoes offering 77% positive reviews, those at Metacritic yielding an average 70% score (more details in the Related Links section much farther below if you'd like to explore them); of those who support it, Richard Roeper (of the Chicago Sun-Times) offers the type of frequent praise that often surfaces: “For a guy who’s been out of the game for a decade and drinks so much he can barely stay awake even when the stakes are life and death, Mason transitions into a foreign espionage superhero in rapid fashion. ¶ Ah, but that’s the genre. The stakes in ‘Beirut’ are deadly serious, but the film itself is not presented as a major political statement or commentary beyond: The more things change, the more they stay the same. This is an old-fashioned spy thriller, and as such it succeeds.” Representative of counter-opinions, even those that aren’t focused on topics of political correctness, is the New York Times’ Manohla Dargis: “Mr. Hamm certainly makes it easy to care for Mason and all that he signifies, and it’s a pleasure to watch him just silently nurse another drink, a lifetime of regret weighing on him. Yet as Mason sits alone, the shadows closing around him, you also catch sight of a character whose past — including a cozy association with Henry Kissinger — suggests a tougher, harder and more interesting movie than the one you are watching.”

Audiences haven’t been overwhelmed with Beirut yet either, with only $2.1 million in domestic (U.S.-Canada) grosses since its debut about a week ago; of course, it’s only playing in 755 domestic theaters so far (compared to the weekend’s box-office-champ, Rampage [Brad Peyton] with its worldwide $154 million [$38.3 million of that domestically] playing in a standard-wide-release of 4,101 domestic venues), thus it remains to be seen if audiences will find reason to pay for Middle East intrigue and deaths as a form of cerebral entertainment when they can get plenty of that on their nightly newscasts, just with the location shifted to Syria (but with the same sort of international intrigue and horse-trading as depicted in this fictional version of atrocities mostly committed during the Lebanese Civil War [1975-1990]). I found this film to be engaging to watch (although the rapid flow of characters, locations, and conflicts do make it a bit difficult to carefully follow every plot point at times, but the main thrust of finding Rafid in order to free Cal is always clear enough, even as intended strategies of the protagonists keep going awry) as long as you don’t intend for this to be any more of a precise history lesson than Argo (Ben Affleck, 2012; review in our October 19, 2012 posting) was, even though actual events—in various, somewhat-fictionalized ways—inspire both films. Bringing these comments to a close with my usual device of a Musical Metaphor I’ve chosen a song being sung in the background in Beirut (when Mason’s first in his hotel bar bickering with Sandy about why he’s been dragged into this “mission impossible” where he’d like nothing better than to not accept the assignment), Air Supply’s “I’m All Out of Love” (from their 1980 album Lost in Love) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1EPtz1Uk4s (a 2013 performance in Hong Kong by this Australian band in an attempt by me to show a little intercultural acceptance amidst these frequent charges of intercultural hatred presented—if not valid in intent—within Beirut).

Ultimately, this song’s about a failed romance with the singer begging for forgiveness (appropriate for the film’s scene where we see Mason still miserably distraught over Nadia’s death, lost in drink over the last 10 years, wising he could somehow reverse the horrid events of her tragic demise), but in a—metaphorical, don’t forget—sense those lyrics about “I wish I could carry your smile in my heart For times when my life seems so low It would make me believe what tomorrow could bring When today doesn’t really know […] I’m all out of love, what am I without you I can’t be too late to say that I was so wrong” also speak to me of how the love Karim once felt for his “foster parents” has almost dissolved along with any sense of humanity he might feel for anyone else until such time as his brother’s been released. The State Dept. and CIA folks Mason’s working with don’t seem to have much love for anything either, except protecting the vital information Cal carries in his head while Sandy’s clearly long ago put personal feelings aside in favor of maintaining her career in an environment where trust, respect, and caring will likely get you shot when you least expect it. All of these characters could use an immersion in the shared feeling of musicians and audience shown in this video, but the lot of them may be too “all out of love” to even consider such (you might not be able to find such spirit in Hong Kong anymore either, but I hope that doesn’t stop any of us from trying to rise above the mistrust, personal priorities, or downright hatred which permeates this film).

(still attempting—but not succeeding—to achieve) SHORT TAKES

(please note that spoilers also appear here)

A Quiet Place (John Krasinski)

In the very-near-future vicious, hostile aliens (blind but with precise hearing, extremely dangerous) have invaded Earth, wiping out most of humanity; one family’s moved to a farm where they constantly keep quiet, communicate via sign language, living from moment to moment with this horrid danger even as tensions grow between the father and his deaf daughter.

Here’s the trailer:

Before reading any further, I’ll ask you to refer to the plot spoilers warning far above.

