The Movie Laier

PLOT OVERVIEW: Thadeous (Danny McBride) and Fabious (James Franco) are brothers. Fabious is far more beloved for being a great warrior. Thadeous gets to test his metal on a quest though when Fabious’ bride gets kidnapped by the evil warlock Leezar (Justin Theroux). Now fit in Natalie Portman and dick jokes and you’ve got the rest of the movie.

I should start by saying this movie isn’t terrible. It’s just not very good. Not because it’s poorly written, acted or directed. The problem is the movie just isn’t very funny. I went into Your Highness expecting a spoof of fantasy films. Instead I got a straight up fantasy flick. It makes for a good one too. They’ve got an interesting mix of characters, monsters and quests that would make a fan of fantasy films very happy. I didn’t come for a fantasy film though. I came for a comedy written and starring Danny McBride who I find hilarious on Eastbound & Down. The jokes are horrible. Instead of writing out gags the characters just say “fuck” a lot. That’s about it. Monster shows up. Danny McBride gets scared and says, “Fuck this,” then runs away. This gets copy pasted throughout the entire film. That gag and another involving pedophilia. The movie doesn’t try to poke fun at the narrative tropes that occur in fantasy films. Not like movies like Airplane and The Baxter do. Instead we just get a feeling of what it would be like if Frodo and Sam talked about dicks in between doing cool shit. Because of the lack of spoofing, the characters of Natalie Portman and James Franco becomes cookie cutter. We get your run of the mill noble knight without a single character flaw and your run of the mill ass kicking babe. They play their characters straight the entire time which would be fine if there were any jokes to play off of. The characters Justin Theroux and Zooey Deschanel play are easily the worst. Deschanel gets one funny gag early on but then the rest of the film might as well have been played by a cardboard cut out of Zooey Deschanel. Theroux had to say the worst lines. He’s a warlock that’s also perverted. So he refers to things like ‘The Fuckening.’ The whole joke is that the word fuck is in there Get it? Get it?!?

WHAT’S THE WORD: Green. The word is green in honor of the director David Gordon Green. DGG got his start making independent art house fare such as Real Women Have Curves and Snow Angels (Great movie by the way). Then he got the gig directing Pineapple Express. He did a lot of things in that film to keep it from being another lazily made stoner comedy. Not here though. DGG let me down by just succumbing to whatever the cast wanted to do. The whole film is directionless. Why? Maybe everybody forgot he’s a credible director and instead thought they hired Dennis Dugan; someone who has made a career out of taking orders from actors.

A SECOND OPINION: “You can’t call it a stoner comedy if there are only two scenes of pot smoking. They did have that one scene that was flooded with topless chicks though. Kudos.”- Papa Laier

PLOT OVERVIEW: Josh (Patrick Wilson) and Renai (Rose Byrne) move into a darling new home with their darling family but there is nothing darling about the evil spirits creeping around at all hours of the day. I’m sure Josh and Renai would invite them in for some tea but they insist on possessing their son instead. You just can’t please some spirits.

Horror movies have their trends. Recently torture porn became a big thing. Instead of spooks and scares; horror movies were just being grotesque. Why be compelling when you can show multiple characters get eviscerated. That has thankfully died out in favor of movies about vampires or zombies. So how fitting is it that the writer/director combo that gave us Saw, Leigh Whannell and James Wan, would give us a departure from that trend with their third film outing. I liked the first Saw film and I’m one of the rare people who thought Dead Silence was nifty. I don’t know why they don’t make more films. They are the kind of horror movie auteurs that could give the genre the kick in the pants it needs. They should at least be making more movies than M. Night does.

Insidious is sort of a throwback to films such as the original House on Haunted Hill. It’s a PG-13 movie but manages to be more terrifying than anything else in the last couple years. That’s because James Wan understands illusion in film making. He doesn’t elect for computer effects to get his scares. He puts things in the background and foreground quite casually but with a bizarre juxtaposition. It is that very combination of casualness and bizarreness that makes you yelp a little when you see something. Wan achieves his vision through great set design, costuming, make up and staging. This film is nice to watch if only to look at the little tricks Wan is able to pull off.

