*Get "The Jackie Robinson Story" on Amazon here*
*Get "42" on Amazon here*
*Get I Never Had It Made: An Autobiography by Jackie Robinson on Amazon here*
*Get Promises to Keep: How Jackie Robinson Changed America by Sharon Robinson on Amazon here*
I have little to no interest in professional sports. I knew the name Jackie Robinson, and I knew this film existed because Robinson portrayed himself in his own life story. After years of having this on my radar, I sat down to watch it and was pleasantly surprised. Is this a great film? Not by a long shot, but it's entertaining enough and puts modern-day athletes' sometimes whiny complaints in perspective. Clocking in at seventy-seven minutes, the film does not waste any time building its story.
Robinson grows up to adulthood in the first ten minutes, and he is shown to be an outstanding athlete in almost every sport he tried- baseball, track, and football. Once Branch Rickey (Minor Watson), President of the Brooklyn Dodgers, gets wind of him, Robinson plays for the Dodgers' Montreal farm team, inciting racist taunts from spectators and players alike. It helps that Robinson was an amazing player, earning the grudging respect of everyone while turning the other cheek when menaced. He let his athleticism speak for itself.
There is a lot wrong with this picture. A copyright wasn't renewed at one point, so the film fell into public domain and anyone could sell whatever lousy copy they had of it- which is how I caught it on YouTube. No major studio would touch it, so it was produced cheaply- a one-time project by its company. For a film made in 1950, they do not soften the racist aspect, and I heard a couple of N-words sprinkled through its running time. I'm not familiar with Robinson's life or Major League Baseball, but the film makers do cover all of this well. Robinson is not the acting disaster I was expecting. He is earnest in his performance, and with the right director and material, he probably could have made a go of it in other motion pictures. Minor Watson is likable as Rickey, taking a chance on Robinson. The rest of the cast is caught up in the breathless pace of the hurried screenplay, trying to turn in a performance with little characterization or help. There's a terrible comedic subplot about a player named Shorty (Ben Lessy) that brings the film to a screeching halt when he does his shtick.
While the quality of the film I saw was okay, I would recommend the colorized version that was released to benefit the Jackie Robinson Foundation. I watched the preview while preparing this review, and it was much better quality-wise than the black and white version I saw. I imagine the film looks just as good. Jackie Robinson's story was retold in "42" (2013) starring Chadwick Boseman as Robinson, and Harrison Ford as Rickey. I might have to check that out someday. There is a strong patriotic vibe through the film, as Robinson literally speaks softly but carries a big stick. No knee-taking, no streaming documentaries, no shoe ads, no Tweets; he was a great player, and played well.
"The Jackie Robinson Story" is not a masterpiece, nor very good, but casting Robinson in his own story makes it good enough.
Stats:
(1950) 77 min. (6/10)
-Directed by Alfred E. Green
-Written by Arthur Mann, Lawrence Taylor
-Cast: Jackie Robinson, Ruby Dee, Minor Watson, Ben Lessy, Louise Beavers, Richard Lane, Harry Shannon, William 'Bill' Spaulding, Billy Wayne, Joe Fluellen, Bernie Hamilton, Kenny Washington, Pat Flaherty
-(Not Rated)- Mild physical violence, mild profanity, adult situations
-Media Viewed: Online
Thursday, October 2, 2025
Film/TV Review: "Jimmy Savile: A British Horror Story" (2022)
*Get In Plain Sight: The Life and Lies of Jimmy Savile by Dan Davies on Amazon here*
*Get Victim Zero by Kat Ward on Amazon here*
*Get Untouchable Jimmy Savile by Shawn Attwood on Amazon here*
*Get How's About That Then?: Jimmy Savile: The Authorised Biography by Alison Bellamy on Amazon here*
Jimmy Savile was a television personality in Great Britain who seemed to be part of the public's collective lives for decades. Behind the camera, he assaulted young and old, and the extent of his crimes only came to light after his death. Basically, he got away with it.
Savile was a strange, eccentric presence. He was a disc jockey in the 1950's, and then branched into television for decades until his death in 2011, two days before his 85th birthday. He also raised millions of pounds for charities and hospitals, and was a confidante to the elite of royalty and politicians. His private life was very private. He never married or had children, and his sexuality seemed to be nonexistent- he existed to entertain, like a robot, and didn't seem to have a social life when out of the limelight. Rumors about his "liking young girls" were just rumors, part of his act was playing up his "dirty old man" shtick, puffing on giant cigars and joking about his sexual proclivities. He was so liked by the media, authorities, and public, that when formal complaints about him were made, they were quickly quashed- after all, he was rubbing elbows with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and the royal couple Prince Charles and Diana. As Savile's luck would have it, he died alone in his penthouse flat and was given a hero's send-off in his beloved Leeds, United Kingdom, just as the accusations and stories broke. His victims ranged from the young to the elderly, males and females, with some being incapacitated patients in the very same hospitals he was raising money for. In the days before he died, rumblings of wrong-doing were growing stronger, and he denied his crimes until the end. Some of Savile's victims didn't come forward because no one was going to believe them. He ravaged a now-closed school for wayward girls. He violated patients at a hospital for spinal cord injuries. He was abusing people for so long, some of them eventually died of old age (or suicide in one case), never telling their story to anyone but perhaps a close family member. Who would take their word that this charitable, beloved fixture was capable of any of this?
