Category Archives: Film

“:A THIRD WAY”— Settlers and Palestinians as Neighbors

athrid way poster

“A Third Way”

Settlers and Palestinians as Neighbors

Amos Lassen

We are living in a time of polarization and conflict around Israel/Palestine and Judaism and Islam. In “A Third Way”, we get a story that inspires and educates as it humanizes the characters and gives us new ideas to think about. During a recent social justice movement protest, a new slogan emerged—“Jews and Arabs Refuse to be Enemies.” This film looks at the reality behind such a slogan especially at it applies on the West Bank. It is there in the disputed territories that Jewish settlers (Israelis) and Palestinian Arabs continue to be locked in a struggle for their countries’ futures.

a third 1

Because of frustration with the direct negotiations with Israel yielding no results, the Palestinian Authority has petitioned the United Nations for recognition as a member state. The Israeli government vigorously opposed what they termed a “unilateral” act. The Palestinians also refuse to back down even in the face of U.S. opposition to their UN bid, including cutting off $200 million in humanitarian aid to the Palestinians by the U.S. Congress.

Meanwhile the diplomatic confrontation still continues with no results, and in the two countries there is a very tense atmosphere. Recent mosque desecrations has spread from the West Bank to Israel proper and the threat of Palestinian demonstrations looms large. This is the backdrop of increasing tensions that has brought about a movement of Israeli settlers and Palestinians to explore ways to communicate and co-exist. This movement known as the “third way,” is now struggles to stay alive.

These settlers and Palestinians have been meeting with each other in an effort to find a new road between domination and confrontation. The members of this small but slowly growing movement are pushing the norms of Israeli-Palestinian relations that sometimes puts them at odds with their respective communities.

Rabbi Meacham Froman, the rabbi of the settlement of Tekoa, is regarded as the spiritual father of the movement. Froman is famed for befriending Yasser Arafat as well as meeting several times in Gaza with the now deceased spiritual leader of Hamas, Sheikh Yassin. He has become a major voice of reconciliation.

Recently, settlers vandalized a mosque in the Palestinian village of Qusra following the Israeli Defense Force’s demolition of illegal houses in the Migron settlement outpost. In response, Rabbi Froman visited Qusra to a way to apologize for the deeds done by his co-religionists. Leading the crowd in chants of “Allah Hu Akbar,” the Rabbi “tried to show that the two sides belong to the same land and share the same destiny, whether or not they’re willing to acknowledge it”.

In the past few years, a new generation of settlers has arisen to continue on Froman’s path. Two of these are Nahum Pachenik and Eliaz Cohen whose activism is informal and individual. There is also a similar group, called Eretz Shalom, that meets semi-regularly. Eliaz Cohen lives in Kfar Etzion, the first West Bank settlement, founded in September 1967, and has been meeting with the mukhtar of a neighboring village. He has been pushing the local Israeli government to pave the single road in the village, as well as to give locals permission to repair the village minaret, which Israel has refused to do for almost 30 years.

Eliaz believes that there’s a struggle “for the soul” of the settler movement currently underway and there is new thought that challenges the old way of, orthodoxy that has characterized relations between settlers and Palestinians. Rabbi Froman proclaims that he is “a citizen of the state of God, it’s not so important who is the government.” There are others hold that, whatever the future political arrangement, it will not be relevant if Israelis and Palestinians can’t learn how to live together.

We see that the number of states does not matter but what does matter is that without good relations between people, nothing would work. There are those settlers and Palestinians who are interested in being good neighbors even though they risk being censured. The Palestinians fear censure not just from their families but also from the Palestinian Authority as well.

