Reviews

One of the best known NFB films, the movie mirthfully depicts a woman's decision to turn down chances to dance with doctors, lawyers and tycoons, and instead chooses to dance with a log driver. In this celebration of the men who for generations drove logs from northern forests to sawmills and pulp mills in the South - one of Canada's most important industries - the woman wants to dance with one of the men who scampers over the logs as they hurtle downstream, keeping them from jamming against the shoreline, because he can dance better than any man. This animation short is directed by John Weldon, one of the NFB's most prolific and skilled animators.

In just 20 minutes, this short film gives us compelling insights into the pressure on politicians; into women's rights at the height of the Second Wave of Feminism in the 1960s and 1970s; and the fraught issue of abortion, still a subject of fierce debate in 2023. This is not a drama, it's a true-life story about a noble politician who faces vilification in casting a decisive vote that will make American history. Whether he votes yes or no he will be condemned by a great many people across the country. Finally, we see the importance here of state politics, that a decision made by legislators in Albany - or in Austin, Sacramento or Lansing - will have a national impact. Those debates tend to be more intense, personal and raw than the polite sparring in Washington, and make for great drama as in this movie.

Max Ward was a giant in Canadian passenger aviation. Alas, this movie doesn't talk about what most Canadians think of Ward, and with affection, which is that he introduced consistent semi-luxury service to air travel at reasonable prices. Instead, the movie is taken up with the dreary business of Ward, in endless Ottawa committee meetings, trying in vain to get regulators to free his airline to compete on an equal footing with the Canadian duopoly of much bigger carriers. That is an important part of the Max Ward story, but how he went from a bush pilot to creating one of the world's most respected international airlines is the interesting story that viewers almost certainly expected and don't get here.

This is a superb contribution to our knowledge of the Holocaust. It has the virtue of brevity. In just one hour, it captures the broad sweep of the atrocity, including grisly archival images but also of Germans in 1966, , scarcely a decade after the end of the Final Solution, now putting fellow Germans on trial for that atrocity, those not captured in time for the Nuremberg trials. This great film anticipates Claude Lanzmann's epic Shoah (1985) in depicting a normality, even a beauty, to the former killing grounds, now overrun by meadows, as if the monstrosity never happened. How could such a thing happen here? And in the tradition of NFB documentaries, there is no moralizing here, just a presentation of the facts. I agree with the previous review by barryrd, that this account succeeds though it came so early after the death camps were finally closed, and is as fresh and relevant today as when it was made. There is, after all, much murderous hatred in the 2023 world. Vigilance.

This wonderful movie immerses you in baseball, and in sports. You will get a sense in this rather short film, just an hour long, of why for tens of millions of people sports is such a big part of their lives. This film does not deal with the fans - the fans who make it all possible - but you sense from the roar of the crowd or when the stadium fans are booing their own team, just what's at stake. Ken Burns' Baseball epic is not to be missed. But if you're not a sports fan and people you love are, watch this movie and in an hour you'll get the broad sweep of baseball history and present-day pro athletes, and you'll understand why sports matters so much to so many. Reviewer "stevrgy2000" better explains, in more detail, why this film is worth watching. I second that opinion.

Political biographies are difficult - stilted, formal, too much talking in boring rooms. "Danny" is a thoroughly enjoyable contrast. Thanks to the access he and his family and the people of Newfoundlanders and Labrador give the filmmakers, we get an intimate story of Williams' winsome personality - a fighter by deed and reputation, but in this tell-all movie also a man in love with his political jurisdiction, a man respectful of his adversaries even as he has (justifiably) caustic regard for some. There's a great take-down here of Stephen Harper, and some mutual respect and even affection between Premier Williams and Prime Minister Martin. If you like the political game, and the improvement of people's lives that the game is about, you will enjoy this picture of a man in full, someone who mattered. I watched from afar, in Toronto, as Williams lifted the pride of his people, but until I saw this movie I didn't appreciate just how much he resonated with the great people of that province. Which makes the film universally instructive on what motives politicians, enables them to succeed, and make peace with their setbacks.