As for the film itself, it's being unnecessarily streamed in two parts as a "limited series." The total running time is just under three hours, and no, this is not a limited series. It could use some editing, however. Too much time is spent on showing the viewer how Savile rose through the ranks of British media, befriending the all the right people, as if they were justifying why the public fell in love with him. I only heard about Savile after the accusations started, and watching old footage of him is skeevy and fascinating. I honestly don't see the appeal, he's strange looking and not very funny, but I also realize that there isn't much footage of him available, and who wants to say nowadays that we was fantastic? An entire "episode" in this limited series could have been done about the victims, but they are only briefly reviewed. This is a mistake in many a true crime documentary on streaming services. Some of the more salacious aspects of Savile's crimes are also ignored, which only serves to ignore the trauma his victims and families went through. Some of Savile's victims were helpless because they didn't have proof of their crimes, as if they spent that traumatic event collecting CSI-inspired evidence. Another aspect of the film that didn't work was the "how did you not know what he was doing?" questioning to former acquaintances of Savile's. I worked retail from the age of eighteen through my early fifties. I worked with, and was supervised by, literally hundreds of people in those decades- I even met my wife through work. I've also seen coworkers and former coworkers run afoul of the law (minor infractions- no serial killers, that I know of), or go through painful divorces or breakups because of their behavior or the behavior of a significant other. I've even had a coworker who appeared in a pornographic movie that they told me about. I had a college instructor, and a high school guidance counselor, jailed on sexual crimes against children (so much for that reference letter) but I have never been employed with someone who committed the crimes on the level of Savile's, much less shared their problems at work (again, that I know of). Savile was brilliant in keeping his anonymity, research into his private life consistently turned up nothing, so I can't imagine he would be sharing what he was doing, and if he did slip up- he was just being Jimmy Savile, the scamp. Like I said, I was unfamiliar with the Savile case, and I don't remember watching any of his shows in the early 1990's when I was briefly living in the United Kingdom.
This is a good starting point, and a very good, but not a great, documentary.
Stats:
(2022) 170 min. (7/10)
-Directed by Rowan Deacon
-Featuring: Jimmy Savile, Roger Ordish, Mark Lawson, Meirion Jones, Alison Bellamy, Dominic Carman, Sylvia Nicol, Christine Checkley, Ian Hislop, Marjorie Wallace, Tina Davey, Martin Young, Carine Minne
-(TV-MA)- Some sexual violence, some profanity, strong sexual references, very strong sexual violence references, violence involving children references, strong adult situations, tobacco use
-Media Viewed: Streaming
*BAFTA*
-TV- Original Music, Factual (won)
-TV- Editing, Factual (lost to "Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes")
*Get Victim Zero by Kat Ward on Amazon here*
*Get Untouchable Jimmy Savile by Shawn Attwood on Amazon here*
*Get How's About That Then?: Jimmy Savile: The Authorised Biography by Alison Bellamy on Amazon here*
Jimmy Savile was a television personality in Great Britain who seemed to be part of the public's collective lives for decades. Behind the camera, he assaulted young and old, and the extent of his crimes only came to light after his death. Basically, he got away with it.
Savile was a strange, eccentric presence. He was a disc jockey in the 1950's, and then branched into television for decades until his death in 2011, two days before his 85th birthday. He also raised millions of pounds for charities and hospitals, and was a confidante to the elite of royalty and politicians. His private life was very private. He never married or had children, and his sexuality seemed to be nonexistent- he existed to entertain, like a robot, and didn't seem to have a social life when out of the limelight. Rumors about his "liking young girls" were just rumors, part of his act was playing up his "dirty old man" shtick, puffing on giant cigars and joking about his sexual proclivities. He was so liked by the media, authorities, and public, that when formal complaints about him were made, they were quickly quashed- after all, he was rubbing elbows with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and the royal couple Prince Charles and Diana. As Savile's luck would have it, he died alone in his penthouse flat and was given a hero's send-off in his beloved Leeds, United Kingdom, just as the accusations and stories broke. His victims ranged from the young to the elderly, males and females, with some being incapacitated patients in the very same hospitals he was raising money for. In the days before he died, rumblings of wrong-doing were growing stronger, and he denied his crimes until the end. Some of Savile's victims didn't come forward because no one was going to believe them. He ravaged a now-closed school for wayward girls. He violated patients at a hospital for spinal cord injuries. He was abusing people for so long, some of them eventually died of old age (or suicide in one case), never telling their story to anyone but perhaps a close family member. Who would take their word that this charitable, beloved fixture was capable of any of this?
As for the film itself, it's being unnecessarily streamed in two parts as a "limited series." The total running time is just under three hours, and no, this is not a limited series. It could use some editing, however. Too much time is spent on showing the viewer how Savile rose through the ranks of British media, befriending the all the right people, as if they were justifying why the public fell in love with him. I only heard about Savile after the accusations started, and watching old footage of him is skeevy and fascinating. I honestly don't see the appeal, he's strange looking and not very funny, but I also realize that there isn't much footage of him available, and who wants to say nowadays that we was fantastic? An entire "episode" in this limited series could have been done about the victims, but they are only briefly reviewed. This is a mistake in many a true crime documentary on streaming services. Some of the more salacious aspects of Savile's crimes are also ignored, which only serves to ignore the trauma his victims and families went through. Some of Savile's victims were helpless because they didn't have proof of their crimes, as if they spent that traumatic event collecting CSI-inspired evidence. Another aspect of the film that didn't work was the "how did you not know what he was doing?" questioning to former acquaintances of Savile's. I worked retail from the age of eighteen through my early fifties. I worked with, and was supervised by, literally hundreds of people in those decades- I even met my wife through work. I've also seen coworkers and former coworkers run afoul of the law (minor infractions- no serial killers, that I know of), or go through painful divorces or breakups because of their behavior or the behavior of a significant other. I've even had a coworker who appeared in a pornographic movie that they told me about. I had a college instructor, and a high school guidance counselor, jailed on sexual crimes against children (so much for that reference letter) but I have never been employed with someone who committed the crimes on the level of Savile's, much less shared their problems at work (again, that I know of). Savile was brilliant in keeping his anonymity, research into his private life consistently turned up nothing, so I can't imagine he would be sharing what he was doing, and if he did slip up- he was just being Jimmy Savile, the scamp. Like I said, I was unfamiliar with the Savile case, and I don't remember watching any of his shows in the early 1990's when I was briefly living in the United Kingdom.
