Title: The Innkeepers – Trailers

Director: Ti West

Cast: Sara Paxton, Pat Healy, Kelly McGillis, George Riddle, Lena Dunham

Synopsis: Watch the Innkeepers trailer. During the final days at the Yankee Pedlar Inn, two employees determined to reveal the hotel’s haunted past begin to experience disturbing events as old guests check in for a stay. Break.com delivers official movie trailers previews, teasers and clips in HD for all the hottest coming soon & theatrical releases including the Horror The Innkeepers.

Genre: Horror


The Innkeepers – Trailers – Watch more Movie Trailers

 

Title: Project X – Trailer

Director: Nima Nourizadeh

Cast: Matthew Broderick, Helen Hunt, Anne Lockhart, William Sadler, Johnny Ray McGhee

Synopsis: Watch the Project X trailer. 3 high school seniors throw a birthday party to make a name for themselves. As the night progresses, things spiral out of control as word of the party spreads. Break.com delivers official movie trailers previews, teasers and clips in HD for all the hottest coming soon & theatrical releases including the comedy Project X.

Genre: Comedy


Project X – Trailer – Watch more Movie Trailers

 

Where does appreciation end and exploitation begin? Gorgeous and disquieting, the documentaryBombay Beach wobbles between the two like a beginner gymnast on her first attempt on the balance beam. On one side, it’s a poetic, freeform examination of the lives of a few of the residents of the area of the title, located by the Salton Sea in the Southern California desert. On the other, it’s an uncomfortable fetishization of the community’s outsider status, dictated by poverty, by location and by an inability or unwillingness to exist elsewhere. Israeli-born director Alma Har’el, who comes from a background of music videos and commercials, doesn’t just bask in this abundance of scenic, decaying Americana, she shapes it into choreographed dance interludes with the subjects, who twirl outside their mobile homes and don carnival masks to cavort in an outdoor gazebo. It’s a bit of whimsy as pretty and problematic as the film as a whole.

There’s no question of what drew Har’el to Bombay Beach’s setting, which is almost otherworldly and ripely cinematic. On the edge of the inland sea, the remote, half-abandoned community has the look of a group of survivors of some apocalyptic event. The film starts with old promotional footage from decades ago touting the area’s destiny as the next California paradise (“The future is now!”), a place for resorts and recreation and a more traditional type of escape, before cutting to the fallen reality, the few dilapidated homes and businesses remaining today, and slowly finding its way to the three characters it will follow — the elderly Red, who lives in the Slab City trailer encampment and gets by bootlegging discount cigarettes; Benny Parrish, a boy who’s been diagnosed with bipolar disorder; and CeeJay Thompson, a black teenager from L.A. who’s been sent to the area to get away from the gang violence that claimed the life of his cousin.

Part of what makes Bombay Beach such prime fuel for arguments about hipster appropriation is its impressively chic pedigree.

Part of what makes Bombay Beach such prime fuel for arguments about hipster appropriation is its impressively chic pedigree. Some of Har’el’s most well-known and acclaimed music videos are for Zach Condon and his band Beirut, original music from whom figures prominently on the soundtrack. There are also songs from Bob Dylan, and an enthusiastic endorsement from Terry Gilliam adorns the top of the official website. There’s nothing malicious in the film’s gaze — I have no doubt that Har’el has sincerely fallen in love with her subjects and the region — but that doesn’t negate the way the film doesn’t observe, it palpably imposes a thesis upon these people, about the crumbled American dream, about the nobility of existence on the outskirts, using them as material for an idea in a way that speaks more to the filmmaker than to who they are. What kind of obligation a documentarian has to his or her subjects can be the center of an interesting if endless debate, andBombay Beach regardless has no aims to be any sort of traditional nonfiction film, but there’s still something squirmy in its vision, the way that it continually flirts with condescending to what it would lift up.