Mohammed A. lives in a Palestinian village just south of Gush Etzion, the first of the settlements where there is a permanent Israeli guard tower and gate at the main entrance to the village that is often closed during times of tension with the neighboring settlements that are located on three sides of the village. Nonetheless, for several years now, Mohammed has been meeting with settlers as often as he can. He tells them the story of his grandfather, who was killed on May 15, 1948, the day after Israel declared its independence. For many Israelis, the Lone Tree of Gush Etzion is a symbol of Israel “regaining” control over the settlement after the 1967 war and this is where Mohammed’s grandfather was killed. For Mohammed and other Palestinians, the tree has a different meaning altogether. But it is by describing his grandfather’s connection to that place to Israelis that Mohammed hopes that there will; be a new understanding and new thoughts about what is going on there.

a third2

While the filming of this documentary was taking place, we learn that this group of Israeli settlers and Palestinians on the West Bank has challenged some of the pre-conceived notions that some people hold about the conflict, so much so that the word “settler” has become quite an explosive word. The significance of the West Bank, the “cradle” of biblical Judaism, has added a religious element to the conflict and made a rational solution difficult to imagine. Add to this what we are taught about hospitality for he stranger and it becomes even more complicated. We “were strangers in the land of Egypt” and this has taken on a very real meaning for us and for the people we’ve met. These settlers are predominantly religious and they have taken this decree to heart.

There are tremendous difference between the two groups and we really see this when looking at the fact that while some settlers have reached out to visit Palestinians in their homes, the Palestinians by and large haven’t reciprocated. The imbalance is symbolic of the larger situation — Israelis have more freedom of movement than their Palestinian neighbors.

The film documents some of this face-to-face work to establish a more equal relationship. These few brave Israelis and Palestinians may be at the forefront of a movement whose end result even they cannot know.

Nahum and Ziad met through the work of Rabbi Menachem Froman, the notorious “settler for peace” (who himself was a friend of Yasser Arafat), and we could say they’re both Froman’s protégés. They believe that, whatever the eventual future of Israel/Palestine, the smartest idea is to become friends now. Ziad and Nahum meet as equals. Nahum has visited Ziad’s home many times. They’ve walked together near Ziad’s town and they’ve broken bread and mutual fasts together. But on a political/social level, they are not equals by any means: Nahum chooses to live in the West Bank, and he could choose anytime to move to Jerusalem or Tel Aviv. Ziad has no choice. His family and ancestors have lived in their town for more than four generations. And for now, Ziad can’t visit Nahum’s home in his settlement.

a third 3

Nahum himself takes it little by little. He wants to know if there’s an Arab minority in Israel, why can’t there also be a Jewish minority in Palestine? A few months ago, he organized a demonstration, confronting Israeli soldiers, when several Palestinian homes were demolished in Ziad’s town. The relationship is unequal now, but we can hope that one day Ziad and Nahum may be able to meet as complete equals.

We meet Ali Abu Awwad, a Palestinian from Beit Ummar (near Hebron), and Shaul Judelman, an Israeli who grew up in the United States and moved to Israel 14 years ago, spending much of that time in settlements: first to Bat Ayin and, a few months ago, to Tekoa.

The story of what brought them together goes through Tekoa, which was home to Rabbi Menachem Froman (who died two years ago). As I said earlier, Rabbi Froman believed in dialogue and connection with his neighbors. He held meetings with Hamas figures, with whom he found it possible to talk from one religious person to another. This documentary is the story of his work in the last five years of his life, and an examination of the legacy he left behind.

, “A Third Way – Settlers and Palestinians as Neighbors” was directed by Harvey Stein. Stein, who moved to Israel from New York close to a decade ago and first met Froman in late 2008 to make a small film about him, and was taken with the way he was building bridges in a place full of disconnect. Stein describes the rabbi as

“totally irreverent. I remember him asking me once, ‘What’s a settler?’ Then he made his hand like a claw and went grrr. He was able to hold contradictions and say that he loves his neighbors. My Jewish tradition told me to love my neighbors, and so I do.’”

Froman sometimes went to great lengths to show the love he felt. We see him visiting a West Bank mosque that was torched and vandalized by settlers, who also spray-painted insulting messages about the Prophet Mohammed on the walls. Wearing his kippah and tefillin (phylacteries), Froman stands on the stairs and calls out repeatedly to the Palestinians waiting below, “Allahu Akbar!”