Although I don’t generally have an after-the-fact-trauma concern* about horror movies that keeps me from attending them, I’ve just found I’m no longer much interested in this genre—especially the demented-psycho-stories such as Saw (James Wan, 2004) and its ilk or the current demon-infested Truth or Dare (Jeff Wadlow)—although if the content’s got something extra going for it, such as with Get Out (Jordan Peele, 2017; review in our May 11, 2017 posting [although I put off seeing that one for awhile, based on misleading implications of standard-slasher-fare in some early reviews I read, until I finally realized the powerful social satire content which was making it such a media sensation]), then I’ll make an effort to see it for myself. That’s largely what happened for me with the initial release of A Quiet Place 2 weeks ago, with what seemed to be no more than an unusual idea involving a fairly-standard-horror-trope of almost-defenseless-victims being stalked by grotesque monsters. Then I began to get the idea there’s something more to be found here as well.

*That’s not always been the case: As an undergrad in 1968 I was barely able to get through Night of the Living Dead (George Romero), then in summer 1974 when I worked up enough courage to see The Exorcist (William Friedkin, 1973)—sometimes even first-run-blockbusters took their sweet time to get to Austin, TX in those days—I purposely saw it at a 2-screen-theater (another quaint concept) where I could exit in daylight, walk into the mall for some dinner, then go back in the dark to watch a re-release of Disney’s Alice in Wonderland (Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, Hamilton Luske; 1951) just to insure I could cleanse those supernatural encounters from my Catholic-upbringing-psyche. By the end of that decade, though, I could see Dawn of the Dead in a projection booth during a film festival, eating a fried-chicken-lunch while watching a screwdriver being driven into a zombie’s head, then at a later date I attended a late-night-re-release of The Exorcist, only to have the house lights accidently go on during a tense scene, bringing laughs from me and everyone else.

Thus, I came to the … Quiet Place party a bit late after becoming better aware of how it’s being universally-critically-lauded (RT with an astounding 95% cluster of positive reviews, MC with a notably high for them 82% average score; more details in Related Links just a bit below), how it’s being compared to Get Out as one of those rare springtime offerings that might actually be remembered months from now when awards season’s in full bloom (with Emily Blunt especially powerful as Evelyn, the determined-to-survive mother of the Abbott family), noting how its box-office-impact’s been quite impressive ($154.3 million in worldwide grosses already [$102.6 million of that from domestic venues]), especially compared to its bare $17 million budget. So, with the assumption I’m not adding much to what’s already becoming known as a pop-culture-phenomenon I’ll just make a few comments here to encourage attendance if you haven’t seem it already (easily done in northern North America where it’s expanded to 3,589 theaters) as long as increasingly-building-tension,* an isolated family in constant danger, and a huge, menacing creature stalking a woman trying to silently give birth in a bathtub (she also stepped on a big cellar-staircase-nail while trying to avoid these predators, giving her extra reason to cry out in pain) aren’t enough to give you a month’s worth of nightmares (yet, none of this is in my spoiler realm, as you can see all of it in the trailers). In brief if you want to know more, the setting’s roughly 2020, some sort of blind-but-armored-aliens have invaded Earth seemingly wiping out most of the human population using acute hearing to locate their prey leading the Abbotts (engineer Dad Lee [Krasinski], physician Mom [Blunt’s also married to Krasinski off-set], young teen daughter Regan [Millicent Simmonds, a deaf actor portraying a deaf character], slightly-younger Marcus [Noah Jupe]) to leave NYC for an upstate farm where they communicate in sign language (subtitled for those of us who need the help), walk barefooted, making every effort to remain silent (except where a louder sound masks their utterances, such as when Lee and Marcus can finally talk behind a waterfall out in the woods).

*In this Notes on a Scene video Krasinski explains how he built tension in his movie, which uses half of its 90-min.-running time to keep us on edge even before these creatures terrorize the farm.

OK, here come the real spoilers: ⇒Early on very-young-son Beau (Cade Woodward) makes the fatal mistake of putting batteries into a toy space shuttle, making enough noise to lead to his swift death; Regan blames herself for giving him the toy (although he secretly grabbed the batteries) leading to a strained relationship with Dad; Regan goes one night to visit the marker on the bridge where Beau was whisked away; Lee and Marcus out in the woods for the day see Evelyn’s turned the lights around their compound to red indicating danger, so Marcus runs to the cornfields to set off fireworks, drawing the creatures away; Evelyn gives birth (we begin on Day 89 of the invasion, then jump to Day 472 so the parents’ passions for each other and love for their kids must have resulted in her pregnancy despite the myriad difficulties a baby will bring); Lee finds his children then sacrifices himself to the creature so they can escape back to the house; Marcus huddles with the baby in a corner of their relatively-soundproof-basement while Evelyn readies her shotgun as Regan discovers feedback from the failed cochlear implant/hearing aid Dad made for her causes discomfort for the creature when it stalks them again so she intensifies the feedback using Lee’s array of shortwave gear (with which he tried unsuccessfully to reach other human survivors) causing the ear-sensitive-monster to open its head armor at which point Evelyn shoots it dead. With this strategy in place, Mom and daughter prepare to take on the others roaming their area (seen on the video monitors Lee set up for surveillance) by cranking up the noise, cocking the deadly firearm.⇐