Bombay Beach does include some unforgettable imagery, much of it shot toward dusk when the desert has cooled and when the washed-out colors of the landscape blend into the vast sky and the reflecting water. CeeJay and his friend noodle around in a golf cart looking for something to do and talking about the future — he hopes to get a football scholarship, but his pal wonders what would happen if he just stayed put and became a bum. “I’d find you and I’d take care of you, no homo,” CeeJay tells him. Red and his friends, many wizened and shirtless, have a cookout in Slab City, as one woman massages a bowl of limp, grayish lettuce. “That is a salad,” her friend declares.

But it’s to little Benny that the film’s heart belongs — an adorable kid who seems to live only half in this world and the rest of the time in his own imagination, Benny’s on a regimen of Ritalin and Lithium and other meds that sometimes leave him even dreamier than is his norm, and while his mother frets over these side effects she also abides by what the doctor tells her, not having any other choice. She and her husband once had a fondness for setting off explosives and an extreme avoidance of housekeeping — the former landed them in jail, the latter got their children taken away for a while, and she’s clearly trying her hardest to parent according to rules she’s had to teach herself. (When she tells her oldest daughter she was 15 when she first got pregnant, the girl says “I finally know what age you were” — it’s a puzzle she’s been exploring for a while in the face of deflections.) We don’t see the problems Benny’s caused that led to his diagnosis, and his drugged up daze and earnest plea to his teacher that “I hope I behave” are extra heartbreaking because of it. Benny’s playing out in the desert on a beached ship or in a fantasy sequence involving a fire truck are some of the only moments he seems fully himself, and they’re the least forceful and most magnetic instances of Bombay Beach’s Harmony Korine-esque tributes to the concept of the beautiful freaks.

 

Every time Sam Worthington shows up in a movie, I squint and ask myself, “Who’s that again?” That might happen two or three times with a new actor. But I feel as if I’ve seen a dozen Worthington performances by now, and I still squinted at him in Texas Killing Fields.

Maybe one of the problems is that although there’s a good story here and, Worthington’s aside, some good performances, there’s just too much filmmaking going on in Texas Killing Fields: Ami Canaan Mann doesn’t show anything to us straight when she can show it underlit, slightly tilted or heaped on a pile with dozens of other extraneous details. All that assertive stylishness wouldn’t matter so much if it didn’t obscure the basic plot: Texas Killing Fields follows two Texas City detectives — local guy Mike Souder (Worthington) and New York transplant Brian Heigh (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) — as they scratch their heads over a recent homicide. A young girl has been found murdered. Might it be linked to other murders of young women that have occurred just outside the cops’ jurisdiction? Nah, says lazy, grouchy, pugilistic cop Mike. Probably! says intuitive, caring, principled, deeply Catholic Brian.

But that semi-exciting conflict doesn’t come up until at least midway through the movie. Mostly, we see characters glancing significantly toward one another or arguing about things that don’t matter all that much in the outcome, and there is one oh-so-clever red herring. There’s also some ewky corpse stuff, which is very artistically shot — by DP Stuart Drybergh — but which still makes you go “eww.” (We have the CSI shows and others like them to thank for that trend.) And somewhere in there, murkily lit, is Jessica Chastain, as the exhausted detective of the neighboring precinct who desperately needs help solving these murders. It also turns out she’s Mike’s ex-wife, though how these two could ever have shared a sandwich, let alone a life together, is something the movie never explores. It’s just an extra little checkbox the movie ticks off.

Texas Killing Fields, written by Don Ferrarone, is loosely based on a series of real-life unsolved Texas murders. And there is an element of effective spookiness here, particularly in the performance of Chloë Grace Moretz as Little Anne, a girl just on the cusp of womanhood who’s obviously at risk. Her mother (Sheryl Lee) kicks her out of the family shack every time she has her “friends” over, which is pretty much all the time. With nowhere to go, Little Anne wanders around town, and her presence is ghostly — with her tangle of seaweed hair and pouty half-smile, she’s like a figure from an old folk song, a wronged specter doomed to wander the plains.