One of them was Ali Abu Awwad. Raised in a politically active family in Beit Ummar, he was a teenager during the first intifada and jailed twice by Israel because he threw stones. However, after losing his brother to the conflict, he began to embrace nonviolence and became one of the pivotal members of the Bereaved Families Forum, speaking locally and internationally with Israelis who have lost loved ones. He demanded that both Arab and Israeli turn a new page.

Many Palestinians quietly started coming to meetings organized by Froman and his Hasidic followers and they were impressed that Froman met with Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in Gaza in 1998 – as well as Yasser Arafat. Awaad says that what prevents us from having rights are not the left-wing camp in Tel Aviv. It’s the right wing in the settlements,” Abu Awwad says at Roots, the center he is establishing with Judelman, Froman’s widow, Hadassah, and several other Israeli and Palestinian activists.

Abu Awwad and Froman and his wife met some seven years ago at Sulha, a gathering of Arabs and Jews whose name is based on the traditional Arab form of reconciliation between sparring parties. He liked what Froman had to say but not where he lived.

Abu Awwad met Judelman, an environmentalist and the two became friends. At about the same time, John Moyle, an American clergyman became involved in trying to help Awwad and Judelman build a grassroots peace movement. In January 2014, they founded a movement with a shack on land owned by Abu Awwad’s family. Since then they’ve been holding meetings at people’s homes around the West Bank . They have brought together Israeli settlers and Palestinians and say that they are not involved

in a political plan, but rather deal with human beings and breaking down stereotypes.

“BIKES VS CARS”— The Bicycle as a Tool for Change

bikes vs cars

“BIKES VS CARS”

The Bicycle as a Tool for Change

Amos Lassen

“Bikes vs. Cars” is an award-winning documentary by Fredrik Gertten that explores the efforts of bicycle activists in cities across the world to keep the roads safe for bicyclists, and the struggle against car traffic on crowded city streets. We see the bicycle as an amazing tool for change and as the instrument that highlights a growing conflict in city planning. The bicycle supports a diverse city with a human scale, while the car brings about urban sprawl and reliance on fossil fuels.

Director Gertten takes us to Copenhagen to Los Angeles via Sao Paolo as he explores the ongoing efforts of bicycle activists, who are fighting for their right to ride on city streets against the forces of multi-billion dollar auto, oil, and construction lobbies, that are determined to keep our cities dependent on automobiles.

b4

The film advocates for bike-friendly cities in the 21st century and it has been inspiring a new approach to urban planning that could lead to better designs, smarter political decisions and reduced carbon dioxide emissions.

Together with the film, a companion app will help cyclists track how much they reduce their CO2 imprint and oil consumption for every mile they ride instead of drive. The app is a campaign tool to support activists and cities to work towards bike-friendlier cities. The documentary shows how more bike-friendly cities benefit everybody, not only cyclists.”

 

“Bikes vs. Cars depicts a global crisis and how every person can contribute to the solution by riding their bike”. The film focuses on the issue that bikes can be the key to solve enormous problems related to traffic, pollution or global warning but we also see that strong economic powers exert pressure on both politics and media are tackling the transition to a possible new system.The automotive industry has invested a lot of money to protect their interests but not to make the world a better place to live in.

Those in the documentary share their personal experiences on the roads of different cities from different places all around the world to the audience that they hope will become their allies. We are asked to imagine a world in which more people bike than drove.

bikes1

In Los Angeles, Dan Koeppel traces the paths of old bikeways and dreams about what it was like when the bicycle ruled the streets In São Paulo, Aline Cavalcante rides between cars that are stuck in traffic jams and agitates for infrastructure that will keep her fellow cyclists (250,000 in a city of 7 million cars) from being killed. Then-mayor of Toronto Rob Ford decries the “war on cars,” spending $300,000 to remove two-year-old bike lanes because he feels that no one bikes anymore.