This is a sweeping history of not only the National Film Board but of the Canada, still a fledgling country, that the NFB helped shape by showcasing the country for thousands of movie-goers who knew little of their geographically and ethnically diverse country. This is the story of British ex-pat John Grierson who invented the nascent NFB as a propaganda machine at the invitation of then prime minister Mackenzie KIng. But the NFB, in its 500 wartime movies that this film is about, not only recruited Canadians to the war effort, extolling the virtues of Canadians to convince they could fight in the battlefields and war factories, but gave dignity to Canadians in all walks of life. And it is a candid movie, the NFB, still a government agency, showcasing its own failures in, for instance, stereotyping regions and failing to create sufficient French-language films. One does wonder if any other countries' government film agencies would be given free reign to expose their self-examination in this way.

A final note: the narration is superb - balanced, ironic, often amusing and always enlightening.

This brief explanation of the United Nations' activities usefully makes the point that most of the UN's work is done beyond the public spotlight. No mention is made of the General Assembly, where delegates of the scores of UN member countries openly debate. The film says that the UN's major work is done through its many agencies, including the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), UNESCO (education and other social improvement), and the World Health Organization (disease prevention, control and treatment, among other health issues). This is even more true in 2023, when the UN's agencies have, with time, become enormously knowledgeable, well-resource, and respected by almost all countries. But, as the movie says, we don't see much news reporting about that. And so people reasonably ask, why does the world still suffer armed conflict, famine, disease? The message here is that these problems often are outside the UN's authority and require political solutions. Which is true today as in 1962 when the film was made. One element of the film that does date it is suggestion that the challenge of creating a Palestinian homeland has been met. But as we know, in 2023 that problem remains to be solved.

Ostensibly a standard-fare documentary by the state-owned National Film Board of Canada, the film subtly hints at unthinking worship of a idol, contrary to admonitions in the Scriptures not to worship false gods. Brother Andre, apparently invested with curative powers, is not a false idol, though there is no scientific basis for the healing he appears to perform. Unfailingly respectful of the worshippers, the director hints at zealotry with images alone. The pilgrimage continues to this day, generations after it began - a Lourdes in North America in a Quebec at this time devoutly Catholic. Two years after this film, the Church's power began to be decried by public intellectuals as Quebec having allowed itself to become a "priest-ridden society" - a revolution in Quebec's pivot to secularity.

An enjoyable movie that inspires on more than one level. A young woman is a victim of a #metoo-era sexual abuse - she said no, and was made to have sex anyway. These are the kind of borderline cases most difficult to resolve, and the movie depicts that reality without getting preachy. The movie also showcases a handful of relationships - mother-daughter, best friends, a young woman and a wise woman with sensible counsel - that tell how relationships are strained, even broken for awhile, among people who love each other. How to resolve those, how to restore them? This story has some answers, it's at times mirthful, and very satisfying watch.

Here's an inside look at the workings of a town in the U. S. heartland. We see the people of Monrovia at their feedlots, corn fields, municipal hearings, schools and places of worship - a great panorama of life in this good place. Some Midwestern stereotypes are knocked down here, not on purpose but as revealed by the responsible way these people act. As a viewer I thank the people of Monrovia - and it's an impressive cross-section of people - for granting access to so much of what matters in this community. There is a bit of self-deprecation, people of Monrovia acknowledging they live in a small town. But in fact it's a big place, in civic spirit and caring for others.

Apropos the featured reviewer, John Ford's Sex Hygiene is among the best PSA films ever made. The sensitive topic is handled with great candor, important given that the stakes are high. A "surprisingly bad government documentary" it is not. STDs were a huge threat to the fighting capability of the hundreds of thousands of U. S. soldiers in the European theater after D-Day. Instead of lecturing, Ford's film dramatizes real-life dangers and is blessedly straightforward on how to get testing and treatment, and how easy and important it is to do so. Like Duck and Cover, Sex Hygiene stands as one of best uses to which filmmaking has been put.