Moretz brings some natural gravity to a role that hasn’t been adequately fleshed out.

Moretz brings some natural gravity to a role that hasn’t been adequately fleshed out. And while Jeffrey Dean Morgan’s Brian worries about her constantly, he also pretty much leaves her to the figurative wolves. (Having her over to dinner at his house once doesn’t count.) Meanwhile, the disastrously mismatched Mike and Brian bicker and spar. You could really do something with this idea of reluctant police partners: The paired-off detectives we generally see in the movies and on TV always get along so famously, even when they pretend to hate each other.

But Texas Killing Fields has way too many fish to fry to follow that one little minnow. And that just causes the plot — intriguing at first — to become hopelessly tangled. Then there’s the issue of Worthington. He’d be easy to take if he were just a bad actor. But he’s something worse: a perfunctory one. He does work hard in Texas Killing Fields, glaring at Brian, or his ex-wife, or any number of thugs — his recurring line is “Don’t look at me like that!” when it’s obvious that he’s the one who’s looking like that. And, as it turns out, his suspicion and belligerence do serve a purpose. But that doesn’t mean we want to watch him exercise it for two hours. We get all sorts of hints about Mike’s troubled past, but Worthington wears all his inner pain right on the surface. The rural Texas of Texas Killing Fields is a very dark place; Worthington’s performance is like an advertising campaign for all that darkness, instead of a manifestation of the thing itself.

 

After the Shrek series used up its charm on rote third and fourth installments that nevertheless raked in giant piles of box office bullion, the prospect of a spin-off prequel focusing on Antonio Banderas’ swashbuckling, footwear-sporting feline seemed as inevitable as it was unpromising. But Puss in Boots, directed by Chris Miller (who also helmed Shrek the Third) is a legitimately entertaining prequel that encapsulates what the franchise does best: Breezy action, clever twists on classic figures from fables and grown-up gags tucked in amidst the kid-friendly developments. (“You got any idea what they do to eggs in prison? I’ll tell you this — it ain’t over easy!” the Zach Galifianakis-voiced Humpty Dumpty quavers at one point, in the first prison rape joke I can think of to not only be slipped into a kiddie flick but also highlighted in the trailer.)

It’s become very easy to think of computer-animated films as falling into the categories of “Pixar” and “Everything Else,” with the former consisting of marvels of art and entertainment and the latter made up of 80-minute chunks of bright colors, merchandising opportunities and outdated pop culture references. But as Cars 2 suggests, not even Pixar can be Pixar all the time, and films likeRango and Puss in Boots provide a gratifying reminder that all mainstream animation has the capacity to get beyond the lucrative niche of the joylessly calculated kid movie. It doesn’t hurt thatPuss in Boots has the participation of Guillermo del Toro, who serves as executive producer and provides the voice of the Comandante — the man may have a lot going on at the moment, but there’s no doubting his aversion to condescension to audiences and his reverence for fairy tales.

It’s that of Jack and the Beanstalk that provides the backbone for Puss in Boots’ plot, though the mood is pure spaghetti western. Puss is roped into a heist in which he and his cohorts will steal the magic beans from Jack and Jill (Billy Bob Thornton and Amy Sedaris), who’ve been turned into square-shouldered outlaws bickering about the right time to slow down their careers in order to have a baby. The gang intends to plant the enchanted legumes in the right spot and climb the resulting vine to steal the golden eggs from the giant’s castle (the giant passed away ages ago, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t still something fierce standing guard). Complicating this plan is the fact that it was dreamed up by Humpty, an ovoid mastermind who grew up in the same orphanage as Puss, and with whom the cat shares an unhappy past. Reuniting with Banderas for a non-Robert Rodriguez-led outing, Salma Hayek provides the voice of Kitty Softpaws, the third cohort, a flirty feline thief with an extra light (and declawed) touch.

Puss in Boots doesn’t have and doesn’t strive for the soul of a Pixar film, but gets pleasure enough out of its own characters and the way they move through this cleverly realized world.