The writing is strong for the most part. The premise grabs you but once it’s time to explain it all (Clarissa), the film gets a little too bogged down in explanation. Considering that this is a ghost film, the third act isn’t that much of a stretch but the execution is off. Where I should’ve been amped up I was kind of just nodding my head along. As if to say, “Okay but then what.” If you’ve seen Saw and Dead Silence than you know that Whannell ususally drags his feet in the third act because movies have to end somehow. I really loved this movie but I’ll be damned if it couldn’t have been better.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Funhouse. The experience I had watching this movie was much the same as walking through one of those funhouses at the county fair. I saw it with a group of friends in a pakced theater at midnight. (The only way to watch a horror film.) We were yelping in each other’s ears and grabbing each other the entire time. So grab a group of friends and watch this in the dark. Rent it on Halloween also. I’m sure it’ll be on DVD by then.

A SECOND OPINION: This is where Kam’s review belong but Kam is either lazy or forgetful. Let me try to paraphrase for him. “PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFSSSSSSSSSSSSSGGGGGGGGG. I liked it. Better than 27 Dresses and I’m not being tongue-in-cheek. I loved 27 Dresses.” Yes, Kam. We know you do. 

Taking some time out from the usual reviews to talk about a matter that has been on my mind the last couple of days. The other night I watched Rob Zombie’s Halloween II. Zombie is somebody I’ve had high hopes for as a horror director but now after having watched all four of his features I have to say I’m disappointed. He’s made the same movie four times now and even then House of a 1,000 Corpses was an extended Rob Zombie music video to me. I’m not writing a article meant to bash Rob Zombie. This is about my love of horror movies and what I think could be done to help the genre thrive.

First thing’s first. The remakes have got to stop and I know I’m not saying anything new but seriously. We’ve seen new versions of Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers, Leatherface and Freddy Kruger. Are any of them lighting the same fire they did in their original carnations? Nope. That’s because there isn’t any mystery to it. These films have to live up to the originals which they can’t because we already have an idea about what it’s like for a killer to stalk our dreams or be confronted by a guy with a chainsaw. No one is surprised because the well has gone dry on these characters. I love them to death but the only way to make Jason Voorhees interesting at this point is to make him be the antithesis to the slasher genre. Have him, Freddy and Michael in a remake of Three Men and A Baby. I’m sure it would be great but then we’re not making a horror film anymore.

Reboots work for adventure and action films. That’s because Batman and James Bond are human beings with a moral compass that’s out of whack sometimes. Also, you can cast a new face to the role. Robert Englund is the only acceptable Freddy and the other three don’t talk. No one cares if Tyler Mane is playing Michael Myers or if it’s just a stuntman. The actor is going to be covered by a mask or make up anyway. The horror movie icons are going to keep hacking and slashing because they’re inhuman. That’s what makes them terrifying.

So let’s make up some new characters. I know people are trying. Adam Green has the right idea with the Hatchet movies but unfortunately those aren’t taking off. Here’s an idea. Why not create a horror movie character that is female? A mutant woman that is relentless. A change of gender could create a new dynamic that horror movies need. I’m not talking about a “who’s killing everyone?” kind of movie where it turns out to be the piano teacher because she’s jealous of all of her students. I mean a badass, in your face, cut your throat, give no fucks chick with a crowbar for a weapon. Get Dot-Marie Jones to play her. That would be sick.

We also need a new school of horror films auteurs. Who do we have? Eli Roth? Not nearly active enough. James Wan? Same applies to him. Rob Zombie? I’m not sold on him. There was a time when John Carpenter, Wes Craven and Dario Argento were cranking out lots of films and they had a massive following. The torch needs to be passed along so horror fans can start marking their calenders again. Saw I and Paranormal Activity are good one and done movies but we need something better. Anybody got any ideas?

PLOT OVERVIEW: ??????????????????????????????????????

Well well well. I don’t even know where to begin. Sucker Punch is the ambitious new project from Zack Snyder who made a name for himself by adapting the popular graphic novels Watchmen and 300. This time Snyder takes us for a spin in what is his first original work. The result is not good. The movie opens up just like any other Snyder film. ‘Hip’ music plays over the opening sequence to a series a slow motion shots that are as detailed as a single button spinning on a floor board. Snyder uses this style so much that he is becoming a parody of himself. He’s worse about it than Wes Anderson is about using Futura font.