This is a good starting point, and a very good, but not a great, documentary.
Stats:
(2022) 170 min. (7/10)
-Directed by Rowan Deacon
-Featuring: Jimmy Savile, Roger Ordish, Mark Lawson, Meirion Jones, Alison Bellamy, Dominic Carman, Sylvia Nicol, Christine Checkley, Ian Hislop, Marjorie Wallace, Tina Davey, Martin Young, Carine Minne
-(TV-MA)- Some sexual violence, some profanity, strong sexual references, very strong sexual violence references, violence involving children references, strong adult situations, tobacco use
-Media Viewed: Streaming
*BAFTA*
-TV- Original Music, Factual (won)
-TV- Editing, Factual (lost to "Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes")
Film/TV Review: "The Call of the Wild" (2020)
*Get "The Call of the Wild" (2020) on Amazon here*
*Get Jack London: An American Life by Earle Labor on Amazon here*
*Get The Second Mrs. London: Charmian Kittredge Shares Her Life with Jack London by Marlo Faulkner on Amazon here*
*Get The Call of the Wild by Jack London on Amazon here*
Maybe I shouldn't have finished Jack London's celebrated novel, and then watched this sanitized film the same day.
Set in the early 1900's, Buck, a half St. Bernard/half Shepherd mix dog, is a goofy screw-up in the same vein as "Clifford the Big Red Dog" or "Beethoven," wreaking havoc in Judge Miller's (Bradley Whitford) household. Buck is kidnapped, sold, and tossed on a ship headed to the Klondike Gold Rush, where he is put onto a mail delivery team run by Perrault (Omar Sy) and Francoise (Cara Gee), running into John (Harrison Ford) here and there in a gold rush town. Buck asserts his dominance with the team after a bunch of screw-ups, is bought by tenderfoot Hal (Dan Stevens) and his brood, and eventually finds his way back into the loving arms of John, who is suffering on his own. John is invigorated by Buck, and takes him on a hunt for fabled treasure that would prove to be their last adventure together.
We need to address the elephant in the room- Buck is computer animated, CGI, whatever you want to call it, and it is very noticeable. I could understand if it was needed to not put a real dog in peril, but since Buck is in almost every scene, it takes you out of the film from start to finish. Director Sanders' background is in animation, and every shot is manufactured and unrealistic- never has a squalid mining town looked so dainty. London's novel was a bloody, violent affair, but the film makers opted to make a message-filled movie, with a story that is kicked into overdrive so the kids don't get bored. The screenwriter messes with the basic plot of the novel, taking attention away from Buck to give Ford some acting scenes. Other important plot points are dropped entirely, perhaps explaining Michael Horse's one scene. The movie is breathtaking in its bogus look, but the live action/animation hybrid does not work. The novel was told from Buck's point of view, and with this film, he has been gifted with Superdog powers like facial expressions, English language comprehension, alcohol abstinence, and perhaps the ability to read. Buck's transition from dumb dog to leader of the pack is quicker than Jack going bonkers in "The Shining," and the musical score sounds too similar to another animated wilderness-bound misfire "The Good Dinosaur." I did like the personification (dogification?) of Buck's ancestral call in the shape of a gray wolf with glowing eyes but that is introduced and dropped quickly. I've lived in North Dakota for most of my life, I know cold weather, and no amount of computer animation can replace actual location shooting. It was nice to see Ford smile onscreen again, I'm not a fan of the cranky old dude persona that he's been trotting out for the last few years. His performance is reliable, but nothing spectacular. The producers do make with some woke messaging here and there, and it stands out only because I read the novel, and common sense would tell you that the Klondike Gold Rush could not have been this antiseptic and progressive.
London's story has been told a number of times onscreen, it would be interesting to track down the other versions as well since this version of "The Call of the Wild" couldn't possibly be "the best." You might stick to reading the original novel instead.
Stats:
(2020) 100 min. (3/10)
-Directed by Chris Sanders
-Screenplay by Michael Green based on the novel by Jack London
-Cast: Harrison Ford, Omar Sy, Cara Gee, Dan Stevens, Bradley Whitford, Jean Louisa Kelly, Michael Horse, Karen Gillan, Colin Woodell, Micah Fitzgerald, Heather McPhaul, Adam Fergus, Stephanie Czajkowski
-(PG)- Physical violence, mild gun violence, some adult situations, alcohol use
-Media Viewed: Digital
*Get Jack London: An American Life by Earle Labor on Amazon here*
*Get The Second Mrs. London: Charmian Kittredge Shares Her Life with Jack London by Marlo Faulkner on Amazon here*
*Get The Call of the Wild by Jack London on Amazon here*
Maybe I shouldn't have finished Jack London's celebrated novel, and then watched this sanitized film the same day.
Set in the early 1900's, Buck, a half St. Bernard/half Shepherd mix dog, is a goofy screw-up in the same vein as "Clifford the Big Red Dog" or "Beethoven," wreaking havoc in Judge Miller's (Bradley Whitford) household. Buck is kidnapped, sold, and tossed on a ship headed to the Klondike Gold Rush, where he is put onto a mail delivery team run by Perrault (Omar Sy) and Francoise (Cara Gee), running into John (Harrison Ford) here and there in a gold rush town. Buck asserts his dominance with the team after a bunch of screw-ups, is bought by tenderfoot Hal (Dan Stevens) and his brood, and eventually finds his way back into the loving arms of John, who is suffering on his own. John is invigorated by Buck, and takes him on a hunt for fabled treasure that would prove to be their last adventure together.