Usually, the adult and sometimes risqué jokes added to movies like these, intended to sail over the heads of younger audience, have the tone of an apology, a bone thrown to bored parents. The occasional wink here — there’s even a medical marijuana crack — seems a little more naughty and good-humored, as if the creators genuinely couldn’t help themselves. Not that the film demands such concessions: Puss in Boots doesn’t have and doesn’t strive for the soul of a Pixar film, but gets pleasure enough out of its own characters and the way they move through this cleverly realized world.Humpty, for instance, his petulant features grouped in the center of his head/torso, struggles with the limitations of an egg-shaped body, including how difficult it can be to get up once one has had a great fall.

Puss and his love interest Kitty have touchable-looking fur of varied length and texture, and move in a diverting combination of lithe human and even lither cat ways, at one point getting into a dance competition that brings in elements of flamenco and poop scooting. The eruption of the beanstalk into the stratosphere and the trio’s bouncing around on the clouds upon arrival provides the film’s highlight, not just in terms of the beauty of its visuals but because of the physicality that goes with them. The characters cling to the plant through its magically accelerated growth spurt, grappling with leaves and ricocheting off stems, and they never display the weightlessness than can still afflict this type of animation and splinter its manufactured reality. Puss in Boots further plays to its strong points by placing the human characters in the background, with the exception of Jack and Jill, who look more like caricatures than people.

The film rounds an extended flashback and its central theft and completes its tale of betrayal and forgiveness by returning to the small town of San Ricardo, scene of Puss’ shame and his ultimate redemption. It may not bring a tear to your eye, but it won’t leave you feeling cheated or talked down to, even when the de rigueur credits dance number comes around. There’s nary an appearance from an ogre, and no Donkey, either — that, I’m guessing, is a spin-off for another day.

 

Alfred Hitchcock and Cecil B. DeMille might have been able to successfully redo their own movies, but more recent auto-remakes, especially ones that find directors cranking out a U.S. version of their own foreign-language hit, have been a motley crew. The best, like Michael Haneke’s 2007 Funny Games and Takashi Shimizu’s The Grudge, tend to be merely functional enterprises that revisit what worked the first time around with added English-speaking and possibly more famous actors. But others highlight in a painfully clear way the compromises that so often come with working in Hollywood. Ole Bornedal’s wan Nightwatch lost the nasty edge of the Danish original and retained no other distinguishing characteristics, and George Sluizer’s 1993 The Vanishing ditched the finale of his 1988 Spoorloos, an uncompromisingly bleak and great ending, for a studio-friendly happy one that undoes everything toward which the first film built.

So 13, Géla Babluani’s remake of his own French 2005 thriller about an underground Russian roulette ring 13 Tzameti, doesn’t come from the most promising tradition, before you even take into account that it’s been bumping around in international release for well over a year. It does at least have an impressive — really, kind of amazing — cast. Sam Riley, so good as Ian Curtis in Control, is the naïve lead, Vince. Michael Shannon, Jason Statham, Ray Winstone, Mickey Rourke, Alexander Skarsgård and Ben Gazzara all appear, as do, somewhat less remarkably, 50 Cent and Emmanuelle Chriqui. Few of these folks make an impression, which isn’t really their fault (except for 50 Cent, who delivers his lines with a singularly enervating lack of intonation) so much as it’s a function of how the film is structured. Both the original and this new 13 are, depending on your worldview, either odd variations on the deadly tournament formula or bleak ones on extreme gambling, but they are also about a group of desperate men who don’t have a lot of time to spend talking about their feelings.

This is a lumpy, dumb, suspenseless thing that sometimes scarcely feels finished.

