This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2006)

(Director) Kirby Dick

(Producer) Eddie Schmidt

(Distributor) IFC, Netflix & BBC Films

Just as 2009's "Food, Inc." exposed the inner workings of America's corporate controlled food industry, "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" exposes the terrifying inner workings of the MPAA and how American medias are being controlled by a small group of people and corporations.

Something to be appreciated with this documentary is that it takes a headstrong approach to a problem that isn't publicly spoken about too often. The rating system for our media has been around for over sixty years now and it's become so normal that nobody questions the way it works or how it's potentially very flawed. "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" doesn't shy away from using frowned upon tactics in order to get the answers it wants the audience to see for themselves. While some may consider this trickery a bit unfair, I believe most should see it as a means to the end. A majority of people don't know what really goes in to the rating systems or how much controversy there is behind the progress; but they should. The amount of sexism and unjust actions within the rating system were kept in secret by major film corporations before this documentary's release and for good reason. The documentary also briefly touches down on topics beyond the rating system into territory such as piracy, the contradictions of MPAA policies, and how the rating appeal process is a circus.

The direction of the film is a little bit choppy every now and then, and if you're not into documentaries you might find it overall a tad boring; especially if you're not familiar with the mechanics of the film industry. Regardless, there's plenty of shocking interviews and humorous transitions to keep most entertained.. Personally I found it extremely intriguing, very educational and quite disturbing at times. After some research I discovered that the film didn't lose it's educational value, even though it's almost six years old. All the information is still up-to-date and spot on.

If you're highly conservative I suggest staying clear of the film because there is an abundance of adult-themed, R & NC-17 rated clips from films spanning between 1970 and the 2000s in order to help the filmmakers get their point across. At the same time I would recommend trying to stomach these scenes because they aren't put in the documentary for lewd purposes; they are there to make comparisons on unfair judgments made by the MPAA.

Overall this is a documentary I highly suggest seeing to update personal knowledge about a system that affects the film industry and American media more than some may realize. Whether you're a conspiracy theorist or someone who enjoys learning about the inner workings of life, this documentary important to the world of film and to the American public. There's a good chance you will walk away from the experience with a refreshed frame of mind or even an enhanced perspective. Even if you don't get anything from it, at least you learned something new.

The Boy In The Striped Pajamas (2008)

(Director) Mark Herman

(Writer) Mark Herman

(Producer) David Heyman

(Distributor) Miramax Films

“Childhood is measured out by sounds and smells and sights, before the dark hour of reason grows.” -John Betjeman.

Based off the bestselling novel by John Boyne, "The Boy in The Striped Pajamas" takes place in Germany during the horrifying times of World War II. We're introduced to the film with a clever quote (seen above) from the English poet John Betjeman; one that roots itself well with the perspective of the movie's lead character, Bruno. The story centers around Bruno (Asa Butterfield), his mother Elsa (Vera Farmiga) and eldest sister Gretel (Amber Beattie) who have recently relocated to the countryside of Berlin due to his father, who stays nameless (David Thewlis), gaining a hefty promotion within the ranks of the SS. Almost from the get-go we learn that Father's promotion is that of leading officer to a nearby, small scale, concentration camp. Bruno manages to sneak off periodically to visit a young boy named Shmuel (Jack Scanlon), eventually befriending him.

Let's get some of the really negative points out of the way first. Something that bothered me from the very beginning is that the film's entirely based in Germany but all the actors are British and do nothing to hide their accents. To some it may be a minute detail but if you're trying to become emotionally involved with the story and characters it's very difficult when you keep hearing English accents, yet your brain is consistently reminded "This is based in Germany. This is based in Germany." Another film that became heavily burdened with this break in consistency is "Valkyrie". Time and time again it's shown that if you're going to have your movie based in a country where there are distinct accents or languages, you need to have your actors imitate those traits.

Alongside the lack of consistency with the character's accents there's also a lack of consistency with the character development. The writing isn't terrible by a long shot but it doesn't get you as involved emotionally as you should, considering the topic of the movie. I understood what the director was going for; trying to get the audience to see the film in the way that Bruno saw every day life, through the eyes of a child and without reason being a form of bias. The issue here is the movie almost seems to take this a step too far and decides to completely tear away any sort of in-depth character development. It's like they want you to view it in the way that Bruno would but at the same time there's all these other adult themed, unfinished side stories that start popping up and things just get a bit bouncy.