As to the film under review, I agree with the featured reviewer that it is poorly shot, and in plot and dialogue as unappetizing as the cabbage that's badly cooked.

A young girl, only three or four years old, already knows he is a boy. His mother not only accepts this but embraces it. With her kindness, understanding and guidance, she will ensure her child does not as a teen and adult have to live a secret life. The black and white photography is beautiful. The minimal dialogue gives the words extra meaning. The greatest impression from this movie, reinforced by the many trans documentaries I've seen, is the young lad's utter conviction of his sexual identity so early in life, and the pleasure and self-confidence he takes from knowing who he is. This movie was showcased c. 2022 by The New Yorker in its screening room feature.

This is a neat dance movie with sexual identity as an important but secondary theme. We start with a renowned male dancer who for years has publicly disguised his gay identity while winning over large audiences. The movie starts with his brave decision to perform flamenco - a national symbol of Spain - in drag. In a largely Catholic country said to be entrenched in its traditions, will audiences accept the major dance production he is preparing with fellow flamenco dancers in drag? The dancing is a treat, the risk-taking of the principal dancer is inspiring, and the friendship of many is uplifting.

This movie captures the beauty of 1930s China, prior to the Japanese invasion the presaged World War II. The costuming is spectacular and acting superb in the dance/operatic scenes. It is a sad film, almost a weeper, as other reviewers have noted. Among the underrated talents of directors is their ability to make you feel the rain and wind in a scene, such that they become cast members. The reaction of characters to nature is part of what gives this movie a memorably enjoyable after-affect. Finally, just as I discovered this movie from an IMDb reviewer, I would like to thank reviewer JonSturgess for directing me to, Bungee Jumping on Their Own, a similarly poignant romance.

This is an enjoyable story of friendship, self confidence, and abortion. It has been showcased by The New Yorker's Screening Room, a high honor. And can be viewed on YouTube under its English title, Memoir of a Veering Storm.

A young woman in her teens has the profound yet subtle support of her boyfriend and girlfriend in an hospital abortion that is depicted (non-graphically) as a meticulous procedure that in all likelihood leaves her in better reproductive health than before the surgery.

We see here that abortion is not a form of birth control. In this case, it is a responsible young woman who will not become "a child raising a child." She is decisive and wise in making her decision, and also remorseful.

There is gentle humor here, and decency and kindness by all of the characters, and a recurring dream the patient has of a beautiful deer in the forest that suggests that while unusual the surgery is a natural occurrence.

In short, the film is a movie version of the classic formulation used in describing the role of abortions in society, that they should be "accessible, safe, and rare."

Wonderful movies like this, so few in number, make me wish I was a film instructor.

I would ask the class to write a screenplay based on a widower on a commuter train coping with his loss as his seatmate, a young tough, betrays every malevolent, tasteless, insensitive thought that any horrible person could summon - and who thinks very highly of himself, as such people do.

Our widower, by contrast, is resolutely calm and empathetic, striving to see the world as others do, as if that were some kind of national duty or, closer to the point, what it takes to be a man. A real man.

Packed into a runtime of just 27m, and working with a budget of only L140,000 (with an assist for which I'm grateful from the Irish Film Board), the future director of Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri reveals why he's destined to only make brilliant movies. With this movie, he started at the top, and has stayed there.

McDonagh did not, of course, come out of nowhere. What you see in this picture is decades of experience writing and producing for the London stage. Still, films are a different medium, and this movie isn't the least stagey. At times you think you're watching a Bond flick, waiting for the next impossible thing to happen. A thriller, a dark comedy, a touch of film noir, and a novice director who has to be one of the quickest studies on how to make superb movies in cinema history.