The activists’ fights aren’t waged against any single person or entity but against the global driving culture. It’s not that anyone (except maybe Ford) is opposed to bikes; they’re opposed to anything that might threaten the profits of car manufacturers and oil companies. Brazilian urban planning professor Raquel Rolnik explains that changing the paradigm is a long and thankless struggle.We watch a teacher lead a group of schoolchildren around busy Bogotá on their little bikes teaching them how to safely navigate their city on their own power, you might feel hopeful for the future of eco-friendly transportation.

bikes3

As we deal with the climate crisis and rising congestion, we become aware here of the war playing out on the streets that could be the decisive battle of our time.

“Bikes vs. Cars” looks at the commonly held idea that traffic is just a necessary part of urban life and that cars are the most rational choice for getting around and upends it.

Of course, we see that the rich are more powerful than the poor and this gives us a sense of hopelessness. Why even try when powers are working so hard to prevent success? This is the question that we need to answer.

Bonus features include an interview with director Fredrik Gertten, “The Invisible Bicycle Helmet” (2012) – a short film by Gertten, and the trailer.

“WHAT’S THE WORSE THAT COULD HAPPEN”— A Burglary

what's the worst

“What’s the Worst That Could Happen?”

A Burglary

Amos Lassen

Martin Lawrence is a clever thief named Kevin Caffery who frequents auctions to find out what’s worth stealing. At an art auction, he meets Amber Belhaven (Carmen Ejogo) who is in tears because she has to sell the painting her father left her because she needs money for a hotel bill. The painting is described as a fine example of the Hudson River School, goes for $3,000 but to many it is worth much more than that. Max Fairbanks (Danny DeVito) is a man who has several lovers including his wife (Nora Dunn), his secretary (Gleanne Headly) and Miss September.

worst1

Kevin has a criminal sidekick named Berger (John Leguizamo) and a getaway driver (Bernie Mac) and he is friends with a flamboyant a Boston cop (William Fichtner). The plot is about Kevin’s attempt to rob Max’s luxurious shore estate, which is supposed to be empty but in fact contains Max and Miss September. After the cops are called, Max steals a ring given him by Amber Belhaven. The rest of the movie as about Kevin’s determination to get it back, intercut with Max’s troubles with judges, lawyers and accountants.

worst3

What could have been quiet jokes becomes sloppy and slapstick and the film does not have a strong narrative that will go from beginning to end. A comedy needs a strong narrative engine to pull the plot through to the end. There are simply too many actors and too poor a script to carry this through.

 

worst4In a movie about a caper like this one, it’s the actors who matter. Lawrence did not make it as a star and he just is not funny here. DeVito is a great talker but he is once again playing the same old, same old.

worst5

The cast is very good and there are some funny moments but by and large, I just could not get into the movie. The underlying premise is that the only difference between the businessman, the politician, the lawyer, and the man who steals is that at least the professional thief is honest about what he does. There is something unsettling about the underlying assumptions here, especially those about the smug self-righteousness of the thieves.

“SIBLING RIVALRY”— A Fling

sibling rivalry

“Sibling Rivalry”

One Last Fling

Amos Lassen

Marjorie (Kirstie Alley) has a single sister, Jeanine (Jami Gertz), who thinks that Marjorie should have an affair because her doctor husband, Harry (Scott Bakula), neglects her. Harry’s dominating doctor sister, Iris (Carrie Fisher), also treats Marjorie as a zero. In rebellion, Marjorie picks up a stranger named Charles (Sam Elliott) for a hot hotel one-nighter, but Charles’s heart gives out from the exertions. Then Marjorie learns that Charles was really Harry’s brother, just returned from years overseas. So Marjorie tries to make it look like Charles committed suicide. She is aided by Nick (Bill Pullman), a bumbling window-blind salesman who just happened to be hanging blinds in Charles’s hotel room. Nick doesn’t want any bad publicity either, since his brother, Wilbur (Ed O’Neill), is a cop running for chief of police. Everyone is related and there is a lot of mugging for the camera.