At least they shouldn’t. This actually becomes part of the problem with 13: This is a lumpy, dumb, suspenseless thing that sometimes scarcely feels finished. The original gets most of its juice from its minimalism — done in black-and-white and starring Babluani’s brother George in his first acting role, it lets the audience in on its premise only when its main character figures it out, after he’s taken the place of his smack-addicted employer and disappeared down a very dangerous rabbit hole. This 13 starts off with a cheap-looking title card, followed by a shot of money being counted and then a flash of Vince and another man pointing guns at one another, as if the audience would drift away if they weren’t promised violent intrigue right off the bat. And they might — the film’s introduction listlessly outlines the tough situation in which Vince’s family has ended up, having had to sell their house to pay for his father’s medical care, and cuts in backstory for Statham’s Jasper, a shady figure who borrows $2 million for purposes we’ll soon learn. Neither thread offers much interest.

13 may actually have been undone by its own added resources and flashier cast. The beefing up of Jasper’s storyline, which unfolds over awkward flashbacks to show his retrieving of his brother Ronald (Winstone) from a mental institution, and the even more clumsily handled background on Rourke’s Jefferson, who is shown to have been retrieved from a prison in Juarez, do 13 no favors. The film grinds to a halt with each jump back in time, which seem to have been put there primarily to placate the stars in these roles by giving them more to work with. A drama about a Russian roulette tourney is a less-is-more proposition — the more detail that’s offered, the more questions come to mind and the more you start to believe, as is inevitable in this case, that the premise is hopelessly silly and hardly warrants this kind of steady seriousness.

Shannon vampily oversees the proceedings, dictating the rules, which involve increasing the number of bullets and the odds of death in each round, and waiting for the illumination of a lightbulb before firing. Ronald reveals himself to be Vince’s primary rival, though he, like many of the participants, likes to retain an illusion of control. There’s talk of the value of experience, of skill, as if what’s at play here were anything other than blind luck. It’s actually the one thing that could have benefited from more exploration in what has to be the most inert film about millionaires betting on the ritualized shootings of morphine-addled outcasts ever — the way these men have chosen to look at and, in some way, normalize the barbaric thing they’re doing. That it’s left hanging is just another reason 13 is such a disappointment. Nothing to see here.

 

“You might say hey, maybe punk rock was never meant to grow up — but it did, so too bad. We’re in uncharted territory,” Bad Religion’s Brett Gurewitz, also the owner of Epitaph Records, says early in Andrea Blaugrund’s documentary The Other F Word. Billing itself as a “coming of middle age story,” this earnest and intermittently lovable look into the lives of prominent punk rockers who’ve gone on to become responsible fathers doesn’t break as much ground as it seems to hope and believe.

Punk’s hardly the first counterculture movement to age into less cutting-edge adulthood, though with its roots in the rejection of conformity, of authority and established structures it may be the one most suited to be left to the young, angry and focused on what they don’t want to be rather than what they do. But how these tattooed veterans of mosh pits and countless tours deal with being authority figures in their own families is a question this film treats with great tenderness if little impact — as one bemused punk pop puts it, “How did we go from rebelling against our own parents to becoming parents ourselves?”

Blaugrund pulls together a solid assembly of interviewees for The Other F Word (if ones that stretch past the boundaries of punk) — Gurewitz is joined by Fat Mike from NOFX, Mark Hoppus of Blink-182, Everclear’s Art Alexakis, Lars Frederiksen from Rancid, Flea of the Red Hot Chili Peppers and plenty of others, including skateboarder Tony Hawk and BMXer Rick Thorne to pipe in from outside of the music world. The main arc of the film is built around Jim Lindberg of Pennywise (incidentally the author of a book called Punk Rock Dad: No Rules, Just Real Life) who finds himself exhausted by the endless loop of touring that’s the reality of band life for most these days, a brutal schedule that allows him to support his family but also keeps him away from them for a large part of the year. He’s placed in a situation in which his obligations to his kids come up against those to his bandmates of 20 years, and at the close of the film he makes the difficult decision to quit.