We need to address the elephant in the room- Buck is computer animated, CGI, whatever you want to call it, and it is very noticeable. I could understand if it was needed to not put a real dog in peril, but since Buck is in almost every scene, it takes you out of the film from start to finish. Director Sanders' background is in animation, and every shot is manufactured and unrealistic- never has a squalid mining town looked so dainty. London's novel was a bloody, violent affair, but the film makers opted to make a message-filled movie, with a story that is kicked into overdrive so the kids don't get bored. The screenwriter messes with the basic plot of the novel, taking attention away from Buck to give Ford some acting scenes. Other important plot points are dropped entirely, perhaps explaining Michael Horse's one scene. The movie is breathtaking in its bogus look, but the live action/animation hybrid does not work. The novel was told from Buck's point of view, and with this film, he has been gifted with Superdog powers like facial expressions, English language comprehension, alcohol abstinence, and perhaps the ability to read. Buck's transition from dumb dog to leader of the pack is quicker than Jack going bonkers in "The Shining," and the musical score sounds too similar to another animated wilderness-bound misfire "The Good Dinosaur." I did like the personification (dogification?) of Buck's ancestral call in the shape of a gray wolf with glowing eyes but that is introduced and dropped quickly. I've lived in North Dakota for most of my life, I know cold weather, and no amount of computer animation can replace actual location shooting. It was nice to see Ford smile onscreen again, I'm not a fan of the cranky old dude persona that he's been trotting out for the last few years. His performance is reliable, but nothing spectacular. The producers do make with some woke messaging here and there, and it stands out only because I read the novel, and common sense would tell you that the Klondike Gold Rush could not have been this antiseptic and progressive.
London's story has been told a number of times onscreen, it would be interesting to track down the other versions as well since this version of "The Call of the Wild" couldn't possibly be "the best." You might stick to reading the original novel instead.
Stats:
(2020) 100 min. (3/10)
-Directed by Chris Sanders
-Screenplay by Michael Green based on the novel by Jack London
-Cast: Harrison Ford, Omar Sy, Cara Gee, Dan Stevens, Bradley Whitford, Jean Louisa Kelly, Michael Horse, Karen Gillan, Colin Woodell, Micah Fitzgerald, Heather McPhaul, Adam Fergus, Stephanie Czajkowski
-(PG)- Physical violence, mild gun violence, some adult situations, alcohol use
-Media Viewed: Digital
Film/TV Review: "Saving America Begins with You" (2009)
*Get "Saving America Begins with You" on Amazon here*
*Get "Horseshoe" by Kevin Myers on Amazon here*
*Get "Front Sight Constitutional Defense of Your Family and Freedom" on Amazon here*
*Get The Patriot's Daughter by Kamryn Green on Amazon here*
Rick Green needs to update this almost two decade old speech.
I received this DVD recently, and this same material is for sale in its original form on his website. Green is a former Texas state representative who is now a Constitutional scholar. He has many courses and products out, extolling the literal virtues of Conservative values and arming yourselves with knowledge as the country begins a slow slide into socialism (oh, 2009 Rick, you won't believe what's happening in 2025). This is a recorded speech, but there are no onscreen credits telling the viewer when or where it was given. Without the context, I was quickly bored, knowing there were larger issues just around the corner besides Obama's increase of the national debt. The speech is bookended by too many ads pushing the lack of freedoms during COVID, increasing a 47 minute speech to a 109 minute running time DVD.
Green's children quoting from the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution is impressive, as are the mentions of minorities and women who fought in the American Revolution (this GenXer was never taught any of that in school). There is even a pretty good song by Kevin Myers called "Freedom's Frame" that eschews shmaltz. Green seems to have his hand in too many projects, as the DVD bombards the viewer with websites and seminar offers that I'm not sure are good anymore. I was hoping for more current topics, but that doesn't happen. Being told to arm yourselves with knowledge is always a great way to get into my good graces, but with the culture war in full swing at the moment, I had hoped for more.
I think Green needs to streamline and update his prodigious output, and centralize his message, since "Saving America Begins with You" is not a good introductory salvo (unless he would do another video showing everyone how right he was).
Stats:
(2009) 47 min. (4/10)
-No Director Credited
-Written by Rick Green
-Cast: Rick Green, Trey Green, Reagan Green, Kamryn Green, Rhett Green, Kevin Myers
-(Not Rated)- Nothing objectionable
-Media Viewed: DVD
*Get "Horseshoe" by Kevin Myers on Amazon here*
*Get "Front Sight Constitutional Defense of Your Family and Freedom" on Amazon here*
*Get The Patriot's Daughter by Kamryn Green on Amazon here*
Rick Green needs to update this almost two decade old speech.
I received this DVD recently, and this same material is for sale in its original form on his website. Green is a former Texas state representative who is now a Constitutional scholar. He has many courses and products out, extolling the literal virtues of Conservative values and arming yourselves with knowledge as the country begins a slow slide into socialism (oh, 2009 Rick, you won't believe what's happening in 2025). This is a recorded speech, but there are no onscreen credits telling the viewer when or where it was given. Without the context, I was quickly bored, knowing there were larger issues just around the corner besides Obama's increase of the national debt. The speech is bookended by too many ads pushing the lack of freedoms during COVID, increasing a 47 minute speech to a 109 minute running time DVD.
Green's children quoting from the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution is impressive, as are the mentions of minorities and women who fought in the American Revolution (this GenXer was never taught any of that in school). There is even a pretty good song by Kevin Myers called "Freedom's Frame" that eschews shmaltz. Green seems to have his hand in too many projects, as the DVD bombards the viewer with websites and seminar offers that I'm not sure are good anymore. I was hoping for more current topics, but that doesn't happen. Being told to arm yourselves with knowledge is always a great way to get into my good graces, but with the culture war in full swing at the moment, I had hoped for more.
I think Green needs to streamline and update his prodigious output, and centralize his message, since "Saving America Begins with You" is not a good introductory salvo (unless he would do another video showing everyone how right he was).