That’s essentially what happens in A Quiet Place, a successful horror movie* playing on primal fears of invasion by hideous forces, isolation, loved ones in great danger, desperate concerns about finding useful resistance to such powerful antagonists. If that sort of thing intrigues you this movie delivers it well (creatively using a minimal soundtrack also), even for moviegoers who don’t like reading subtitles (most of this action needs no dialogue, so it flows smoothly with limited verbiage).

*We can easily assume (given the scant info provided on these creatures, their means of arrival on Earth, what defenses we can possibly muster against them) this story has roots in the sci-fi stories of malevolent aliens (no, Mr. Trump, this has nothing to do with building border walls) but it’s truly constructed as a horror movie with the focus on imminent, personal threat from mysterious, grotesque forces as laid out eloquently by Bruce Kawin in his “Children of the Light” exploration of these genres (most of which is available at this site—a book preview of Barry Keith Grant’s Film Genre Reader III [2003]; you might have to scroll down to chapter 22 to reach Kawin’s contribution)—although I still consider The Thing from Another World (Howard Hawks, 1951) and Alien (Ridley Scott, 1979) to be more sci-fi than true horror, such as Frankenstein (James Whale, 1931) and Repulsion (Roman Polanski, 1965) but it would take too long to explain why to you or Kawin here.

However, with my limited time in a given week to go forth to current cinema I must admit I was also intrigued by something else that would often be categorized as a horror-movie-monster-story (as Kawin would call it, based on that article cited above), Rampage (Brad Payton), but that’s because of my mutual affection for both the silliness of giant-beast-tales (what I call “creature features,” as a subset of fantasy because their “science” is something along the lines of what Trump EPA administrators would consider valid) and the appealing-on-screen-presence of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson; but having just seen him in Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle (Jake Kasdan, 2017; mentioned, not really reviewed, in our April 5, 2018 posting) plus I was aware (thanks to my friend Barry Caine) of David Ehrlich's scathing dismissal (but still fun to read) of Rampage I fortunately allowed curiosity to lead me instead to A Quiet Place so I’ll lead you, to finish off this review, to my final Musical Metaphor, Carole King’s “A Quiet Place to Live”* (from her 1973 Fantasy album) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEbXCtE6tMs with its lyrics about what the Abbotts wistfully dream of whenever they can take their minds off stalking monsters: “All I want is a quiet place to live Where I can enjoy the fruits of my labor Read the paper [no longer published in ... Place, although somehow power and water supplies remain stable] And [be able] to cry out loud [because these parents must constantly worry] What will become of us What about the children […] What will the answer be.” One answer you can count on is more cinematic commentary from Two Guys in the Dark so we hope to see you again soon, wherever you may find us in the world, even Beirut.

*I could have used Neil Young’s “Harvest Moon” in honor of the love these besieged parents maintain for each other despite constant crises, in that Evelyn and Lee dance to it at one point each sharing an earbud; however, you can always find that song at the end of any Two Guys posting by scrolling to the end where I keep it in ongoing tribute to Nina, my own loving wife of so many years.

Related Links Which You Might Find Interesting:

*A Google software glitch causes every Two Guys posting prior to August 26, 2016 to have an inaccurate (dead) link to this Summary page; from then forward, though, this link is accurate.

Here’s more information about Beirut:

https://bleeckerstreetmedia.com/beirut

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLf8xEu6K_c (12:30 interview with director Brad Anderson, screenwriter/co-producer Tony Gilroy, co-producer Mike Weber, actor John Hamm, and a few others who don’t say anything—audio quality’s not great but listen carefully and you can hear it all)

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/beirut

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/beirut

Here’s more information about A Quiet Place:

https://tickets.aquietplacemovie.com (seems to come up with local theater options)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U-vdHI6D_s (8:50 video on 32 things you missed in this movie plus the origin of the creatures)

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_quiet_place_2018

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/a-quiet-place

By the way, if you’re ever at The Hotel California knock on my door—but you know what the check out policy is so be prepared to stay for awhile. Ken