sib1

 Director Carl Reiner seems to have lost what he once had when he was directing wonderful dark comedies such as Where’s Poppa” and “All of Me”. As I watched this, I thought it was cheesy and somewhat exhausting. It is madcap and a bit screwball and I do not think it fair to summarize the plot because some of you might actually enjoy this and I do not want to influence your opinion.

sib2

The plot is a series of revolving-door situations in which first one person and then another lacks a crucial piece of information. The actors deserve better than the material and direction they’re given.

sib4

Watching the film, I found myself thinking about other ways of directing the same material. If the performances were cooled down and the pacing was revved up, I think the movie would be better received. As it stands, it is something of a failure with a lot of talent.

“UNLIKELY HEROES”— Winning Respect

unlikely heroes poster

“Unlikely Heroes” (“Schweizer Helden”)

Winning Respect

Amos Lassen

In “Unlikely Heroes”, Swiss director Peter Luisi brings us a mainstream comedy-drama in which a motley group of asylum seekers come (crammed) together in a center in the Alps to put on a play during the Christmas vacation. This is a film about immigration and white guilt set in Swiss Alps that follows an amateur production of Friedrich Schiller’s “Wilhelm Tell” at a home for asylum seekers.

unlikely

 

Recently separated from her husband and coldly abandoned by her posh socialite friends, middle-aged Sabine (Esther Gemsch) faces the prospect of spending the holidays alone. Unable to tell her snobby companions the truth about her plans for Christmas, Sabine elects to make reality more to her liking by telling those same friends that she will be directed the show at the local shelter for political refugees. Her friends, however, insist on viewing the show themselves, and consequently, Sabine is forced into going through with her own falsehood. Thus, with a group of nonprofessional actors with varying degrees of German fluency and a very hesitant sanctuary staff, Sabine sets out to produce the play.

 

“Unlikely Heroes” desperately wants to say something about the politics of immigration. Director Luisi exploits every opportunity and every character to make some sort of hackneyed statement about the necessity of reform. Some characters are made to fall in love. Others are made out to be as flat and likeable as physically possible. This is undoubtedly because he wants to make sure that everyone who sees this film will be angry enough to do something about immigration.

unlikely

 

He places Sabine front and center. Because of this, potentially potent sub-plots and honest character development are pushed to the back burner and Sabine hopelessly meanders about very much preoccupied with what her waspy confidantes are going to think of her play. Even more upsetting is that, when Sabine eventually wakes up and understands what is going on, Luisi actually asks the audience to empathize with her and her feelings of being a goddess to the immigrants.

Technically this is a fine movie but the plot is a disaster. The original play about William Tell is practically entirely stripped of dialogue by a semi-xenophobic actor friend (Klaus Wildbolz) of Sabine’s and she needed him because the level of German of most of the asylum seekers is extremely basic. Luisi uses this absence of German skills of most of the actors as an awkward source of humor.

unlikely4

Unlike Sabine, Luisi uses real actors for the roles of the asylum seekers, and they are an affable bunch that at least manage to suggest why Sabine keeps coming back to the center. Unfortunately (again), “Unlikely Heroes” fails its feelings of self-importance.

“BETRAYED”— A Real Killing Fictionalized

betrayed poster

“Betrayed”

A Real Killing Fictionalized

Amos Lassen

“Betrayed” is a fictionalized version of a genuine killing – the shooting by white supremacists of “shock jock” Alan Berg in Denver. We meet Katie (Debra Winger), a ‘combine girl’ who has been hired to cover the busy harvest season in a small town in Iowa and becomes romantically involved with Gary (Tom Berenger). He is a widower with two children and Katie seems to be just the woman he needs to restore his faith in love after the highway murder of his wife three years earlier. However, there is more to Katie than he realizes and we learn that she is an undercover FBI agent who has been charged with the task of discovering if Gary, a suspected member of a right wing militia group, was involved in the murder of the DJ. Her boss Michael (John Heard) is Katie’s ex-lover) who is convinced that Gary is implicated in the killing. However, Katie can’t believe that the man she is falling in love with could possibly be an extremist, let alone the organizer of the atrocities that have been committed in the name of white supremacy. Her feelings become conflicted when she hears him voice racist sentiments and he life takes a turn when she becomes directly implicated in Gary’s secret life.