Stats:
(2009) 47 min. (4/10)
-No Director Credited
-Written by Rick Green
-Cast: Rick Green, Trey Green, Reagan Green, Kamryn Green, Rhett Green, Kevin Myers
-(Not Rated)- Nothing objectionable
-Media Viewed: DVD
Film/TV Review: "The Mother" (2023)
*Get True Love by Jennifer Lopez on Amazon here*
*Watch "This Is Me...Now: A Love Story" on Amazon Prime Video here*
*Watch "The Greatest Love Story Never Told" on Amazon Prime Video here*
*Get "Dance Again...The Hits" by Jennifer Lopez on Amazon here*
The screenplay to "The Mother" is so bad, you don't have to wait until the end credits to ruminate on its flaws. The glaring plot holes and errors of logic occur in real time, and all the scenes of Jennifer Lopez kicking butt aren't going to save it.
Lopez is the title character, a perfect-shot military assassin who gets caught between two ruthless arms dealers- Adrian (Joseph Fiennes) and Hector (Gael Garcia Bernal) in a confusing guns-and-love triangle. She ends up pregnant, and gives birth to a girl who is immediately put up for adoption. Because of the danger to her daughter, Lopez must go on the run, using sympathetic FBI agent Cruise (Omari Hardwick) as her eyes and ears on her daughter's upbringing. Bad guys come back into The Mother's life in a big way after the-now twelve year old daughter Zoe's (Lucy Paez) whereabouts are discovered, and The Mother must spring into The Action.
Caro directs the film with confidence. There are long, complicated action sequences, and the cast is athletic and ready. A few too many overhead drone shots to be sure, but given the right screenplay, Caro could have directed set-pieces that enhanced the story and added to the suspense. This screenplay is not the right screenplay. I found myself wondering out loud what the writers were thinking. The characters onscreen weren't thinking, I could be an elite assassin, too, up against this bunch of henchmen. Every action film cliche ever concocted seems to have found its way onto the screen. At one point, there was a purposeful car crash that I saw coming a mile away, and the driver of the car that was struck should have also known what was literally coming from a mile away. The story tries to get metaphysical with the introduction of a mother wolf and her cubs that gets sillier as it goes along. The locations are used to their fullest extent, and are beautiful to look at. Lopez has some nice scenes, but her character is busy being off-putting and secretive, and her lack of emotion renders her performance stilted. Paez is pretty good as the twelve year old whose life is suddenly upended, but I found Hardwick's role bizarre. I'm beginning to think Cruise started out as two characters- the special agent whose life the Mother saves, and the helpy helperton who befriends Zoe's new family to keep an eye on her. Although villains, Bernal and Fiennes are barely here. With some name and gender switching, this could have served as a weak James Bond entry, or any other action film with an infinitely wealthy, special-ops protagonist who must go into isolation and await the standard army of villains to attack. The very final scene could have made a darker statement about the preceding two hours, but instead we get the warm fuzzies.
I went in cold to "The Mother," having no idea about its existence until it popped up on a streaming service. The film feels longer than under two hours, and it took me two days to complete. There is a lot about "The Mother" that should have worked.
Stats:
(2023) 115 min. (4/10)
-Directed by Niki Caro
-Screenplay by Misha Green and Andrea Berloff and Peter Craig, Story by Misha Green
-Cast: Jennifer Lopez, Joseph Fiennes, Gael Garcia Bernal, Lucy Paez, Omari Hardwick, Edie Falco, Paul Raci, Jesse Garcia, Yvonne Senat Jones, Michael Karl Richards, Link Baker, Mayumi Yoshida, Ryan Cowie
-(R)- Strong physical violence, strong gun violence, violence involving children, gore, profanity, adult situations, drug abuse, alcohol and tobacco use
-Media Viewed: Streaming
*Watch "This Is Me...Now: A Love Story" on Amazon Prime Video here*
*Watch "The Greatest Love Story Never Told" on Amazon Prime Video here*
*Get "Dance Again...The Hits" by Jennifer Lopez on Amazon here*
The screenplay to "The Mother" is so bad, you don't have to wait until the end credits to ruminate on its flaws. The glaring plot holes and errors of logic occur in real time, and all the scenes of Jennifer Lopez kicking butt aren't going to save it.
Lopez is the title character, a perfect-shot military assassin who gets caught between two ruthless arms dealers- Adrian (Joseph Fiennes) and Hector (Gael Garcia Bernal) in a confusing guns-and-love triangle. She ends up pregnant, and gives birth to a girl who is immediately put up for adoption. Because of the danger to her daughter, Lopez must go on the run, using sympathetic FBI agent Cruise (Omari Hardwick) as her eyes and ears on her daughter's upbringing. Bad guys come back into The Mother's life in a big way after the-now twelve year old daughter Zoe's (Lucy Paez) whereabouts are discovered, and The Mother must spring into The Action.
Caro directs the film with confidence. There are long, complicated action sequences, and the cast is athletic and ready. A few too many overhead drone shots to be sure, but given the right screenplay, Caro could have directed set-pieces that enhanced the story and added to the suspense. This screenplay is not the right screenplay. I found myself wondering out loud what the writers were thinking. The characters onscreen weren't thinking, I could be an elite assassin, too, up against this bunch of henchmen. Every action film cliche ever concocted seems to have found its way onto the screen. At one point, there was a purposeful car crash that I saw coming a mile away, and the driver of the car that was struck should have also known what was literally coming from a mile away. The story tries to get metaphysical with the introduction of a mother wolf and her cubs that gets sillier as it goes along. The locations are used to their fullest extent, and are beautiful to look at. Lopez has some nice scenes, but her character is busy being off-putting and secretive, and her lack of emotion renders her performance stilted. Paez is pretty good as the twelve year old whose life is suddenly upended, but I found Hardwick's role bizarre. I'm beginning to think Cruise started out as two characters- the special agent whose life the Mother saves, and the helpy helperton who befriends Zoe's new family to keep an eye on her. Although villains, Bernal and Fiennes are barely here. With some name and gender switching, this could have served as a weak James Bond entry, or any other action film with an infinitely wealthy, special-ops protagonist who must go into isolation and await the standard army of villains to attack. The very final scene could have made a darker statement about the preceding two hours, but instead we get the warm fuzzies.