It’s as much the shifting ground in the music industry as the burdens of image and ideology that make life difficult for these mohawked fathers, though it’s this aspect The Other F Word handles least well, touching on complaints about downloads and the reasoning behind putting an album on MySpace that are part of a discussion no one’s even having anymore. But with the idea of making money from record sales gone, touring’s all that’s left, and for a band like Pennywise, that’s no glamorous proposition. We watch Lindberg check into an Econolodge with a suitcase full of antacid and clothes he didn’t have time to toss in the laundry, to at night comb dye into his goatee to hide the gray. The film splashes lyrics across the screen during the lively performance footage, but off stage the interviewees talk of exhaustion with their songs and with the cycle of having to summon enthusiasm each night for each new town.

Punk may be best suited to the young and carefree about consequences (“Sometimes you think, ‘Oh shit, should I have tattooed my forehead?’” muses Frederiksen, whose brow reads “SKUNX”), but it’s of course the scenes of these unlikely dads doing typical dad things that’s where the movie sings, from Flea tearing up talking about his daughter to Alexakis singing “The Wheels on the Bus” to his little girl in the car seat behind him to Fat Mike in a zebra-print bath robe spraying toast with — is that I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter!? The idea that these men, many of whom came from rough backgrounds and troubled home lives, find such fulfillment and meaning in being better fathers to their kids than their own fathers were to them is touching, especially given how ill-suited to the role many of them at first considered themselves.

It’s lovely to see these attempts at punk parenting, but there’s really not much “punk” to them beyond appearances.

The heartfelt sincerity of these scenes almost obscures how little there is to The Other F Word beyond them.It’s lovely to see these attempts at punk parenting, but there’s really not much “punk” to them beyond appearances. Even the kids with the liberty spikes have to grow up eventually, or risk being left the oldest guys at the show, hitting on high school girls, developing liver damage and bragging about never selling out while living in their parents’ basement. That this film acts like it’s unexpected to find such paternal dedication amongst these pierced, guitar-playing dudes seems terribly naive. Why would being in a hardcore band preclude you from being a decent dad? You need only flip through the current roster of reality TV to see that far scarier and less-prepared people become parents every day.

 

For every musical act that’s made it big, there are thousands that have languished in obscurity, but when it comes to movies, it’s rare that a band that comes to naught gets much screen time. Achtung Baby celebrates it’s 20 year anniversary this month, and joining the chorus of reminiscences aboutU2’s legacy and impact is Killing Bono, a slightly sour Irish comedy about not making it big directed by Nick Hamm (Godsend) and based on Neil McCormick’s memoir Killing Bono: I Was Bono’s Doppelganger.

That title’s a misdirect — obviously, Bono’s still alive and kicking and spent last week hobnobbing with tech entrepreneurs at Dublin’s exclusive founders conference, and McCormick was the man’s double mostly in his own head. He was childhood friends with the boy then known as Paul David Hewson, and the two formed different bands as teenagers. Only one went on to massive rock star fame and fortune; the other did what’s sometimes uncharitably described as the refuge of those who can’t cut it in their creative field of choice — McCormick is now the Telegraph’s head rock critic.

It’s that mean edge to Killing Bono’s storytelling, none of it directed at the famous figure of the title, that makes it more than the film equivalent of someone’s prize bar anecdote about the celebrity he knew (and could have been — nay, should have been) back in the day. Young Neil (Ben Barnes, theNarnia films’ Prince Caspian), a would-be lead singer who’s beat out, in a friendly way, to a place in a classmate’s band by the future Bono (Martin McCann), is sure he’s going to be famous. So sure that he monologues about the fact as he drives through the streets of Dublin as an adult, carrying a gun and looking ragged, desperate and miles from rock stardom, at least until he happens upon U2’s homecoming party.