Anyway, after the usual Snyder tropes the story kicks in. Only it doesn’t. The movie goes from being about one thing to another. What was once a mental institution is now a burlesque house. Just when you get cozy with whatever just happened; it all changes again. What was once a dance studio is now a dojo. Then the action sequences take place.

I thought the action sequences would be the saving grace of this film but I was taken aback by how uninspiring they all were. Our characters go through all these fantasy worlds inspired by other film genres. Snyder at times looks to be giving a film history lesson and other times trying to make up for all the genres he may not be able to tackle in his career. Certainly not if people are counting on him the save the Superman film franchise.

There’s no believable plot device that guides us through these fantasy worlds. Baby Doll (Emily Browning) starts dancing and all of a sudden she’s fighting nazi zombies. Yet everyone else is doing not so exciting things back in the real world whilst no one is sure what’s actually going on in the mental institution that I’m not even sure is suppose to be the reality of it all.

The ending is a cop out also. Something about the viewer getting to decide the story or some crap like that. Seems like it’s my fault I washed a movie I never understood.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Sympathy. I felt bad for a lot of the actors here. Carla Gugino is usually delightful but here it seems she thought she had been cast as Natasha from the Rocky & Bullwinkle cartoons. Jon Hamm has a cameo were he doesn’t get to do anything interesting but speculate. Emily Browning looks like such a sweetheart but I don’t buy her as a badass. I did however enjoy Oscar Isaac who played the character of Blue Jones. His character was on evil auto pilot but at least he had a lot of fun with the role. Something no one else seemed they got to do with theirs.

A SECOND OPINION: “Two minutes into Sucker Punch, Paul asked me if we could leave. I should have taken him more seriously. Instead, we sat through almost two hours of nazi robots, showgirl hookers, samurai schoolgirls, orcs, dragons, and killer robots - all of which sounds good in theory but when mashed up together becomes a festering stew of boring confusion. Zack Synder should have just taken the old adage “everything in moderation” to heart if he wanted to save this one.”- Leah Herman

PLOT OVERVIEW: Mick Haller (Matthew McConaughey) is a defense attorney with balls of steel. He takes on the case of Louis Roulet (Ryan Phillippe); a rich kid accused of beating up a hooker. Louis swears he is being set up but as Mick presses further into the investigation, he believes that he is the one being set up.

Matthew McConaughey was once a serious actor before he started taking lead roles in dumb movies like Fool’s Gold and Sahara. He was in A Time To Kill and Amistad and he was good in them. I guess somewhere around The Wedding Planner it became easier for a handsome young man with blond hair and a six pack to collect a paycheck in romantic comedies. That’s why it is such a breath of fresh air to see him in The Lincoln Lawyer. He still brings a good amount of smug and surfer charm to the role but it’s not his fault if Mick Haller has a heck of a lot more fun than Michael Clayton.

The rest of the cast rounds out well too with your usual characters in the background to add a shot in the arm to otherwise secondary scenes inserted for the sake of plot development. Bill Macy and Bryan Cranston are just a few of the names that pop up.

The movie is based on a book by Michael Connelly who if you’ve read any of his novels; can tell would much rather write Hollywood action films. Bizarrely enough the only other one of his books to be adapted into a movie Blood Work. Buy up the film rights to a couple more, Hollywood. I want to see a Mick Haller film franchise. Watch him as he cruises around Hollywood getting drug dealers back on the streets while still making time to take his daughter to soccer practice. Seriously, Haller is a great lawyer who isn’t a shitty dad? He’s already more interesting than the Green Lantern.

The only problem with the film is the end draws on like a novel but where you know you’re not quite down because of the extra fifty pages left in the book; you get fooled into thinking it’s all over. The only reason it keeps going is to wrap some plot details you’ve long forgotten about. Also, to give Mick Haller one more cool guy thing to do. There is no shortage of scenes with him in the titular lincoln town car.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Whim. I absolutely saw this on a whim. I was having a beer on my pool deck when I had the urge to watch McConaughey lay his legal dick all over the silver screen. I was rewarded for my trouble. I wish more movies you didn’t intend to see in the first place were always this good and the movies I went to see on purpose didn’t disappoint me. I think I just want every single movie to be good. Why hasn’t Hollywood thought about doing this?