I went in cold to "The Mother," having no idea about its existence until it popped up on a streaming service. The film feels longer than under two hours, and it took me two days to complete. There is a lot about "The Mother" that should have worked.
Stats:
(2023) 115 min. (4/10)
-Directed by Niki Caro
-Screenplay by Misha Green and Andrea Berloff and Peter Craig, Story by Misha Green
-Cast: Jennifer Lopez, Joseph Fiennes, Gael Garcia Bernal, Lucy Paez, Omari Hardwick, Edie Falco, Paul Raci, Jesse Garcia, Yvonne Senat Jones, Michael Karl Richards, Link Baker, Mayumi Yoshida, Ryan Cowie
-(R)- Strong physical violence, strong gun violence, violence involving children, gore, profanity, adult situations, drug abuse, alcohol and tobacco use
-Media Viewed: Streaming
Tuesday, September 30, 2025
Film/TV Review: "Forgive Us Our Trespasses" (2022)
*Get Forgotten Crimes: The Holocaust and People with Disabilities by Susanne E. Evans on Amazon here*
*Get Worth Saving: Disabled Children During the Second World War by Sue Wheatcroft on Amazon here*
*Get The First Into the Dark: The Nazi Persecution of the Disabled by Michael Robertson, Astrid Ley, and Edwina Light on Amazon here*
*Get The Nazi Slaughter of the Disabled: The Euthanasia Program T4 by Kurt Gerstein on Amazon here*
This way-too-short film has its heart and moral outrage in the right place, but its execution is all wrong.
In Nazi Germany, Peter (Knox Gibson) is a young boy missing part of his arm. During prayers one night, Peter questions his mother (Hanneke Talbot), who is also his school teacher, as to why they should forgive the Nazis. By chance, soldiers stop at their house to take Peter because of his disability, and Peter must fight back.
This didn't feel like a short film, it felt like some footage that was shot in order to get financing to make a feature-length film based on Peter's story. The cinematography is breathtaking, and Gibson is perfectly cast- physically looking like the Nazi-ideal German male, except for the missing limb. Much has been made in other reviews about the historical inaccuracies of the film, especially in the closing coda. I'm not familiar with this part of World War II history to argue it, but this is a perfect example of not taking everything you see onscreen as historical truth, whether it be in a film, television show, or online.
The main problem here is the climax. I don't want to spoil it too much, but there is a physical altercation that has little bearing in reality. I didn't believe it could happen for one second, and Peter's reaction to it is puzzling. Although this is arguing against punishing people for their disabilities, something I think we can all get behind, the film makers make a strong pro-life argument at the beginning of the film during a classroom scene, which is a little surprising coming from the profoundly Liberal entertainment industry. I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. I saw this on a streaming service, so finding a physical copy of it might prove difficult, but it is out there.
Stats:
(2022) 13 min. (5/10)
-Directed by Ashley Eakin
-Written by Ashley Eakin, Shawn Lovering
-Cast: Knox Gibson, Hanneke Talbot, Justin Mader, Nathaniel McParland, Tyler Hutchings, Noah Lamanna, Luke Marty, Dl MacDonald, Todd Campbell
-(TV-14)- Physical violence, some gun violence, violence involving children, mild gore, adult situations
-Media Viewed: Streaming
*Get Worth Saving: Disabled Children During the Second World War by Sue Wheatcroft on Amazon here*
*Get The First Into the Dark: The Nazi Persecution of the Disabled by Michael Robertson, Astrid Ley, and Edwina Light on Amazon here*
*Get The Nazi Slaughter of the Disabled: The Euthanasia Program T4 by Kurt Gerstein on Amazon here*
This way-too-short film has its heart and moral outrage in the right place, but its execution is all wrong.
In Nazi Germany, Peter (Knox Gibson) is a young boy missing part of his arm. During prayers one night, Peter questions his mother (Hanneke Talbot), who is also his school teacher, as to why they should forgive the Nazis. By chance, soldiers stop at their house to take Peter because of his disability, and Peter must fight back.
This didn't feel like a short film, it felt like some footage that was shot in order to get financing to make a feature-length film based on Peter's story. The cinematography is breathtaking, and Gibson is perfectly cast- physically looking like the Nazi-ideal German male, except for the missing limb. Much has been made in other reviews about the historical inaccuracies of the film, especially in the closing coda. I'm not familiar with this part of World War II history to argue it, but this is a perfect example of not taking everything you see onscreen as historical truth, whether it be in a film, television show, or online.
The main problem here is the climax. I don't want to spoil it too much, but there is a physical altercation that has little bearing in reality. I didn't believe it could happen for one second, and Peter's reaction to it is puzzling. Although this is arguing against punishing people for their disabilities, something I think we can all get behind, the film makers make a strong pro-life argument at the beginning of the film during a classroom scene, which is a little surprising coming from the profoundly Liberal entertainment industry. I'm not sure if that was intentional or not. I saw this on a streaming service, so finding a physical copy of it might prove difficult, but it is out there.
Stats:
(2022) 13 min. (5/10)
-Directed by Ashley Eakin
-Written by Ashley Eakin, Shawn Lovering
-Cast: Knox Gibson, Hanneke Talbot, Justin Mader, Nathaniel McParland, Tyler Hutchings, Noah Lamanna, Luke Marty, Dl MacDonald, Todd Campbell
-(TV-14)- Physical violence, some gun violence, violence involving children, mild gore, adult situations
-Media Viewed: Streaming
Film/TV Review: "Amityville: An Origin Story" (2023)
*Watch "Amityville: An Origin Story" on Amazon Prime Video here*
*Get The Amityville Horror by Jay Anson here*
*Get "The Amityville Horror" (1979) on Amazon here*
*Get "My Amityville Horror" on Amazon here*
This long miniseries documentary isn't an end-all, be-all about the 1974 murders of the DeFeo family in Amityville, New York, but a very good modern look at the story that has entranced (and fooled) a nation for over five decades.