What makes Neil so convinced he’s got fame coming his way isn’t any obvious surplus of talent — we see him fronting variations of a band with his younger brother Ivan (_Misfits_’ Robert Sheehan, who tends to steal the show) over the years and coming across as an adequate but chameleon-like vocalist with no strong musical identity. No, it’s just a typical teenage certainty that greatness has to be on the horizon, because god knows you’re not going to end up like your parents (a sentiment best blithely expressed directly in front of said parents, hopefully when they’re feeding you). Killing Bonopresents an interesting conundrum: How much harder would it be to let go of your improbable rock star dreams if you had proof in front of you that such success does happen for a select few? There doesn’t appear to be anything extraordinary about Bono when he’s starting out — one of the better moments of the film involves him declaring to Neil and other friends on the back of the city bus after a night out that “Bono” is what he’d like to be called from here on out, and his guitar player sitting next to him saying that from now on he’s going by “The Edge.” Everyone laughs, the way you would if your high school bestie announced a desire to henceforth be known as “Princess Fabulous” in anticipation of a later pop persona.

U2 begins releasing records, while Neil and Ivan head down to London on money that Neil’s borrowed from a local gangster without letting his brother know. Where Killing Bono tests audiences the most, and where it’s perversely most interesting, is in Neil’s doomed insistence on the band finding fame on its own — he turns down multiple offers of help from Bono, from an early one in which he offers assistance in getting a record deal to a later one in which he invites them to be U2’s opening act at their Dublin show. It’s pride that makes Neil say no, but it’s also guilt — as teenagers, Ivan was offered a place in U2 only to have it turned down on his behalf by his brother, who wanted Ivan in his own band.

In London, Neil and Ivan starve, make some questionable ’80s fashion decisions and accrue some new friends — gay landlord Karl (Pete Postlethwaite, in his last role), former punk Gloria (Krysten Ritter) and record exec Hammond (Peter Serafinowicz) — but it’s the toxic dynamic between the siblings that’s the heart of the film. Neil’s not a very likable protagonist — he’s actually often awful — but who can’t relate to that nagging certainty that one’s destined for great things? Letting go of that is part of growing up, but it’s also part of letting go of a dream and embracing normalcy in a deflatingly non-Hollywood ending. The low-budget look of Killing Bono (one most apparent in scenes in which crowds are meant to be swarming for just a sight of U2) suits the grubby sentiment of the film, and of its ultimate realization that glitz and glamour aren’t available for everyone, no matter how enticing they look.

 

How could Solomon Rabinovich have guessed, while he was going bankrupt in the stock market, that fame would come to him from the fiction he wrote in a dying language for little newspapers? When two of his plays opened on the same night in New York and closed after the critics hated them, would he have thought that his work would inspire one of the greatest hits in the history of the musical theater?

Yes, my dear friends, I can hear you asking, who is this big shot Solomon Rabinovich I have never heard a word about? That’s not so important. Maybe you should call him by his other name, Sholem Aleichem. He’s the subject of Joseph Dorman’s documentary “Sholem Aleichem: Laughing in the Darkness.” While he worked all day losing his father-in-law’s money in the markets and bragging he was becoming successsful, he was coming home to write his stories late at night, and writing more of them so early in the morning that God himself was not awake.

He was rich for a while, after marrying a rich girl and inheriting her father’s money. He lost it all because he was maybe paying more attention to his writing than to these tipsters who told him sell when they should have told him buy. When things went bad in Russia, he emigrated to America, the land of opportunity, where a man could make something of himself. But he grew so discouraged, he returned to Europe and never owned his own home again.

But all the time, writing the stories, filled with humor and irony, inspired by his childhood in a shtetl so small he had to leave town to change his coat. He created a world of characters who often seemed to be speaking in their own voices, and even writing him letters. He wrote a story a week, sometimes two, and every Friday night, the readers of the Yiddish papers came home to read a new one.

He was a nice-looking family man and had six children, none of whom could speak or write Yiddish, so in his own household, these children couldn’t read the words of the greatest Yiddish writer who ever lived. He sold the rights to most of his work to raise cash, and at 50, he was so broke, he had to go on lecture tours.