betrayed1

Director Costa-Garvas handles Gary’s monstrous sympathies in a way that makes it easy to believe that Katie could have such a hard time believing that he could really be a killer. The truth is revealed in a genuinely horrifying sequence when Katie is invited to a ‘hunt’ where a kidnapped black man is tracked down through the woods and then shot. It is a brilliant and shocking sequence which is perhaps necessary to demonstrate the logical result of Gary’s extreme political beliefs. It’s also hugely effective propaganda. There is a distinct sense of exploitation here and the hunt sequence is shot for queasy shock effects. We also see a which aren’t all that far away from the murders in a white supremacist training camp where neo-Nazis trot about in their uniforms and white-cloaked racists burn crosses sing “Amazing Grace”. We see the banality of evil in an excellent performance from John Mahoney as Shorty, a farmer whose political radicalism has been fired by the bank taking his farm away and Vietnam taking his son from him. When he casually talks about the evils of ‘niggers’ and Jews, his quiet rationality is far more disturbing than the more obviously upsetting hunt sequence. Equally disturbing and believable is a sad scene where Gary’s cute little daughter talks about “killing all the dirty niggers and the Jews”.

betrayed2

What Costa-Gavras does so very well here is suggest how extreme right-wing organizations can flourish in apparently normal small towns and recruit people who are otherwise “entirely normal”. He doesn’t make the mistake of turning the racists into crude caricatures and in the character of Gary, he allows Tom Berenger a small triumph as we see him as a perfectly and entirely believable figure. His sincerity is evident in everything he does and while this doesn’t make him sympathetic, it does help us to understand why Katie would be so conflicted in her feelings about him. In the early scenes, Berenger is charismatic and likeable so that when the truth is revealed, we somehow want his true nature to be some kind of mistake or deception. Debra Winger is also excellent in a very difficult role that demands her character to be pulled every which way without ever quite defining just what she is doing in the FBI or why someone like her would put up with the patronizing types she is forced to work with.

betrayed3

I am not sure that this is a thriller although it was advertised that way. Whatever twists are in the plot, they happen early on and the revelations about Katie and Gary come in the first half hour. All that we have to do is wait to see how long it will take for Gary to find out that his new love is an FBI agent. We are gripped by the performances but unfortunately the characters aren’t complex enough for this kind of exposure. The sentiments of the film are excellently shown and the anti-racist message is delivered in no uncertain terms. “Betrayed” is certainly worth seeing for the performances and for some very good scenes.

 

“DIE FIGHTING”— Getting a Break in Hollywood

die fighting correct poster

“Die Fighting”

Getting a Break in Hollywood

Amos Lassen

“Die Fighting” chronicles four Shaolin martial artists who have just won the top award at a Film Festival. They immediately set their sights for Hollywood, but they face a new challenge— a mysterious director forces them to “act” in his own brutal reality film, with the lives of their loved ones at stake. Every move they make is watched through hidden cameras and they are forced to run a gamut through the underbelly of Los Angeles including robbing an armored truck, dealing with a Drug Lord, breaking an entire dojo of Blackbelts, evading a SWAT team, surviving a blazing gunfight and these are only a few of what they have to do according to the script. The team gives us some of the best martial arts that we have seen on commercial film.

This is a low budget film and there moments where the low budget does become more evident, but as soon as something like this starts to show, they become involved in brilliantly choreographed fight sequences. that reminds you why this movie works so great. Not only are the lead actors but so are the bad guys that they take on. We see a variety of styles that help to keep the film fresh and fun to watch.