It's quite obvious throughout the film that the creators wanted you to care heavily for these characters and what happened to them but the flow of attention between each character became so wishy-washy that you didn't really feel connected to anyone. I have to say that while watching the entire film I really did feel like they were banking on the audience taking their already instilled emotions of the Holocaust and connecting them with the film as to avoid any emotional development. It's a tactic that doesn't sit right with me. You cannot take a well known, tragic event and simply use past knowledge of the tragedy to bubble up emotions. The story needs to be told as though nobody knew such a tragedy was a part of history.

Overall I struggled a lot with this movie because one of the aspects that I really enjoyed also heavily weighed down the storytelling. I'm referring to the unique way of the movie trying to emotionally capture a film through the eyes of a child. The film itself can also be beautiful to watch at times. It's well scored and there's some really attractive cinematography that highlights the beauty of Berlin, regardless of the sad note the movie plays on. At the same time nothing really jumps out and grabs a hold of you at any point. The acting isn't anything to get ecstatic over, though I did really enjoy the performance from Vera Farmiga's character. Something just felt like it was missing from beginning to finish. Even the extremely devastating ending didn't warrant a single tear from me because the ride up until this point was emotionally bland. It's one of those films that I watch and become convinced that the only reason there's any serious hype over it is due to fans of the book or because it's a Holocaust movie and that gains a lot of sympathy points. I don't hate it but I don't love it either. It's worth a Netflix rental but nothing more.

Tokyo Godfathers (2003)

(Director) Satoshi Kon

(Producer) Masao Maroyuma

(Distributor) Destination Films

Satoshi Kon, you either admire his work for its unique art style and charming storytelling, dislike it for it's unfamiliarity and over-the-top presentation or you sit there completely puzzled, not sure what to think or how to feel about what you've just witnessed. Personally I believe that everybody, anime fan or not, should see Satoshi Kon's works at least once in their lifetime. Like the brilliant adventures crafted by Hayao Miyazaki, Kon's are wildly epic tales that take place from the perspective of every day people. Creatively mixing a feeling of realism and surrealism along with heavy eye candy, they always end up leaving you bewildered and delighted. Tokyo Godfathers is no exception to this.

The story begins on Christmas day and centers around three homeless Tokyo residents: Gin (voiced by Toru Emori) the pessimistic, ex-father figure who has a drinking problem. Miyuki (voiced by Aya Okamoto) the mentally unbalanced, teenage runaway & Hana(voiced by Yoshiaki Umegaki), the "wish-I-was-born-a-woman" type who yearns for the chance to become a mother. Hana feels as though God has granted his/her wish when the three stumble upon an abandoned baby amongst piles of trash on the streets. What is originally seen as a blessing turns into a whimsical and meandering adventure around the chilly streets of Tokyo to find the baby's mother; in hopes of getting some answers and some pseudo-closure.

First thing many people will notice is the art style. Satoshi's work is revered in the way that it is unique and borderline strange. Some audiences compare his visual perception of human beings to that of dolls and that it comes off quite creepily in his films. Though I agree with this I don't find it to be creepy but more mystifying. Like with his storytelling, the looks of his characters are so surreal and at the same time have a deep sense of realism to them, artistically. The character's facial features and movements are truly something to be appreciated when you consider the lack of dedication to detail that a lot of animated features are shying away from these days. Passed the characters you have beautiful backgrounds that highlight the scenic aspects of downtown Tokyo and the surrounding areas; as well as emphasizing on the cold, haunting underworld that seeps on its outskirts.

The storyline itself tends to slow down from time to time. None of these moments ever drag on for too long but were several instances where I thought something extra could have been added to make the stew feel more rich. Other than the occasional bumps in the road the story is compelling, interesting and makes you want to know more about the characters who feel very similar to real people. I'll admit they are a bit over the top and that the story does tend to jump around quite a bit, not to mention there are completely strange moments that might have you scratching your head but that's the beauty of Satoshi's movies; he makes it work. The jumping around, the wayward moments and the oddities seem to all blend together, making the adventure feel much more epic than it actually is. It's like taking the almost-wild tales of life and turning them into something far more important and extraordinary.

Overall this film was very enjoyable and definitely worth snagging off Netflix for a one time watch. It had beautiful art, likable characters and a very magical story. Personally, I'd recommend anything by Satoshi because even at the man's worse, he comes off entertaining.