A SECOND OPINION: “Oh! He’s the Lincoln Lawyer because he rides around in a lincoln. I thought he was just defending Abraham Lincoln for a weird sex crime that took place in modern times. Still sounds cool though.”

PLOT OVERVIEW: Andrew (Scoot McNairy) is a photographer in Mexico who must chaperone his boss’ daughter, Sam (Whitney Able), back to the states. The task is complicated because aliens have been roaming around Mexico for the last six years. Are aliens in Mexico a really blunt allegory?

Let me go on the record as stating that I thought Monsters was going to be pretty sweet. I though it was going to be like the Amazing Race with aliens thrown into the mix. Instead, Monsters is mostly a crappy love story. The movie opens with Andrew and Sam meeting and then bonding as they head back to the states. I was fine with it for the first half hour because I thought the movie was trying to make everything as normal as possible before the really bizarre stuff happened. Instead, the movie was a repetition of this sequence with the aliens taking a back seat to Andrew and Sam’s brewing love.

You see, Sam is engaged and Andrew has a kid. They speak in depth about how these events have misshapen their lives individually. Then they hear rustling in the bushes and stare for a few minutes before moving on to more philosophical conversations about owning a pet. Not a single person gets their face ripped off.

Director Greth Edwards pulls triple duty as he is also the writer and the director of photography. You could make an argument for the script being some kind of deconstruction of a monster movie thus making it unique but Edwards can’t shoot a night scene for shit. This is when we mostly see the aliens and by see I mean look at amoebic shapes that are suppose to be aliens. You can hardly make out what is going on in these scenes. It’s strange because the day scenes are wonderfully done. It makes me wonder if the actual DP quit halfway through the movie and then Edwards refused to give him the film credit and inserted his own name instead.

The ending is a strained metaphor for love or something. Two aliens float around a gas station cooing at each other and tangling up their tentacles in an embrace. Andrew and Sam watch this go down and decide they are in love with each other. Then the kiss and the movie ends. It’s super cheesy and just stupid. Those aliens should’ve torn their heads off.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Casserole. This movie had scenes and plot details that seemed to be lifted from other movies. Movies that don’t even fit together thematically. I was reminded of films like District 9, Apocalypse Now, Leap Year, The Happening and The Crazies while I watched it. You end up with a clump of other movies rolled into one.

There is one scene where Sam and Andrew walking into a desolate town. They coming across an older woman pushing a shopping cart and talking to herself. They ask her where all the other people have gone. She stops and stares at them for two minutes before responding, “Quack! Quack! Quack! Woof!” This about sums up my opinion of the movie.

A SECOND OPINION: I’m glad I didn’t have a guest critic for this movie. I would’ve hated my guts for suggesting we watch it. 

PLOT OVERVIEW: Rango (Johnny Depp) is a house pet that finds himself trapped in the Mojave Desert after a traffic accident. He arrives to the town of Dirt and makes up a new persona for himself; soon becoming the town’s new sheriff. Rango has to solve the water crisis before the entire town is doomed.

I don’t think Gore Verbinski gets much credit as a visionary director. His previous successes Pirates of the Caribbean and The Ring were adapted works that most people credit the original source for. His other films such as The Mexican and The Weatherman aren’t nearly as commercially successful as his other work but go back and watch 1997’s Mousehunt to get a real dose of what Verbinski is capable of. He knows how to blend adventure and comedy perfectly.

Rango comes from a screenplay written by John Logan who boasts such credits as Sweeny Todd and Gladiator on his resume. The writing is particularly good when Rango is delivering full on monologues. They’re quite philosophical while also paying great respect to classic Western films.

The animation is inspiring. I’d say the quality is better than anything Pixar has ever done. Each character has a very detailed look to them that one starts to appreciate as the characters interact with each other. The attention to detail makes everything astounding to look at. The animation also lends itself to a thrill seeking chase sequence through a cavern. Also, a poignant dance number the people of Dirt perform weekly as a tradition. I still can’t believe how beautiful it all looked. Animated films are truly remarkable when trying to accomplish what can’t be done in a live action film rather than just making an animated film about talking birds because you know kids will beg to see it. (Fuck you, Rio.)