It's no exaggeration that the story painstakingly brought to light by The New York Times and its remarkable reporters has changed the world. There is pre- and post-Weinstein revelations, with sexual abuse since - and quickly - revealed to be widespread. And there has been a tremendous reckoning for the abuse, with people in high places abruptly ousted from power, a phenomenon that continues.

Why a movie, when we already know most of this life-altering story? Because only the movie can convey the tension for all parties that spanned the entire investigation. The fear that Harvey Weinstein, Miramax and Hollywood itself would rise and destroy or at least grievously harm Weinstein's victims to shut them up (they'd already tried to do so with hush money), as well as two reporters pretty much alone with all the information they had gleaned, and knowing the danger that put them in.

I confess I write this as a mainstream newspaper columnist and magazine reporter, a 40 year veteran of journalism. Even though the mighty Times has your back, as with "Woodstein" and The Washington Post, there are moments when you feel alone and your life to be in jeopardy.

And finally the greatest fear, "What if we get this wrong?" The journalist's chief responsibility, as that of the doctor, is "First, do no harm."

This very good movie does not glamorize journalism. It is restrained in its sympathy for the victims. And it has a slow enough pace, though it so compelling it goes by quickly, that you can see the details of these truth-seekers work.

A fine show, all around.

In the heart of a dangerous city, isolated angry vignettes are laced together by desperation of the characters, each struggling with their own and the city's cruel adversity. The tension of the half dozen principal characters, representing the emotional stress of the entire community, seems headed for an explosion. The film is relevant in 2022 with an escalation of mass killings in urban centers worldwide, notably in the U. S. Seething bitterness coalesces into the random murder of innocents. This movie captures to slow and seemingly unconnected violence in the hearts of many characters, whose anger is not without cause, though the maelstrom in which it culminates seems senseless. A universal story of urban despair well acted and highly realistic in our times.

Great chemistry between the co-stars, an engaging story that's also enjoyably informative about both Philippines and Spanish culture, and a "travelogue" film that showcases the astonishing beauty of Barcelona. -D. O., Toronto.

This movie is fun while tackling the tough issue of being in love with two people at once. Viewers might be frustrated at times with protagonist Luke's indecisiveness. But that is so often the way of things in all aspects of life. Luke is coming of age sexually, and like so many people in that phase of life, he is for now uncertain of what makes him happiest by way of sexual identity. Which is, of course, further complicated by the two wonderful people with whom he's in love, and who have a passionate romantic love for him. "Boy Foretold" tackles this common dilemma with great humor as well as poignancy. You will enjoy the laughs, the music, and some useful ideas on how to deal with one of life's most challenging decisions. Especially, you will know you're not alone in making that decision, and that everyone is wishing you the best in whatever you decide.

A delightful story that breaks with rom-com conventions like the one that has only young adults finding each other. This one is geared to middle-aged lovers, a woman and a man rich in life's joyful and tough experiences, so we listen up when they share their wisdom. Not a preachy movie, though: lots of laughs; beautiful set design and costuming; and characters that aren't movie-star glamorous but real, likeable, and worth rooting for. -David Olive, Toronto.

Unlike some reviewers, I am prepared to suspend disbelief and cheer for a cleaning lady - as Bonnaire's character is repeatedly referred to here - becoming a chess grand master in relatively short order.

And I have a bias in enjoying chess and the very agreeable screen presence of Bonnaire and Klein.

But I agree about logistical issues that work against an entirely successful presentation. We have practically no background on Kline's character. And there is no explanation for the one big hurtful thing he does to Bonnaire's character, which speaks to the illogical aspects of the film mentioned by other reviewers.

These are mere pebbles in one's shoe in enjoying the mutual attraction between an A-list French actor and her American counterpart - their chemistry is superb as they bring out the best in each other's characters.

The movie's worth watching for that alone, and the Corsica setting is a nice touch. But those pebbles are an annoying distraction.