Don’t think he was unsuccessful. He didn’t manage his money well, but he was very popular. When he fell sick on one of his tours, his young admirers spread straw on the cobblestones outside the window of his inn, so his sleep wouldn’t be disturbed by the passing carriages. He returned to America, and when he died in 1916, only 57 years old, 200,000 people participated in his funeral. To call him beloved would be putting it mildly.

This documentary tells the story of Sholem Aleichem with many photographs and early films, most of them not showing him but re-creating the world that produced him. There are many scholars and critics here, most of them useful and pleasant, who obviously love him. Most remarkably, there is his granddaughter, Bel Kaufman, still looking terrific at 100, who had writing in her blood and wrote Up the Down Staircase.

Of all his many characters, his best known is without a doubt Tevye the milkman, who is the hero of the great musical “Fiddler on the Roof.” Although Sholem Aleichem’s work is easily available in English, I’d never heard of him when I saw that musical. If I’d known more, it would have helped me to better understand If I were a rich man, ya ha deedle deedle, bubba bubba deedle deedle dum.

 

“Senna” is a documentary that focuses on the popular image of the great auto racer and leaves us to ponder the mystery. Ayrton Senna won the Formula One world championship three times, was cheated of it a fourth, was the beloved hero of his native Brazil and died in a crash at 34 — when he was in the lead during a race. All of that racing fans may already know. This film implies that he was consumed, inflamed, devoured by the need to win. Perhaps no one, least of all Senna, can say why.

He is a good-looking, nice boy when he has a surprise success in the Monaco Grand Prix. Earlier, he’d done well on the top-level Go Kart circuit; his wealthy family could afford to send the boy to Europe for a world competition. In a few short years, he leaped into the front ranks of Formula One drivers and exhibited an ability to come from far back in a pack and blaze past other race cars.

At first, he was happy to be a McLaren teammate of Alain Prost, the French champion. Then they became cool, and finally bitter, rivals who did not speak. Between them was Jean-Marie Balestre, the French president of the Federation Internationale de Sport Automobile. When Senna and Prost collided during a 1989 Grand Prix in Japan, the archival footage makes it look as if Prost left a gap and moved too late to try to fill it again. The federation ruled against Senna, gave him a suspended disqualification and fined him. Much is said about Prost being better at the “politics” of Formula One than Senna; the implication is that Balestre was prejudiced in favor of his countryman.

The movie is edited entirely from Formula One archival video. There is no new footage in the film. The well-chosen voiceover narration is by Senna, his parents, his sister, Prost and a great many television commentators. “Senna” lives entirely in the moment. The race footage is thrilling; much of it, including the seconds leading up to Senna’s final crash in 1994, is from the camera mounted on his car.

That final one-car crash is an enigma. Senna, having joined the Williams-Renault team, had been complaining about his car. It failed him in two earlier races. He doesn’t like the steering or the suspension. Experts later suggested the crash was due to mechanical failure. A man who believed deeply in his connection with God, Senna awakened on his final day, felt uneasy and consulted his Bible, coming upon a passage in which God told him he would be united with Him on that day. Not precisely good news.

As I looked at Senna’s face before the race, I felt I was looking at a man who expected to die. His doctor advised him to retire. “I can’t,” he said. What drove him? The film is enigmatic about his inner life. He loved women and is seen with many, but we learn nothing about his relationships. He drove faster than anyone else, in a sport where success is a hair’s breadth from disaster. In a competition among risk-takers, he took the most. But apparently that isn’t why he crashed.

Earlier, Alain Prost, having finally won the world title, retired on the spot. Good for him. Senna won it three times, kept right on racing — and would have continued, I suspect, until he finally died on the track. That is not the portrait of a happy man, and although he pours magnums of champagne over his head on one podium after another, he doesn’t look joyous so much as vindicated.

“Senna” is a documentary that does the job it sets out to do. I wish it had tried for more. It is a competent TV sports doc, the sort you’d expect to see on ESPN. Unless you are a big fan of Senna or Formula One, I don’t know why you’d want to pay first-run prices to see it.

© 2012 3D Movies Theatre Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha