Reviews

I hate writing about metaphors, in movies, music, or poems, but this movie cries out fot it.

It isn't about, just, a man who is fat. It is about a man who loves, to excess. And his excess of love leads him to an excess with food. He had left his family, not "abandoned" them, for he still felt for them very deeply. But because his love was for another man that his wife abandoned him, and thru her, his daughter. The man he loved was deeply depressed and killed himself and that love lead him to his excess. He tried so hard to connect with his daughter, whom he loved above all, but his wife kept them separated. His nurse loved him and cared for him, and even enabled his excess with food. Enter a "preacher" who isn't really a preacher at all. That's all I can do with that.

The title seems to be misunderstood, even tho it's made clear from the start. The first, English, edition of Moby Dick was published in England and the origitnal title was "The Whale." If you ever come across a copy of that book, it's worth millions.

The film emphasizes over and over how much the father loved the daughter and vice versa. And yet, when she is an adult she says she is incapable of love. That is absolutely absurd and makes the whole story a farce.

MAJOR SPOILERS

At the beginning we are told that this is a "true story," not "based on" or "inspired by." But it isn't. The man was washed overboard in the hurricane and died, yet the movie says he lives and she nurses him. Well,, it was quite enough that she survived and made it to Hawaii on her own, an excellent story of determined survival. Why wasn't that enough? They could have kept the romantic flashbacks without fooling us about things that didn't happen.

I don't see how people see this as a love of folk music, which they make fun of at every turn, the only exception being the excellent Irish quartet. They make fun of Peter Paul and Mary, of Bob Dylan, and above all their subject, Davis. They even parody a parody song, Please Mr. Custer, with a wit-less and really bad result. As always, the Coen Bros. make fun OF their subject, instead of having fun WITH it. They seem to think this shows how smart they are.

This film is beautifully shot, excellent pace, and an absorbing story. The narration by the boy is perfect as we travel the world over with his surfer parents and a quest for the Big Fish. It is a quiet film but as it unfolds it is an absolute treat to see so many places so exquisitely filmed, with a special attention to lighting. It is not a "surfer" movie, although there are wonderful shots of surfing, nor is it a "boys" movie, although the story as told by Given is enchanting. These are the real people telling the story of their real lives and an inspiration for all.

I was really looking forward to this documentary about four women who set out to row the Pacific from California to Australia. This would be a first for a team of four, men or women, as others have rowed the Pacific but none as a team of four. The filming was excellent and there were wonderful views of sunsets and storms and an aching portrayal of the tedium and sheer willpower it took to row 2 hours on, 2 hours off each shift, 24 hours a day. And the women occasionally record video diaries that add to the story, and their honesty and often pain is palpable. And they accurately recount the many setbacks, as currents and winds push them in the wrong direction. HOWEVER. The "team of four" did not row the whole way: one quit in Hawaii and was replaced and another quit in Samoa and was replaced. The rules say that for it to count it has to be an unassisted row. So this was a team of two assisted by four others and so was not a record at all, as they claim at the end. Yes, it was a huge achievement, but not the one they claim.

When a director labels his/her film "inspired" by a true story, watch out! This usually means "I added enough spin to bounce this off the back wall." In this case, Lech Walesa is portrayed as not *really* being the leader of Solidarity (he hardly appears at all, and as nothing more than a prop), but is merely a token figure being given some backbone by the heroine, who in this case is a German, not a Polish actor! Note that the original title is also in German. Hmmm. Our heroine is implausibly super-heroine and played with such tenacious pluck that she achieves near-caricature status. And they changed her name from the original character--to avoid comments from the people who really knew her? If so, it didn't work, for her neighbors weighed in on this film and while she is greatly admired, she did not play the role given her here. Having said that, the film is remarkably even-toned and effective, history aside. Would that they had gone just that little bit further and given the Polish workers their due credit in bringing down the Soviet Union, revisionist historians of the Reagan Right notwithstanding.