Ronald DeFeo, Jr. killed six members of his sleeping family one night in 1974, and was eventually sent to prison for a life sentence. George and Kathy Lutz and their three kids eventually moved into the giant house, but fled four weeks later after they said they were terrorized by demonic and unseen forces. The Lutzes gave recorded interviews of their experiences to author Jay Anson, who published the book The Amityville Horror (one of the greatest book, and later film, titles of all-time). A (terrible) hit 1979 film was made of the experiences of the Lutzes, which spawned dozens of sequels, spoofs, and remakes, all mostly unrelated to the original DeFeo murders except in passing. As the Lutzes continued to talk about what happened, lawsuits began as the major players tried to get their piece of a very lucrative pie. The series concentrates on Christopher Lutz, one of Kathy's sons from her first marriage (her other son appeared in the documentary "My Amityville Horror"), and his bitterness at a celebrity he never asked for.
George Lutz is the villain in the series, although it's understandable to see how an average guy can get caught up in the glitz and glamour of money and fame. There are a lot of clips from the 1979 film, and I thought the film makers were relying on it a little too much before I realized they were showing what everyone else at that time was seeing and accepting as the truth. I was eleven in 1979, and I remember the Amityville story vividly. There is a quick shot of a newspaper series based on Anson's book, and I remember reading that exact same series of articles when I was living across the country in Louisiana. I've seen a lot of the earlier sequels, and reviewed "Amityville: No Escape" (2016) a while back. I also had the misfortune of seeing "Amityville Vibrator," a stupid decision on my part. The final episode's credits show the physical media containers of other Amityville films, and they get progressively dumber as they go along.
The documentary is a little meandering, dwelling on odd aspects of the case. The infamous "red room" isn't mentioned until the final episode of the four episode run. The "ghost boy" photograph is debunked in a story I was hearing for the very first time. Ed and Lorraine Warren don't escape blame, either. "The Conjuring" films and their preceding cinematic universe are all thanks to the exposure they gained investigating the Lutzes' story, not the DeFeo murders. Even the murderer, Ronald DeFeo, Jr., wanted in on the profits. I watched an interview with DeFeo years ago, he was an awful drug burnout/killer looking to blame everyone else for the murders he committed. A Native American indigenous spokesperson pops in to tell everyone to quit blaming "indian burial grounds" for the evils of many a horror film (I have no dog in that fight), and even the Mafia was looked into after the original shootings. The DeFeo case is touched upon, but the documentary wants to show how this snowball of lies quickly overtook the original tragedy, dragging everyone with it as it plunged downhill into the country's consciousness. Director Riccobono needs to get his hands on a horror film soon. His direction is fantastic, elevating this above basic cable true crime show levels and discomforting the viewer.
Having recently started watching more true crime documentaries and fictionalizations, I keep coming back to a focus that many film makers keep missing- the original case and their victims. I've had passing brushes with true crime in my over half a century on this planet- a family member was friends with a child who was killed in a murder/suicide. I have lived within walking distance of houses where murders were committed. I have known sexual crime perpetrators back before they were caught and jailed, throwing everyone who knew them "before" for a loop. I have been the victim of criminal trauma, untried by the courts and eventually forgotten by everyone but me and maybe the abusers. I don't mean to sound like a narcissist and make this case about me- we should be making the case about the people who can no longer speak for themselves anymore. Ask the DeFeo's children's friends, now understandably angry adults (the film "Amityville II: The Possession" hinted at incest in the DeFeo home), about what those forever-kids were like. We all know the names Amityville, Lutz, the Warrens, the DeFeos, but what were the deceased family members really like? I've mentioned this about serial killers and their victims in the past, too: I can say the name Gacy, and you don't need any additional information to know who I'm talking about, but can you name any of John Wayne Gacy's almost three dozen victims? The documentary wisely goes after Hollywood and the irresponsibilities of profit over storytelling and the cinematic and literary arts.
This film puts the brakes on the ridiculousness that the DeFeo murders and the Lutz infamy have turned into. Christopher reminds us that there were children involved, and he and his brother (through his documentary "My Amityville Horror") show that they still aren't ready to talk about what really happened back then, if anything did at all. Christopher does allude to physical abuse at the hands of George, whose idea for a sequel to the original film was both stupid and shocking. Christopher's story about elitist actor James Brolin winking and shrugging off an incident with a young Christopher should anger you too- and you can see why the Lutz children haven't come out with a tell-all book or long documentary of their own, if they even have a relationship today. We forget they were kids, but getting their story out there might help others heal. George and Kathy Lutz are no longer alive, Christopher changed his name from Lutz to his original last name, and he seems to be trying to move on. Looking back over past true crime stories, many involve children and young adults who now suffer in silence and/or self-inspired anonymity. Even victims can't rest in peace, as Ronald DeFeo, Jr. blamed his sister for the murders, another silly and easily debunked claim.
"Amityville: An Origin Story" plays with the conventions of the modern true crime documentary, and succeeds.
Stats:
(2023) 201 min. (8/10)
-Directed by Jack Riccobono
-With Christopher Lutz, George Lutz, Kathy Lutz, Ronald DeFeo Jr., James Brolin, Ed Warren, Lorraine Warren, Gloria Gangitano, Carol Soviero, Joe Vetter, Erik Davis, Diane Franklin, Tommy Maher
-(TV-MA)-Physical violence, some gun violence, violence involving children, gore, profanity, very brief nudity, sexual references, adult situations, strong violence involving children references, drug abuse references, alcohol and tobacco use
-Media Viewed: Streaming
*Get The Amityville Horror by Jay Anson here*
*Get "The Amityville Horror" (1979) on Amazon here*
*Get "My Amityville Horror" on Amazon here*
This long miniseries documentary isn't an end-all, be-all about the 1974 murders of the DeFeo family in Amityville, New York, but a very good modern look at the story that has entranced (and fooled) a nation for over five decades.
Ronald DeFeo, Jr. killed six members of his sleeping family one night in 1974, and was eventually sent to prison for a life sentence. George and Kathy Lutz and their three kids eventually moved into the giant house, but fled four weeks later after they said they were terrorized by demonic and unseen forces. The Lutzes gave recorded interviews of their experiences to author Jay Anson, who published the book The Amityville Horror (one of the greatest book, and later film, titles of all-time). A (terrible) hit 1979 film was made of the experiences of the Lutzes, which spawned dozens of sequels, spoofs, and remakes, all mostly unrelated to the original DeFeo murders except in passing. As the Lutzes continued to talk about what happened, lawsuits began as the major players tried to get their piece of a very lucrative pie. The series concentrates on Christopher Lutz, one of Kathy's sons from her first marriage (her other son appeared in the documentary "My Amityville Horror"), and his bitterness at a celebrity he never asked for.
George Lutz is the villain in the series, although it's understandable to see how an average guy can get caught up in the glitz and glamour of money and fame. There are a lot of clips from the 1979 film, and I thought the film makers were relying on it a little too much before I realized they were showing what everyone else at that time was seeing and accepting as the truth. I was eleven in 1979, and I remember the Amityville story vividly. There is a quick shot of a newspaper series based on Anson's book, and I remember reading that exact same series of articles when I was living across the country in Louisiana. I've seen a lot of the earlier sequels, and reviewed "Amityville: No Escape" (2016) a while back. I also had the misfortune of seeing "Amityville Vibrator," a stupid decision on my part. The final episode's credits show the physical media containers of other Amityville films, and they get progressively dumber as they go along.
The documentary is a little meandering, dwelling on odd aspects of the case. The infamous "red room" isn't mentioned until the final episode of the four episode run. The "ghost boy" photograph is debunked in a story I was hearing for the very first time. Ed and Lorraine Warren don't escape blame, either. "The Conjuring" films and their preceding cinematic universe are all thanks to the exposure they gained investigating the Lutzes' story, not the DeFeo murders. Even the murderer, Ronald DeFeo, Jr., wanted in on the profits. I watched an interview with DeFeo years ago, he was an awful drug burnout/killer looking to blame everyone else for the murders he committed. A Native American indigenous spokesperson pops in to tell everyone to quit blaming "indian burial grounds" for the evils of many a horror film (I have no dog in that fight), and even the Mafia was looked into after the original shootings. The DeFeo case is touched upon, but the documentary wants to show how this snowball of lies quickly overtook the original tragedy, dragging everyone with it as it plunged downhill into the country's consciousness. Director Riccobono needs to get his hands on a horror film soon. His direction is fantastic, elevating this above basic cable true crime show levels and discomforting the viewer.
Having recently started watching more true crime documentaries and fictionalizations, I keep coming back to a focus that many film makers keep missing- the original case and their victims. I've had passing brushes with true crime in my over half a century on this planet- a family member was friends with a child who was killed in a murder/suicide. I have lived within walking distance of houses where murders were committed. I have known sexual crime perpetrators back before they were caught and jailed, throwing everyone who knew them "before" for a loop. I have been the victim of criminal trauma, untried by the courts and eventually forgotten by everyone but me and maybe the abusers. I don't mean to sound like a narcissist and make this case about me- we should be making the case about the people who can no longer speak for themselves anymore. Ask the DeFeo's children's friends, now understandably angry adults (the film "Amityville II: The Possession" hinted at incest in the DeFeo home), about what those forever-kids were like. We all know the names Amityville, Lutz, the Warrens, the DeFeos, but what were the deceased family members really like? I've mentioned this about serial killers and their victims in the past, too: I can say the name Gacy, and you don't need any additional information to know who I'm talking about, but can you name any of John Wayne Gacy's almost three dozen victims? The documentary wisely goes after Hollywood and the irresponsibilities of profit over storytelling and the cinematic and literary arts.
This film puts the brakes on the ridiculousness that the DeFeo murders and the Lutz infamy have turned into. Christopher reminds us that there were children involved, and he and his brother (through his documentary "My Amityville Horror") show that they still aren't ready to talk about what really happened back then, if anything did at all. Christopher does allude to physical abuse at the hands of George, whose idea for a sequel to the original film was both stupid and shocking. Christopher's story about elitist actor James Brolin winking and shrugging off an incident with a young Christopher should anger you too- and you can see why the Lutz children haven't come out with a tell-all book or long documentary of their own, if they even have a relationship today. We forget they were kids, but getting their story out there might help others heal. George and Kathy Lutz are no longer alive, Christopher changed his name from Lutz to his original last name, and he seems to be trying to move on. Looking back over past true crime stories, many involve children and young adults who now suffer in silence and/or self-inspired anonymity. Even victims can't rest in peace, as Ronald DeFeo, Jr. blamed his sister for the murders, another silly and easily debunked claim.
"Amityville: An Origin Story" plays with the conventions of the modern true crime documentary, and succeeds.
Stats:
(2023) 201 min. (8/10)
-Directed by Jack Riccobono
-With Christopher Lutz, George Lutz, Kathy Lutz, Ronald DeFeo Jr., James Brolin, Ed Warren, Lorraine Warren, Gloria Gangitano, Carol Soviero, Joe Vetter, Erik Davis, Diane Franklin, Tommy Maher
-(TV-MA)-Physical violence, some gun violence, violence involving children, gore, profanity, very brief nudity, sexual references, adult situations, strong violence involving children references, drug abuse references, alcohol and tobacco use
-Media Viewed: Streaming
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)