The voice acting is remarkable as well. Johnny Depp and the rest of the cast get it. You research it like any other role then make choices using only your voice. You don’t just go in there and sound like yourself. (Fuck you Jesse Eisenberg in the upcoming Rio.) The unique aspect about this though is Gore Verbinski recorded the entire cast acting out each scene together on a sound stage. Not motion capture but ‘emotion capture’ as Depp put it. I love the idea. Verbinski even had the cast wear costumes so they would have a feel for the characters. Make more animated movies like this and less ones like Rio.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Existential. There was one sequence that really struck. Rango is down on his luck and decides to cross a busy highway in the middle of the night. Before that he declares that he is nobody. Rango essentially walks into the abyss with no identity, temporarily relieved of the burden of consequence. That’s pretty deep and heavy for a kid’s movie but pretty awesome for older audience members. I’ve never seen an animated character go through a transition the way Rango did in that scene. Bravo.

A SECOND OPINION: “In a sea of homogenous CGI dreck replete with single eyebrow-raising, smirking protagonists, “Rango” is a pleasant surprise. The film is beautiful, intelligent, macabre, and extremely funny, with subtle pop culture references and cameos littered throughout . Rango is certainly not a kid movie; at least not for the really little folks. The violence even made me squirm a little bit, but probably only because small critters were involved.

Rango is eye candy, and anyone with an appreciation for well-done computer animation will fawn over this movie. Rango has certainly set the bar much higher for CGI children’s movies. I may even say that Rango is the Citizen Kane of this genre. Do yourself a favor and go see it, because it’s going to be talked about for a long time.”- Sandra Mirocha 

PLOT OVERVIEW: Shane (Ryan Kwanten) is a cop who moves to the town of Red Hill so his pregnant wife can get some peace and quiet. His first day on the job is rather quaint until news gets out that convicted felon Jimmy Conway (Tommy Lewis) has busted out of jail and is headed for Red Hill. Don’t talk to Shane about rough first days.

This is my second week in a row reviewing an Australian film. This time instead of a crime drama we have what has been referred to as a Vegemite western. I think that term is pretty neat and I’m just glad that I have something to call this along with The Proposition. If Australia can become better known for films like these rather than whatever gushy romance epic Baz Luhrmann cranks out then my mine interest in Australian cinema would’ve peaked sooner.

At first Red Hill plays out like a slasher flick. Jimmy Conway storms through town and starts picking off it’s people one by one for what seems like revenge for having him put away. Jimmy was the best tracker to ever reside in Red Hill. He’s got the tools to hunt a man down and make him beg for mercy. Jimmy also walks around with burn scars on the left side of his face. It is this facial disfigurement that puts Jimmy in the same league as Leatherface and Jason Voorhees.

The thing that puts Jimmy over those classic horror villains is the acting job by Tommy Lewis. Jimmy only has one line throughout the movie at the very end. That leaves Lewis to do much acting with his facial expressions and body movements. It’s a strong demonstration on how an actor can convey such emotion without the use of speech. Plus, he doesn’t get to hide behind a mask like Leatherface or Jason.

Jimmy has all the tropes of a horror movie villain but the story plays out like a western. That’s mostly a result of the setting. Red Hill is a town with dirt roads and buildings made of wood planks. What we have is a horror/western hybrid that is fun to watch but quite tense at the same time. It’s particlularly fun to watch with all the lights out.

The story might not be the freshest but the plot takes a few turns to keep it interesting. There’s a lot know to more about Jimmy than what you get from a first glance. It goes to show that strong writing can make any reused concept seem ripe.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Picturesque. The film was shot in Omeo, Victoria. Director Patrick Hughes takes a few moments in his film to show how beautiful the landscape is. It’s also a horrific reminder just how secluded the town of Red Hill is and how the town’s people is trapped with Jimmy Conway. I look forward to see what Patrick Hughes does with his next feature.

A SECOND OPINION: None today because Bethany Catob didn’t feel she was capable but if you’re interested in watching a movie with me and being my guest critic, leave a comment. The second opinion is my favorite feature on this blog and I need your help to fill it. 

PLOT OVERVIEW: J’s (James Frecheville) mom dies so he must go live with his grandmother and his uncles but they’re all criminals so this really screws with his moral compass. How do you do right by betraying your family?