“VIKTORIA”—“The Baby of the Year”

viktoria poster

“VIKTORIA”

“The Baby of the Year”

Amos Lassen

Maya Vitkova’s debut feature, “Viktoria”  is set in the final years of the People’s Republic of Bulgaria and the early years of the transition to democracy. Born without an umbilical cord and unwanted by her mother unwanted by her mother, Boryana (Irmena Chichikova) , Viktoria (Daria Vitkova) is named the country’s “Baby of the Decade” and is showered with gifts and attention until the disintegration of the East Bloc. Despite throwing their worlds off balance, the resulting political changes also allow for the possibility of reconciliation. 

viktoria1

 

Vitkova wrote, produced and directed the film which makes it personal for her making it both personal and universal. It is the first Bulgarian film ever to screen at Sundance and it has a lot to say and does so with very few words. As the story comes to life during the fall of communism, Vitkova’s gorgeous imagery elevates her semi-autobiographical debut to poetic heights. Viktoria’s relationship with her mother was severed before it even began. As a living symbol of the communist party, Viktoria knows that the love she receives is more political than it is maternal and as we watch we see a powerful metaphorical link between the physical body and the body politic.

It begins in November 10, 1979, ten years before the fall of communism. Boryana and her husband Ivan (Dimo Divov) are quietly having sex and do not to wake her mother (Mariana Krumova) with whom they live. The next morning, we see Boryana having her daily ritual of drinking contraband Coca-Cola from a stash that she keeps hidden in the bathroom and we get a hint of her desire to go west to the free world. She also goes through a series of activities to prevent a child from forming inside of her. These obviously did not work since the next time we see her she’s pregnant.

Director Vitkova actually takes us inside the womb to connect the viewer with the fetus. Cross cutting between two laboring mothers in the same room, we see the normal delivery of one baby and the silent birth of Boryana’s child. As the doctors hover over Viktoria in awe and confusion because of her lack of a belly button, a pack of well-suited comrades invade the room to celebrate “the baby of the decade.”

viktoria2

Unable to breast-feed her own child, Boryana’s post-partum depression becomes darker as Viktoria grows up. What Viktoria doesn’t receive in motherly love, she finds in the affections of a doting government. The party throws her lavish birthday parties and transports her to and from school everyday. She has a phone by her bedside that connects her exclusively to the party leader and is allowed free reign at school. Vitkova gives us some absurd by satirizing political propaganda.

When the collapse of communism arrives in 1989, the entire foundation of Viktoria’s life comes crashing down with it. Quickly moving ahead, the film begins a nuanced exploration of the mother-daughter relationship. As an adolescent Viktoria (Kalina Vitkova), see a good deal of pain and longing. Boryana who has maintained a stoic front throughout the film until the final scene and we get hints of her motivations.

The film spans some thirty years. Politically and psychologically, Vitkova gives us a highly personal story with great pathos that shows her smart sense of humor.

“THE KINGDOM OF ZYDECO”— The Roots of Zydeco

the kingdom of zydeco

“The Kingdom of Zydeco”

The Roots of Zydeco

Amos Lassen

“The Kingdom of Zydeco” is a celebration of music and it is also a comedy of manners. Boozoo Chavis and Beau Jocque are involved in a tussle that is an American status farce and a folk tale. Both of these men give thrilling performances that have been filmed by Robert Mugge who is a specialist in roots music documentaries. This is basically a documentary on the irresistibly rhythmic dance music of Louisiana’s black Creole community.

kc1

Two musicians are rivals to wear the crown of Zydeco’s. The veteran Boozoo Chavis insists it is his to wear because he’d been anointed by none other than the late Rockin’ Doopsie, whose own claim as successor to the original King of Zydeco, Clifton Chenier, was itself much disputed in Southwest Louisiana.