Animal Kingdom comes to us from Australia. We don’t hear a lot about Australian films here in America. Not in the same way we hear about German and French ones. My own exposure to them is limited to later films such as The Proposition and Wolf Creek. Makes me wonder what sort of tropes are common in Australian movies. Tropes other than having Guy Pearce play a role.

Animal Kingdom is a crime drama that is more crime than drama. The main focus is on J and how he manages having to be an accessory to his uncle’s crimes. That gives us scenes of J setting around the house just to provide an alibi. Not very compelling but the film has other devices to get your heart going.

The film has a ghoulish opening title sequence comprised of security camera photos of an assortment of robberies. The stillness of the images is a demonstration of how director David Michod’s camera will operate throughout the film. The camera sits far away as an observer as you watch characters enter dangerous settings. It makes you feel helpless, putting you in J’s shoes.

The cast is composed of some very strong and sadly weak actors. Frecheville is too rigid and stiff to handle such a weighty role. Ben Mendelsohn nails his character down though as well as Jacki Weaver does. Mendelsohn plays J’s Uncle Andrew and sports a sinister stare in every shot. He is a man unhinged. Weaver plays J’s grandmother. You never know if she means to hug you or kill you. It gives all of her lines this double meaning. Rest of the cast pales in comparison though.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Dissonance. Maybe it’s just me but Australian accents are really hard to understand. I should’ve watched this thing with the subtitles on. I didn’t even realize until after the film that one of the characters was named Craig and not Greg. I swear they were calling him Greg the entire time.

A SECOND OPINION: While it runs at a slower pace than most crime movies, Animal Kingdom uses its pacing effectively, keeping me in grueling anticipation for the next big gut punch. A lot of the characters in Animal Kingdom lack depth— most notibly the semi-Autistic main character, J— but the movie relies most on pacing, story, and smart plot twists. In the end, Animal Kingdom left me exhausted mentally and a little bit satisfied. Animal Kingdom is Australia’s best export since Foster’s and the phrase ‘put some shrimp on the barbie.’- Justin Plemmons.

PLOT OVERVIEW: An older magician is struggling to get by as he goes from gig to gig performing for embarrassingly small crowds. He meets a young bar maid who believes that his magic is real and it gives our magician what the drive he needs to keep swallowing light bulbs.

Remember when traditional hand drawn animation was king? I remember. A lot of the Disney classics such as Aladdin and The Lion King got pumped out when I was a little kid. Then a little movie called Toy Story emerged and it wasn’t long before Hollywood gave up on releasing 2D animated films until the recent revival in The Princess and The Frog but that was a revival that didn’t include many followers. One might be lead to think that 2D just paled in comparison to 3D as an art form but then one would be very wrong.

Here we have Sylvain Chomet, a French dude that still very much believes in the wonderment of 2D animation. Chomet works from an original screenplay by Jacques Tati. The film very well could have been shot live action but then you wouldn’t get the caricatures Chomet has created. Whether it be a frumpy circus clown or a larger than life rock star. We know more about Chomet’s characters by simply

looking at them than we ever would be hearing them speak. This is something that is lost in 3D animation. There’s a large focus on making people look so real that you don’t get the cartoony details that sub in as character traits. It has become a lost form in Hollywood animation land.

The film is sluggish at times. It’s the result of having hardly any dialogue and when someone does speak it is in another language. No subtitles either. Chomet is punishing those of us that dragged ass in French class.

I didn’t much like the character of Alice. She’s the young bar maid that the magician befriends. She was so bobble headed. I couldn’t muster up any sympathy for her as she merely gestured for the magician to make something appear. Pay the price of admission like the rest of us, Alice.

WHAT’S THE WORD: Somber. The film is delightful but caps itself off with a somber ending. Magic isn’t real and the magician must find a new calling in life. I couldn’t help but think Chomet was making to same declaration to 2D animation.

A SECOND OPINION: “The Illusionist draws you to the deathbed of magic and lets you carefully observe the cancerous real world grow over all of the little fantastical things that happen not only in old time stage shows, but in everyday life. This film is heartbreaking and the story spins out at a slow pace, so don’t expect anything too Hollywood. Still, if you have room in your soul for the sorry tale of a caring, lonely old man and a young teen girl who wants to believe that he can make something out of nothing, then you will appreciate the subtle touch of this film.” - Leah Herman.