Chavis made the first commercial zydeco recordings in 1954, when Beau Jocque was still a gleam in his father’s eyes. Now the strapping Jocque challenges Chavis in an accordion and washboard-fueled battle., However, this civil war seems more of a promoter’s scheme than a serious musicians’ showdown. The genial Jocque says that the best man might win if he does. Jocque clearly the people’s choice, thanks to a bracing zydeco sound updated to include elements of funk, rock and John Lee Hooker-style electric boogie.

kz2

As for the 63-year-old Chavis, who takes the challenge quite personally, sees himself as the gatekeeper of tradition. I know more music than he’s ever going to learn says the feisty Chavis, who adds that Jocque has a lot to learn before he can come over Boozoo. “I’m coming from way back, I ain’t comin’ from yesterday.”

Chavis also claims that claiming he’s been overlooked because he’s “kind of short.” Jocque is 6-foot-6. Even though the heart of this documentary is the showdown, it’s never really shown and there’s an anti-climactic feeling at the eventual crowning of which man wins and to find that out you will have to see the film.

kz3

Robert Mugge is a longtime chronicler of American music, is not out to create a history of zydeco, but to capture the music’s spirit. He intersperses performances by both Chavis and Jocque with interviews about the “conflict” with local deejays, club owners and other musicians. This is a delightful film about delightful competition between two delightful musicians.

“DILLINGER”— A Different Dillinger

dillinger

“DILLINGER”

A Different Dillinger

Amos Lassen

Director John Milius gives us a “Dillinger” that is fascinating for its speed, action and firepower.Dillinger (Warren Oates) and company rob banks and get shot up in dashes across the Depression countryside in vintage cars to vintage music on a gory road that ends in Dillinger’s bloody finish outside that Chicago movie house in 1934. However, it is never explained why or how Dillinger chose that path. “I sure am happy. I just want to steal people’s money,” says Dillinger. As depicted in scenes shot in and around Enid, Okla., members of his gang (Pretty Boy Floyd, Baby Face Nelson, et al) are just as callous and equally happy in their work.

d1

Warren Oates’ Dillinger is tough and homespun. He, pushes Baby Face Nelson around and is sentimental about visiting his folks. He is roughly affectionate with his girl, but there is something missing is this characterization. The film captures the look of the nineteen-thirties, but its violence dominates the film and the players who are largely undefined. We see Dillinger as a fairly decent man who became something of a folk hero with more modesty than Bonnie and Clyde (whose adventures he follows in the newspapers). He brags sometimes, but with reason, and he’s not a sadistic killer. He’s a professional. He has killers in his gang, however, and is enraged when Baby Face Nelson gets trigger-happy.

d2

The film perfectly captures the local colloquialisms, the mannerisms, and casting is near perfect, from the lead to supporting characters, primarily because the actors don’t look like actors, they look like ordinary early-twentieth-century common folk. They are certainly representative of the time period with crags and wrinkles in their faces and in their hardened eyes. The Dillinger gang, other than Richard Dreyfuss’ George “Baby Face” Nelson, operate almost like a family. We believe that they care for each other, are courteous to their women and, on occasion, to the common folk. And while they are desperate killers, they seem to delight and enjoy the entire affair and even know that the end is always near.

d3

It’s a brutal film with a lot violence, sexual aggressiveness and death. There is no internal conflict to go “straight” or escape from his past. Dillinger says to his lover, Billie Frechette, “All my life I wanted to be a bank robber. Carry a gun and wear a mask. Now that it’s happened I guess I’m just about the best bank robber they ever had. And I sure am happy.” We look at him and think that he is hardened. And if Oates’ Dillinger makes a compelling anti-hero, Ben Johnson as Melvin Purvis is a great foil. He pursues Dillinger with almost T-800 Model 101 efficiency and the folksiness of a John Ford character. His mission is to eradicate Dillinger his gang. However, Milius never makes him unwavering in his mission, and both the FBI and the gangsters develop a form of mutual and deadly respect.

d1a

All in all, the film is a fun and nostalgic romp. The protagonists are clear in their intentions— they’re outlaws. The antagonists are the system that will systematically track them down and kill them. No one will be left alive. The Dillinger gang will meet a gruesome end, but they will not go quietly.